After Toronto

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

After Toronto

Randy Clark’s Global Awakening, Heidi and Rolland Baker’s Iris Ministries, and the Post-1990s Global Charismatic Networks

Michael McClymond

Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri

[email protected]

Abstract

This essay explores the unity and diversity of global charismatic ministries emerging from the 1990s Toronto Blessing revival, including John and Carol Arnott’s Catch the Fire Ministries (Toronto, Canada), Randy Clark’s Global Awakening (Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, usa), and Heidi and Rolland Baker’s Iris Ministries (Pemba, Mozam- bique). Such practices as bodily healing, verbal evangelism, care for the poor, Bible teaching, exuberant worship, “soaking prayer,” and inner healing are held in common, while each group has some area of functional specialization. The post-Toronto move- ments thus do not present an archetypal, Weberian “routinization of charisma” or a global dissemination of a single, homogenized approach to Christian ministry. A common element among the groups is an insistence on an individual, inner spiritual renewal that must precede any outer work of service. Effective ministry derives from “intimacy with God.” In their diversity, vitality, and adaptability, these post-Toronto movements offer hope for reviving the worldwide charismatic renewal.

Keywords

Toronto Blessing – religious revival – charismatic renewal – prophets and apostles – soaking prayer – John Arnott – Carol Arnott – Randy Clark – Heidi Baker – Roland Baker

In studying new religious movements, one expects such movements to cool down over time, to organize and structure themselves, and to develop insti- tutional forms that were lacking at the beginning. All this follows the familiar patternof“theroutinizationofthecharismatic,”asformulatedbyMaxWeberin

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi: 10.1163/15700747-03801007

1

after toronto

51

his writings from the early twentieth century.1What is less familiar and perhaps unexpected is that a new charismatic movement would begin from a single point of origin and yet take on multiple forms in its “routinization.” Such has beenthecasewiththecharismaticministriesthatarethefocusofthisessayand that find their roots in the mid-1990s “Toronto Blessing.”2 Rather than a single movement forged from disparate components—epluribusunum(“out of many, one”), to use the United States motto—we see the opposite happening—e uno plures(“out of one, many”). Mark Cartledge has noted that the “initial sociologi- cal interpretations [of the Toronto Revival], while illuminating certain features, failed to predict the global networks that are emerging. It was noted for itscen- tripetal force within Charismatic Christianity, now it must be appreciated for its increasing centrifugal influence.” As this essay will show, the “centripetal” motif (pulling inward) is less apparent today than the “centrifugal” (pushing outward).3This is not to say that are no certain family resemblances in the off- shoots of the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship; yet, the differences are as noteworthy as the resemblances.

The ministries and movements to be considered as “post-Toronto” phenom- ena might include the Catch the Fire Ministries of John and Carol Arnott (Toronto, Canada), Global Awakening as led by Randy Clark (headquartered in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, usa), Iris-Arco Ministries under Heidi and Rol- land Baker (Pemba, Mozambique), and perhaps also Ché Ahn’s Harvest Rock

1 For a reconsideration of the sociological theme of “institutionalization,” with references, see

Michael Wilkinson, “The Institutionalization of Religion: Impediment or Impetus for Godly

Love?” in Matthew T. Lee and Amos Yong, eds., Godly Love: Impediments and Possibilities

(Lanham,md: Rowman and Littlefield, 2012), 153–170.

2 Literature on the Toronto revival is abundant, and among the major studies are: Stanley

E. Porter and Philip J. Richter, eds., The Toronto Blessing—Or Is It? (London: Darton, Long-

man, and Todd, 1995); Martyn Percy,The Toronto Blessing; Latimer Studies 53–54(Oxford,uk:

Latimer House, 1996); Bill Jackson, The Quest for the Radical Middle: A History of the Vine-

yard (Capetown, South Africa: Vineyard International Publishing, 1999), esp. 282–338; David

Hilborn, ed., ‘Toronto’ in Perspective: Papers on the New Charismatic Wave of the Mid 1990s

(Carlisle, Cumbria,uk: Paternoster/acute, 2001); Jürgen Römer,The Toronto Blessing(Turku,

Finland: Åbo Akademis förlag: Åbo Akademi University Press, 2002); Stephanus Petrus Preto-

rius, “The Toronto Blessing: An Expression of Christian Spirituality in the Charismatic move-

ment?” D.Th. diss., University of South Africa, 2002; Margaret M. Poloma, Main Street Mystics:

The Toronto Blessing and Reviving Pentecostalism (Walnut Creek, ca: AltaMira Press, 2003);

and Stephen Hunt, A History of the Charismatic Movement in Britain and the United States of

America, 2 vols. (Lewiston,ny: Edwin Mellen Press, 2009), esp. 521–568.

3 Mark Cartledge, “‘Catch the Fire’: Revivalist Spirituality from Toronto to Beyond,”PentecoS-

tudies13 (2014): 236.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

2

52

mcclymond

Church (Pasadena, California,usa), and Bill Johnson’s Bethel Church (Redding, California, usa). The Arnotts’ ministry in Toronto is a lineal successor to the 1990s revival there. Randy Clark’s relationship to Toronto is equally close, since he was the visiting preacher whose sermons originally sparked the Toronto movement—which in turn led to further opportunities for him to continue in itinerant ministry. Both Heidi and Rolland Baker experienced personal renewal while in Toronto, and their shared Christian ministry in Mozambique, though it existed prior to the mid-1990s, entered a new phase of fruitfulness and expan- sion after their experiences in Canada. Several thousand new Christian congre- gations have been established in Mozambique and surrounding nations in the last twenty years or so.4 Both Bill Johnson and Ché Ahn are affiliated with the Toronto movement and influenced by it, though perhaps less directly so than the Arnotts, the Bakers, and Clark.

Insiders within these groups often use biological and familial metaphors of “birthing,” “begetting,” and “fathering” to describe the connections between them. Prominent individual leaders, churches, and parachurch organizations “beget” or “birth” new leaders, churches, and parachurches that bear resem- blances to the entities that spawned them. Yet, like all offspring, the children grow up and follow their own path. They display resemblance to their parents and yet act independently once they have grown up. “Birthing” seems to be the most commonly used metaphor. Sometimes in these circles the phrase “spir- itual dna” is used to describe the resemblances that are embedded in two or more related groups or ministries. “Fathering” is an alternate term that usually pertains to origination, yet also has connotations of authority, oversight, and accountability.

Despite the many books on the Toronto Blessing from the last twenty years—much of it polemical or controversial literature, either attacking or defending one or another aspect of the movement—not much has been done to establish a larger narrative of Charismatic Christianity and/or neo-Pentecos- talism since the 1970s. Regarding the various “post-Toronto” movements, little academic literature exists at all.5Stephen Hunt’s lengthy and well-documented A History of the Charismatic Movement in Britain and United States of America

4 See Tim Stafford, “Miracles in Mozambique” [cover story],Christianity Today(May 2012), 19–

26, and Heidi Baker, Always Enough: God’s Miraculous Provision among the Poorest Children

on Earth(Grand Rapids,mi: Chosen Books, 2003).

5 On post-Toronto developments, see Hunt, History, “The Afterglow of Revival,” 569–606;

Michael Wilkinson and Peter Althouse,Catch the Fire: Soaking Prayer and Charismatic Renew-

al (DeKalb, il: Northern Illinois University Press, 2014); and Cartledge, “Catch the Fire,” 217–

238.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

3

after toronto

53

(2009) is almost unique in seeking to situate both the Toronto Blessing and the successor movements within a larger trajectory of Charismatic Christianity in North America and Britain. Hunt is aware of decisive changes that occurred in the charismatic movement of the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s. He writes as an outsider to these developments and, like his fellow British sociologist Martyn Percy, is often suspicious or doubtful regarding what he sees.6Hunt’s work may be helpful in providing a critical lens through which to assess the post-Toronto movements. The present essay begins by summarizing Hunt’s view of the 1980s Vineyard Movement, the 1990s Toronto Blessing, and the emerging trends of the 2000s. The remainder of the essay is based partially on written sources and partially on personal observation and interaction with leaders in some of the post-Toronto movements.7The conclusion of the essay will return to assess the adequacy of Hunt’s perspective alongside of the views offered by insiders to the post-Toronto movements.

Stephen Hunt on the Roots of the Toronto and post-Toronto Movements

Hunt traces the roots of the Toronto Blessing to John Wimber, the Associ- ation of Vineyard Churches in the 1980s, and its initial focus on “signs and

6 Percy wrote the Foreword to Hunt’s History, entitled “‘Survival of the Fittest’? Some Dar-

winian Perspectives on the Progeny and Prospects for Contemporary Revivalism,” in Hunt,

History, i–vi. Using the Darwinian analogy, Percy views Charismatic Christianity as largely

determined by its “fitness” to a given environment, and argues that “so far as Charismatic

Christianity is concerned, I think the intense growth of recent years may be largely over—

at least in Europe” (iii). The idea of a social or cultural environment as determining the

viability or even the possibility of a Christian revival makes sense in terms of standard

sociological approaches to religion. Yet, this perspective would be anathema to most par-

ticipants in revival, who see themselves as agents of God’s coming kingdom and adopt a

supernaturalist outlook that makes impossible things seem entirely possible. Especially in

the “dominionist” strand of Charismatic Christianity, God’s work in the world is never lim-

ited by existing social conditions, but instead creates those conditions in whatever way God

wishes.

7 Much of the information on Clark’s ministry is derived from eleven hours of interviews I

conductedwith him in Mozambiqueand in Brazilduring 2009.My thanks areduetoProfessor

Margaret Poloma (University of Akron, emerita), who oversaw the grant from the Flame of

Love Project (2009–2010), and to my colleague Professor Candy Gunther Brown (Indiana

University), who was a corecipient with me of the grant to study divine healing in Iris-Arco

Ministries and in Clark’s Global Awakening network.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

4

54

mcclymond

wonders.” He stresses the theme of “power” during this period, understood as “a desirable source of spirituality for individual adherents and the collec- tive.”8 Yet, below the surface-level concern for the miraculous, Hunt discerns insecurity and self-doubt among contemporary Charismatics. The interest in “signs” of God’s power and presence flow from apologetic motivations and the “need for the ‘proof’ of divine power and a verification of [the] existence of the supernatural.”9 Psychologically speaking, one might argue that the quest for “signs” was due to perceptions of weakness rather than strength among Charismatics. Hunt’s “theme of power” ties into his “theme of marginality.” Those anticipating a glorious “end-times” Christian revival were fully cognizant of the declining influence of Christianity in western societies and yet main- tained a certain grandiosity about future events and their role in them: “The charismatic constituency … were [in their own view] the harbingers of new waves of the Holy Spirit, the leading actor in an unfolding cosmic drama.”10 The 1980s Vineyard theology thus paralleled 1950s Latter Rain teaching, which maintained that God’s coming kingdom would arrive in power by means of a Spirit-empowered and “end-times” church, set apart from the church of ear- lier ages because of its more overt manifestation of supernatural power. The phrase “greater things than these”—based on Jesus’ reported words in John 14:12—meant that the “end-times” church would surpass the first-century man- ifestations of the Spirit and witness “changed lives and a changed world.”11The phrase “cutting edge” was used to refer to the purported center of what God was doing in the world.12The idea that such a center existed, and that the Vineyard movement was at or near that center, could of course generate an attitude of spiritual elitism.

In Hunt’s reading, the Vineyard movement was anti-intellectual. He cited Michael Harper’s earlier words that “the world awaits a fresh manifestation of Christ within his body” and “it is tired of … the airy-fairy doctrines of the- ologians.”13 Emerging from the 1970s charismatic renewal, the 1980s Vineyard movement highlighted emotionally engaging and intimate experiences of God’s presence rather than doctrinally elaborate or conceptually accurate the- ological expressions. God the Father was now “Daddy.” In certain respects, God

8 9 10 11 12 13

Hunt, History, 391.

Ibid., 393.

Ibid.

Ibid., 394.

Ibid., 393, 405, 484.

Ibid., 396; citing Michael Harper, A New Way of Living(Plainfield,nj: Logos International, 1973), n.p.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

5

after toronto

55

was more or less tailored to each individual worshipper. McGuire spoke of “a highly personalized God of intimate conversations.”14 The theological flu- idity or flexibility of the Vineyard movement was epitomized in the idea of a “centered set” rather than “bounded set.” The Vineyard was less concerned with setting external boundaries—to determine who was “in” or “out”—and more concerned with defining its “center” or focus.15 When facing opposi- tion, Wimber generally “did not engage in critical dialogue,” believing that the effort of answering his critics would divert valuable time and energy away from the tasks of ministry.16 Hunt cites the criticism of Martyn Percy to the effect that Wimber never developed an adequate “theology of suffering and sick- ness.”17

Demographic analysis of typical Vineyard participants showed that most were above average in educational attainment, were financially secure, and often worked in professional or managerial positions.18 Correspondingly, as the Vineyard movement made its way to Britain, it did not draw many par- ticipants from working-class neighborhoods or inner-city London. One critic spoke of the Vineyard as “predominantly white skinned, white collar and wealthy.”19At the same time, Hunt acknowledges that Wimber and many Vine- yard churches were actively involved in community outreach and service, including prison and homeless ministry, distributing food and clothing, and so on.20 Hunt also acknowledges that Wimber was not simply preaching to the already converted, but was committed to evangelism and church planting among non-Christians. From Hunt’s British perspective, Wimber may be the most important Christian evangelist to emerge since Billy Graham.21

Wimber’s message should be distinguished from other strands of charis- matic or neo-pentecostal Christianity, including the dominionist, prophetic, and prosperity teachings. Even though Wimber co-taught with C. Peter Wag- ner a famous course at Fuller Seminary in the 1980s on “signs and wonders,”

14

15

16 17 18

19 20 21

Ibid., 413; citing M. McGuire, Ritual Healing in Suburban America (New Brunswick, nj: Rutgers University Press, 1988), n.p.

Ibid., 418. Hunt speaks here of a “bounded centre” versus “bounded set”—a different phraseology, but seemingly conveying the same distinction.

Ibid., 426.

Ibid., 427.

Ibid., 415; citing D. Perrin, “Signs and Wonders: The Growth of the Vineyard Fellowship,” Ph.D. diss, Washington State University, 1989, 90–100.

Ibid., 424–425.

Ibid., 427.

Ibid., 418.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

6

56

mcclymond

Wagner’s emphasis in the 1990s began to diverge from that of Wimber. God’s kingdom would only come in power, Wagner argued, once God’s people acted deliberately to bind and disable the “territorial spirits” resisting God’s will.22 Wagner’s elaborate theology of the demonic is largely absent from Wimber and the literature connected with the Vineyard. It seems to be even more absent from the Toronto Blessing and its successor movements.23Hunt argues that Wimber showed a “profound dislike” for the prosperity gospel, and this seems to have continued into the Toronto and post-Toronto movements. At the same time, Hunt notes that a “spirit of success” runs through Wimber’s teaching, which tends to be optimistic regarding God’s power to overcome problems and to be results-oriented. These are traits shared with prosperity theology. Regarding the prophetic movement in the 1980s and 1990s, Hunt sees this movement as less evangelistic and more inwardly focused than Wim- ber and the Vineyard were.24 Just as Wimber had little use for the involved demonology of C. Peter Wagner, so too he became increasingly uncomfort- able with the intricate apocalyptic prophecies of Paul Cain, Bob Jones, and other prophetic leaders of the 1980s. These are among the reasons for the sep- aration that occurred between John Wimber and the so-called “Kansas City Prophets.” The 1980s prophetic movement showed “an ever-deepening inter- est in the spectacular and the esoteric”—a development that Wimber came to reject.25

One intriguing sociological reason that Hunt gives for the 1990s revival is “the pent up psychological pressures associated with the relevance of the advanc-

22

23

24 25

C. Peter Wagner wrote or edited many books on this theme, including: (ed.) Territorial Spirits(Chichester,uk: Sovereign Press, 1989); (ed., with F. Pennoyer),Wrestling with Dark Angels(Ventura,ca: Regal, 1989); Engaging the Enemy: How to Fight and Defeat Territorial Spirits (Ventura, ca: Regal, 1991); Warfare Prayer (Ventura, ca: Regal, 1992); Breaking Strongholds in Your City (Ventura, ca: Regal, 1993); Confronting the Powers (Ventura, ca: Regal, 1996).

Martyn Percy writes that there is no “deliverance ministry” as such in the Toronto Blessing: “Deliverance ministry is very much scaled-down for a church in the revivalist tradition … tacfbelieves (presently) that specific prayer ministry for deliverance is unnecessary, sim- ply because of the power of the current—the tb—in which they move. It graciously but insistently sweeps everything before it” (Percy, Toronto Blessing, 29). Demonic influences are “‘loved’ out” or “squeezed out by the presence of the Holy Spirit” (ibid.). “In all my time attacf, Satan, evil spirits or demons were hardly mentioned” (ibid.).

Hunt, History, 507.

Hunt, History, 477. On Kansas City developments, see David Pytches, Some Said It Thun- dered: A Personal Encounter with the Kansas City Prophets(Nashville: Oliver-Nelson, 1991); and Jackson,Quest for the Radical Middle, 166–231.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

7

after toronto

57

ing year of 2000a.d.”26 In interpreting the Toronto movement, Hunt stresses the theme of “pilgrimage” and generally views Toronto as the movement’s focal point.27Hunt mentions the idea of a commercialized or “McDonaldized” blessing—like the “exportation” of a manufactured product—yet he only par- tially agrees with this assessment.28 Internally considered, the Toronto move- ment focused on individual, inward, and subjective experience, as signified in the title of a worship music cd from Toronto: “Intimate Bride—gentle worship for soaking in God’s presence.”29Hunt follows Martyn Percy in highlighting the role of women at Toronto, especially those ranging from fifty to sixty years of age.30

Hunt’s overall assessment of the Toronto movement is remarkably ambigu- ous. Sometimes he seems to minimize the movement’s importance, as when he comments that charismatic churches were able to “hold their audiences” for the time being, as spiritual phenomena were “relaunched on an existing market.”31 He goes so far as to call Toronto “an increasingly inward and nihilis- tic millenarian movement that was going nowhere in particular.” He writes that “it was an individual and atomized experience rather than a spur to world revival” and “plausibly marked the beginning of the end of neo-Pentecostalism as a movement, a veritable ‘ghost dance’ within the charismatic Christian sec- tor.” Yet, Hunt admits that the movement brought “refreshing” to Christian believers, even though it “did not appear to have dramatically expanded the charismatic market share or resulted in new conversions.” In the end it was “essentially a movement of cultural revitalization.” The Toronto movement, he writes, “was truly a remarkable phenomenon that was unrivalled in the his- tory of the Charismatic movement.” It meant that “the Charismatic movement was turning back on its self to rediscover its initial impetus but in greater mea- sure.”32

Hunt is evidently in two minds regarding the Toronto movement. It is diffi- cult to see how Hunt’s assessment of Toronto as a “ghost dance,” “atomized,” or even “nihilistic” movement “going nowhere in particular” matches his descrip- tion of the same movement as a time of “cultural revitalization” that allowed “the Charismatic movement … to rediscover its initial impetus but in greater

26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Ibid., 477. Ibid., 521–522. Ibid., 530. Ibid., 558. Ibid., 559. Ibid., 563. Ibid., 561–562.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

8

58

mcclymond

measure.” Perhaps the point is that Hunt acknowledges the renewing and refreshing effect among Charismatic Christians but is wary of the subjectivism, inwardness, and/or social detachment that he attributes to “therapeutic-type neo-Pentecostalism.”33

Hunt contrasts the “hegemonic” or Toronto-centered view of the movement with the “glocalized” view, in which the movement on leaving Toronto adapts itself in each new location in which it takes root. He holds that both interpre- tations have a measure of validity: “[The] clear global impact of the Blessing meant that it constituted an ideal study in the context of extant theories of the globalization of religion, whether in the form of a more hegemonic model or for exploring the significance of ‘glocalization’—its local impact and possible adaptation. Clearly the dissemination of the charismatic phenomena displayed aspects of both.”34

Post-Toronto Overview: Catch the Fire, Iris-Arco Ministries, and Global Awakenings

We turn now to consider briefly the history of three post-Toronto develop- ments. The new ministry that took shape at the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship (tacf)—later given the name Catch the Fire—emphasized “soak- ing prayer” and led to the establishment of several hundred “soaking centers.” “Soaking prayer” refers to the practice of spending an hour or more at a time avowedly “soaking” in the presence of the Holy Spirit.35 In certain respects it represents a “routinization” of the so-called “carpet time” that took place in a spontaneous and unplanned way during the early stages of the Toronto move- ment. Those who fell to the floor, overcome by the power of the Spirit, were at first unprepared for the internal sensations and transformations that they experienced. Yet after repeated experiences of the Spirit’s overpowering pres- ence, participants began to bring pillows or sleeping bags in anticipation of spending extended periods of time on the floor.36Instruction inhowto rest and

33 34 35 36

Ibid., 562.

Ibid., 561.

For a full account, see Wilkinson and Althouse,Catch the Fire.

One is reminded of the emergence of “camp meeting” revivalism around 1800. Out-of- door preaching arguably goes all the way back to the time of Jesus, and yet something new happened as people came to outdoor venues with supplies in hand, expecting in advanceto spend days at the selected location. In an analogous process of “routinization,” Toronto participants were expecting in advance that they or others would be spending

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

9

after toronto

59

howto experience God’s presence filled the pages of soaking prayer pamphlets and manuals. Those familiar with the noisy, exuberant, and raucous worship of the Toronto Blessing in the mid-1990s may be surprised to learn that the worship style now typically favored in some post-Toronto “soaking” services involves lengthy periods of total silence and resting by oneself while listen- ing to soft instrumental music—appropriately termed a contemplative form of prayer. Yet, if “soaking prayer” on one level represents aroutinizationof the mid- 1990s Toronto experience, on another level it represents a continuation of the charismatic. Soaking prayer was and is an effort to rekindle a powerful, trans- formative experience of God’s presence.

Iris-Arco Ministries developed along a different pathway. The Bakers’ min- istry to the orphans of Mozambique was already established, though struggling to make ends meet, at the time that the Toronto movement emerged in Jan- uary 1994. Unlike Catch the Fire, Iris Ministries was not a lineal successor of the Toronto Blessing but an existing ministry significantly reshaped by it. The Bakers operate several large homes for orphaned children in Mozambique, the largest of which has, in a brief time, become a Christian ministry and training center for much of Mozambique and surrounding nations, featuring a semi- nary for indigenous African pastors, a ministry missions school primarily cater- ing to younger Christians from developed nations, and vocational training for Mozambican women. The Bakers’ center in Pemba is now the focal point of nearly seven thousand small indigenous African congregations, most of which were founded during the last twenty years.

What is more, the Bakers’ ministry appeals to younger (that is, mostly in their twenties and thirties) Christians from North America, Europe, Latin America, East Asia, and Australia who come to learn and to serve short-term in Mozam- bique. Iris Ministries shows the new structures and institutions that one might expect in a sociological process of routinization. Yet, the Bakers’ continual effort to press in ever new directions in evangelism, church planting, mercy ministry, and the healing of the sick forces them into constant innovation and change. Iris Ministries manifests an ethos of “soaking” and “seeking”—a desire perpetually to move forward and refuse to settle into any fixed or estab- lished pattern for serving God. So one might say that the continuation of the charismatic—rather than routinization—seems to be the dominant motif at Iris. What makes Iris recognizably a post-Toronto phenomenon is not merely

time on the carpet, and so they brought along pillows and blankets to be prepared. See Kenneth O. Brown, “Camp Meetings and Tent Meetings,” in Michael J. McClymond, ed., Encyclopedia of Religious Revivals in America(Westport,ct: Greenwood Press, 2007), s.v.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

10

60

mcclymond

the fact that both Heidi and Rolland Baker attribute their personal spiritual renewal and the subsequent renewal of Iris Ministries to their visit to Toronto; it is rather that Toronto-style “soaking prayer” has become the template within which the Bakers seek to receive divine guidance, blessing, and provision in their work of ministry. In the Bakers’ life story, as recounted in their book Always Enough (2003), the mystical and practical dimensions of religion are never far apart from each other. Hearing God speak and feeding the orphans are two aspects of one divine calling to follow God’s guidance and to embody God’s love.37

Randy Clark’s Global Awakening shows yet another pattern. Clark’s preach- ing at the Toronto Airport Vineyard Fellowship in January 1994 was a trigger— perhaps one of the triggers—that sparked the beginning of a movement there. John and Carol Arnotts’ visit to Argentina and their encounter there with Claudio Freidzon may also have played a role in raising the level of spiritual expectancy and prayerfulness within the Toronto congregation. Yet, Clark’s role ought not to be minimized. A distinctive feature of Clark’s work is that he came to Toronto as a guest, or itinerant preacher. After the revival took off, Clark in fact spent little time in Toronto. Prior to his visit to Toronto in early 1994, Clark had travelled very little. This was soon to change. Invitations to preach in far- flung locations began to pour in within the first few weeks after the start of the Toronto movement. As Clark’s ministry, Global Awakening, began to take shape over the next several years, its hallmark wasitinerancy. In essence, Clark travelled from place to place seeking to kindle the same kind of transformative revival that occurred in Toronto in January 1994. Clark’s Lighting Fires (1998) aptly summed up what he has sought to do in and through Global Awakening.38 Though Clark had never been outside of the usa prior to his initial preaching

37

38

Heidi Baker’s more recent writing has highlighted the theme of love as much as or more than the miraculous. See Heidi Baker with Shara Pradhan, Compelled by Love: How to Change the World by the Power of Love in Action (Lake Mary, fl: Charisma House, 2008), and the analysis of Matthew T. Lee, Margaret M. Poloma, and Stephen G. Post, in their coauthored work, The Heart of Religion: Spiritual Empowerment, Benevolence, and the Experience of God’s Love (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013). The Bakers’ work in Mozambique—with its implied link between prayer and spiritual renewal on the one hand, and outward acts of benevolence on the other—was a major inspiration for the Lee-Poloma-Post volume. On the Bakers, one of the few studies is Donald R. Kantel, “The ‘Toronto Blessing’ Revival and its Continuing Impact on Mission in Mozambique” (D.Min. diss., Regent University, 2007).

Randy Clark, Lighting Fires: Keeping the Spirit of Revival Alive in Your Heart and the Hearts of Others Around You(Lake Mary,fl: Charisma House, 1998).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

11

after toronto

61

foray in Toronto, during the last fifteen years he has preached and ministered in no less than thirty-four different nations. For many years he has travelled for up to five or six months out of every year. If Catch the Fire Ministries represents a continuation of the Toronto Blessing at its point of origin, then Global Awaken- ing represents a continuation of the itinerancy that helped to spark the revival in Toronto.

Clark has maintained his long-term friendship with John and Carol Arnott— lead pastors attavf/tacfsince the 1990s—and together they participate with several other people in a loosely affiliated “Revival Network” that includes several like-minded ministry leaders together with their spouses—Randy and DeAnne Clark, John and Carol Arnott, Heidi and Rolland Baker, Ché and Sue Ahn, Bill and Beni Johnson, and Georgy and Winnie Banov. Members of this Revival Network gather annually for an informal time of prayer, fellowship, and exchange of ideas and vision on an annual basis. Despite their commonalities, those in this select group perceive themselves as having differing callings. Bill Johnson, whose name is often mentioned alongside of Randy Clark’s in Global Awakening circles, leads the Bethel Church in Redding, California, and is primarily known as a teacher and author. He is known for “revelational teaching” in which he interprets the Bible to bring out its deeper implications for living a “supernatural life,” or “life of miracles,” or, in his words, “making the supernatural natural”—a phrase that Johnson borrowed from Vineyard Church founder John Wimber. Ché Ahn’s focus is global evangelism, and, like the Bakers, he leads a congregation that is a mother church for thousands of others in various locations globally. Finally, the work of the Banovs lies in the area of exuberant, passionate worship, although they too itinerate internationally and claim to minister in signs and wonders. Each element stressed by one leader in the Revival Network—bodily healing, evangelism, ministry to the poor, Bible teaching, exuberant worship, silent prayer, inner healing—is affirmed by all the other members of the network, and indeed most members are active at some level in each of these areas. So there is both cohesiveness and diversity within this group of charismatic leaders.

Post-Toronto Beginnings: The Emergence of Randy Clark and Global Awakening

When Randy Clark speaks of his work in Global Awakening, he sees it as a con- tinuation of the work of John Wimber, founder of the Association of Vineyard Churches (avc) during the late 1970s and leader in the Vineyard until his death in 1997. Prior to founding Global Awakening, Clark served as a Vineyard pas-

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

12

62

mcclymond

tor. Along with many other leaders of his generation, he viewed John Wimber as a teacher, mentor, role model, and catalyst. Clark himself sees the work of Global Awakening as call to a revitalizaton of “Vineyard values.” The story of the Vineyard Church begins with the unlikely character of John Wimber, described by his wife, Carol, as a “beer-guzzling, drug-abusing pop musician, who was converted at the age of twenty-nine while chain-smoking his way through a Quaker-led Bible study.”39 Wimber’s ministry, like the man himself, is multi- dimensional. His personal experiences, spiritual life, musicianship, education, leadership, and mentorship are all essential to understanding the man and the movement he initiated.40

AnydiscussionofWimber vis-à-vistheTorontoBlessingdrawsoneintoareas of disagreement among those who were, and still are, affiliated with the avc. The story of the Toronto Blessing is variously interpreted. Some observers in theavcviewed the Toronto Blessing as a departure from “Vineyard values” and as involving an embrace of “non-biblical” ideas and practices. Indeed, this was the claim made by John Wimber and others in the avc leadership at the time that the Toronto Airport Vineyard Fellowship (tavf) was removed from mem- bership in the avc and became an independent, free-standing congregation (henceforth the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship—tacf). Others, by con- trast, have claimed that the Toronto Blessing represented a return toavc’s radi- cal, experimental, experientialist, and supernaturalist origins from the early to mid-1980s. That view, by and large, is the perspective of Randy Clark. On Clark’s view, it was theavcthat by the early 1990s had largely departed from “Vineyard values” as properly interpreted, while the Toronto Blessing was returning to and reasserting those earlier values.

Clark took many of his key ideas from Wimber, including the notion that spiritual gifts were reflections of the kingdom reality that Jesus came to estab-

39

40

Quoted in Donald E. Miller, “Routinizing Charisma: The Vineyard Christian Fellowship in the Post-Wimber Era,” in David Roozen and James R. Nieman, eds., Church, Identity, and Change: Theology and Denominational Structures in Unsettled Times (Grand Rapids, mi: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2005), 144, n. 10.

On Wimber and the Association of Vineyard Churches, see the interpretive essays in David Roozen and James R. Nieman, eds., Church, Identity, and Change: Theology and Denominational Structures in Unsettled Times(Grand Rapids,mi: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2005): Bill Jackson, “A Short History of the Association of Vineyard Churches,” 132–140; Donald E. Miller, “Routinizing Charisma: The Vineyard Christian Fellowship in the Post-Wimber Era,” 141–162; and Don Williams, “Theological Perspective and Reflection on the Vineyard Christian Fellowship,” 163–187. See also David Pytches, ed., John Wimber: His Influence and Legacy (Guildford, uk: Eagle, 1988), and John Gunstone, Signs and Wonders: The Wimber Phenomenon(London: Daybreak, 1989).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

13

after toronto

63

lish on earth, that ministry gifts are corporately present in the church and not confined to certain leaders, and that believers should experience God’s pres- ence in prolonged worship and then expect to see God bring supernatural healing and prophetic communication. Wimber stressed, in Mark Cartledge’s words, the “multiple infillings of the Holy Spirit” and so “downplayed the evi- dential nature of glossolalia and Baptism in the Holy Spirit as a distinct sub- sequent event to conversion.”41 Wimber held that one had to give away what- ever one had received, in accordance with the gospel command: “Freely you received; freely give” (Matt 10:8). Somewhat surprisingly, Wimber viewed spiri- tual gifts that an individual received from God as entities that—like soup, cash, or clothing—could be given away to those who needed them. It was not merely that a gift like healing might be exercised on others’ behalf; it was instead that the capacity to heal could itself be given away. Clark later developed this concept in his teaching on “impartation.”42

Clark sees his particular service to the Christian church, in the words of his autobiography, as “lighting fires” and his major gift not as healing or evangelism, although he devotes much attention to both, but as “impartation” of anointing of the Holy Spirit to others. Whenever he has the opportunity to preach just one message in a church it is almost always a message on the theme of “impartation” and is followed by a ministry time in which he lays hands on all those who feel spiritual manifestations in their bodies as he prays over the crowd. As Clark prays for particular individuals, bodily manifestations may appear (such as

41 42

Cartledge, “Catch the Fire,” 219.

See Randy Clark, There is More! Reclaiming the Power of Impartation (Mechanicsburg, pa: Global Awakening, 2006). As Clark acknowledged in conversation, his theology of “impartation” has much in common with ideas prevalent during the Latter Rain Revival in Canada in 1948–1949. Latter Rain preachers justified their practice of laying on hands for the conferral of spiritual gifts by appeal to 1Timothy 4:14 (nasb): “Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed upon you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery.” The leaders of this 1940s movement held that pentecostal believers who already spoke in tongues should continue to ask God for more spiritual gifts and for greater efficacy in the use of the gifts that they already had. They saw the laying on of hands as the normative pattern for the conferral of spiritual gifts. This of course conflicted with the interpretation of Spirit baptism that was dominant among denominational Pentecostals in North America. By about 1950 the Latter Rain had already been disfellowshipped by the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (paoc) and by the Assemblies of God (ag) in the usa. For an overview of this often neglected pentecostal-charismatic movement, see Richard Riss, Latter Rain: The Latter Rain Movement of 1948 and the Mid-Twentieth Century Evangelical Awakening(Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: Honeycomb Visual Productions, 1987).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

14

64

mcclymond

sensations of heat or tingling, tremors or shaking, weeping, laughing, shouting, and so forth). Such bodily manifestations, in Clark’s view, may be outward signs of the new gifts for service purportedly conferred or activated through the laying on of hands in prayer.

The theology and practice of “impartation” has ecclesiological implications that may be overlooked. In early Pentecostalism, individuals typically went to the “altar”—sometimes a physical spot at the front of a church building—to pray and seek after God, and to “tarry” until each one had a personal “Pentecost” asoutwardlymarkedbyspeakingintongues.43Thepicturehereis ratherstarkly individualisticas each one seeks God by himself and receives his or her personal blessing. By contrast, Wimber’s approach, and that of the Toronto and post- Toronto movements, iscorporatistic. The spiritual gifts belong not to a few but to the entire body of Christ, the gifts are to be used for the benefit of all persons, and the gifts are even transferable from person to person through the laying on of hands.44 Wimber’s and Clark’s theology and practice of spiritual gifts stress Christian interconnectedness rather than individualism.

Post-Toronto in Practice: Healing, Worship, Spiritual Gifts, and the Apostles and Prophets

Like his mentor, John Wimber, Clark is convinced that revival, healing, and prophecy areteachable. These are not inscrutable phenomena but they may be explained so that those who have not experienced them may begin to do so. In contrast to many of the pentecostal healing evangelists of the 1940s and 1950s, Clark’s “school of healing” reflects a “democratization” of healing and prophetic gifts. The underlying idea is that large numbers of the faithful have spiritual gifts that are not being exercised at present. To discover God’s purposes, Clark often uses a trial-and-error method. He encourages the new participants in Global Awakening “ministry teams” to step out in faith and to attempt to heal the sick. They are also encouraged—within well-defined boundaries—to act on the basis of spiritual impressions and hunches that they attribute to God’s “prophetic” guidance. Clark does not claim to know in advance which persons in his ministry team have particular spiritual gifts, but these gifts are known and recognized in a process that is surprisingly open-ended and empirical—a

43

44

The early pentecostal expression “tarrying or the Spirit” is adapted from Luke 24:49, Authorized Version.

Mark Cartledge, in “Catch the Fire,” 219, speaks of the “transferable anointing.”

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

15

after toronto

65

kind of supernatural pragmatism.45Clark speaks openly about his own failures in healing ministry as a way of encouraging those whom he trains to be unafraid of attempting something new. It should be noted that Clark does not agree with Word-Faith teaching that God’s purpose is always to heal the sick when believers pray with faith. His Vineyard theology of the “kingdom already” yet “kingdom not yet” allows for ambiguity in our human experience of God’s healing power.46

Clark’s Global Awakening reveals its origins in the Toronto movement in its stress on joy, exuberance, and the immediacy of God’s presence. The spokesper- son at one gathering, cited by Margaret Poloma, commented that “laughter and playfulness was a sign of the inner joy that was being given to people.” He added further: “We don’t want to focus on how you shook [that is, in bodily tremors] or how you fell down [to the ground]. The real issue is what the Lord is doing in your life.”47Another Toronto participant, Heidi Baker, urged: “It is not frivolous to see people stuck to the floor—it is not frivolous to see people crying—it is not frivolous to see people shaking and quaking and feeling the power of God.

45

46

47

Grant Wacker balances “primitivism” with “pragmatism” in his interpretation of early Pentecostalism inHeavenBelow:EarlyPentecostalsandAmericanCulture(Cambridge,ma: Harvard University Press, 2001). He defines “primitivism” as “a determination to return to first things, original things, fundamental things,” expressing itself in a “yearning to know God directly” (11–12). “Pragmatism” deals with the question of what does and does not work. Both traits are much in evidence in Clark’s ministry.

Clark’s general position is that believers who pray for the sick should err on the side of hopefulness and expectancy rather than fear or caution. When healing does not occur, there may be some kind of blockage standing in the way (for example, personal sin, unbelief, or perhaps a familial curse or demonic opposition). Because God is the Healer, something is standing in the way, whether or not those praying and the one being prayed for are able to discern the impediment. The questions-and-answers of Clark’s ministry team with the sick person receiving prayer perform a diagnostic function. When did your medical condition begin? What was happening in your life at the time? Is there anyone with whom you have a broken relationship? Is there unforgiveness in your life? Is there any unrepented sin in your life? Depending on the answers to such questions, Clark will encourage those receiving prayer verbally to express faith in God, forgiveness toward those who have offended them, and so forth, as a prelude to receiving efficacious prayer for their own healing. The one being prayed for is not simply passive but plays an active role in their own healing by God though their responses to prompts received by the ministry team. Pavel Hejzlar compared Word-Faith teachings on divine healing with those of Sanford and MacNutt in Two Paradigms for Divine Healing: Fred F. Bosworth, Kenneth E. Hagin, Agnes Sanford, and Francis MacNutt in Dialogue(Leiden: Brill, 2010). Based on Hejzlar’s analysis, Clark’s theology of healing might be closest to that of MacNutt.

Poloma, Main Street Mystics, 4.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

16

66

mcclymond

I want you to know that unless God touches you, you will not go in his power and you will not see what he wants you to see.”48

Music is central to the “renewal rituals” among today’s Pentecostals and Charismatics. This was true in the Vineyard Church, in the Toronto Blessing, and more recently in the work of Randy Clark and Global Awakening. Music is a vehicle of what philosopher Walter Stace has referred to as “introvertive mysticism.” Songs allow one to go beyond the lyrics into a realm of the non- tangible.49 Joan Stanbaugh writes that music takes humans into a “rarified sphere, beyond concepts, representations, and objectivity.” The decision to lis- ten to music, as Alfred Schutz says, “involves a particular attitude” whereby one “stops living in his acts of daily life, stops being directed toward their objects,” and “lives now on another plane of consciousness.” Both musical experience and religious experience have something in common in that both reflect “pat- terns of inner time; like all patterns of inner time, they can be shared.” Donald Miller describes pentecostal-charismatic services by writing that the “worship may be viewed as a form of sacred lovemaking, transcending the routinized rit- uals that so often structure the human divine communication.”50 Lyrics to the typical songs used in worship in Vineyard Churches and in the Toronto Bless- ing involve images of water, wind, and fire. Water is a symbol of refreshment and joy and cleansing, while wind may connote either a gentle breeze or the Spirit’s unpredictable and powerful movement, and fire denotes the purifying, cleansing effect of God’s presence and the empowerment of God’s people for service and ministering in gifts of power such as healing.51

While music in one sense draws the worshippers into a place of interiority and intimacy with God, it also can express what sociologist Emil Durkheim referred to as “collective effervescence.” In the act of “making a joyful noise unto the Lord” (Ps. 100:1), the worshippers come together with one another in an

48 49

50

51

Heidi Baker, as quoted in Poloma, Main Street Mystics, 218.

Poloma,Main Street Mystics, 33, citing Walter T. Stace,Mysticism and Philosophy(London: Macmillan, 1960).

Poloma, Main Street Mystics, 37–38, citing Joan Stambaugh, “Expressive Autonomy in Music: A Critique,” in J. Joseph Smith, ed., Understanding the Musical Experience (New York: Gordon and Breach, 1989), 167; Alfred Schutz, “Making Music Together,” in A. Broder- son, ed., Collected Papers ii: Studies in Social Theory (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1964); James V. Spickard, “A Sociology of Religious Experience,” in W.H. Swatos, ed., A Future for Reli- gion? New Paradigms for Social Analysis (Beverly Hills, ca: Sage, 1993), 199; and Donald E. Miller,Reinventing American Protestantism(Berkeley,ca: University of California Press, 1997), 87.

Poloma, Main Street Mystics, 51.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

17

after toronto

67

affective unity that might not be possible in any other way. In a social-scientific study of the functions of music, Thomas Geissmann writes that the essential function of music in primitive times was “to display and possibly reinforce the unity of a social group toward other groups. In humans this function is still evident today whenever groups of people, be they united by political, religious, age, or other factors, define themselves by their music.”52 A service of worship typically begins with a time of exuberant praise, dancing, and celebration, and then later—in the customary, unwritten liturgy of the Vineyard tradition— shifts toward quieter songs. In part, this pattern exists because it is hard for those praying to hear each other while the music is loud.53 Often the music neverstops,evenwhileasermonortestimonyisspoken,andprayersareoffered during “ministry time.”

In this theology of divine and human action, Clark distinguishes what he calls a blueprint model—in which everything happens according to God’s pre- ordained plan—from a warfare model. Clark says that he embraces a warfare model.54Everything that happens is not a product of God’s sovereign blueprint, but a battle between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness, in which humans and angels and demons are all active participants. In one sense, Clark shares with John Wimber a Calvinistic emphasis that God himself deter- mines who, when, how, and even whether divine healing, prophetic guidance, and/or the impartation of spiritual power and spiritual gifts takes place. Yet, Clark is more Arminian than Calvinistic in highlighting the many gifts and blessings that God is ready to confer to all those who seek for them diligently and believingly. Prophetic messages or “words of knowledge” related to healing

52

53

54

Ibid., 47, citing Thomas Geissmann, “Gibson Songs and Human Music from an Evolu- tionary Perspective,” in N.L. Wallin, B. Merker, and S. Brown, eds., The Origins of Music (Cambridge,ma:mitPress, 2000), 119.

In the Black Church tradition this order (i.e., exuberance followed by stillness) is often reversed. One begins with “the Devotion,” a phase “characterized by sobriety and a pro- found sense of holiness,” and then this is followed by “the Service,” showing a “contrasting mood of excitement.” Walter F. Pitts, “Keep the Fire Burnin’: Language and Ritual in the Afro-Baptist Church,” in Michael J. McClymond, ed., Embodying the Spirit: New Perspec- tives on North American Revivalism(Baltimore,md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 196–210, citing 198–199.

Clark has spoken at conferences alongside Gregory Boyd, and Boyd’sGod at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove, il: InterVarsity Press, 1997) expresses something like Clark’s “warfare model” for understanding God’s relationship to a fallen and corrupted world. Like Wimber’s “already but not yet” kingdom theology, the “warfare” idea allows for uncertainty and ambiguity in interpreting what God might be doing in any particular situation.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

18

68

mcclymond

are effective not because God is more ready to heal some people rather than others, but because the “words of knowledge” tend to build faith in individuals who are in need of healing.

Through his years of ministry, Wimber became known for “love for the whole church”—which included Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and adher- ents of mainline Protestant congregations. He believed that the church’s color- ful diversity was one of its defining traits. This was a point not of appreciation but of attack by some of Wimber’s conservative critics. For his part, Clark has sought to emulate Wimber. Few organizations have approached Global Awak- ening’s effectiveness in networking leaders and members of diverse Christian traditions worldwide—including Word of Faith megachurches, Classical Pen- tecostals, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, New Apostolic Networks, and Baptists. In Clark’s words, the “healing streams come together to make a major healing river of God.” “My purpose,” said Clark, “is not to put any stream down, but to say here is the stream, here is the teaching, here are the strengths and the weaknesses. This weakness can be handled by this stream over there that is strong in that area [sic]. We need all streams flowing together.”55To implement something new in the church, John Wimber argued, requires atheology, amodel, and apractice. Global Awakening focuses on mod- eling and practicing Wimber’s kingdom theology and his vision of a church united in love and service. The intertwining themes of the teaching and prac- tice in Global Awakening include extended or soaking prayer, intimacy with God, deep fellowship among believers, Christian unity, and the experience of God’s supernatural healing power.

Because Global Awakening uses conferences and training materials to equip pastors and laity to return to their own churches with greater effectiveness, rather than seceding to form a new denomination, it is difficult to quantify the organization’s influence. Yet, there is reason to believe that this influence is extensive, and that the activities of Global Awakening are representative of a large number of similar transnational healing networks—such as those bro- kered by Mensa Otabil, Reinhard Bonnke, David Yonggi Cho, Sérgio Von Helder, Mahesh Chavda, Ché Ahn, David Hogan, Dennis Balcombe, Heidi Baker, Bill

55

Clark, “Benefits of Partnership” [manuscript supplied by Clark]. Clark writes further: “One thing I had always liked about the Vineyard movement was the emphasis placed on loving all of God’s Church, from the litergical [sic] ‘high churches’ (Orthodox, Anglican, Roman Catholic) to the Pentecostals, and everyone in between. I agreed with that idea and I really did love the Church” (Randy Clark, God Can Use Little Ole Me: Remarkable Stories of Ordinary Christians[Shippensburg,pa: Revival Press / Destiny Image Publishers, 1998], 11).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

19

after toronto

69

Johnson, and Leif Hetland—the last three of whom acknowledge major debts to Clark and Global Awakening.

Global Awakening and the network brokered by Clark speak of modern- day “apostles” and “prophets.” Indeed, the major annual reunion conference hosted by Clark is titled “Voice of the Apostles,” and another, subsequently introduced annual conference is “Voice of the Prophets.” It should be noted that the noun apostle and the adjective apostolic are not used in a uniform or consistent fashion among independent charismatics and neo-Pentecostals. In some instances, the term apostolic means something like “missional” and so does not imply that any human beings today possess an authority comparable to that of the first-century leaders whom Jesus appointed, such as Peter and the Twelve, or Paul of Tarsus. Among other writers—C. Peter Wagner, for example—the termapostolicis generally linked to the leaders of megachurches and to networks of churches linked to such megachurches.56 The problem at the present time is that terminological confusion prevails, and it is by no means clear that everyone who speaks of “apostles” and “apostolic” has the same meanings in mind.

Some thirty years ago, Andrew Walker drew a distinction between “r1” and “r2” forms of Christian “restorationism”—a point that might be applied in the debate over “apostles” and the “apostolic.”57“r1” represents the more separatis- tic and authoritarian strand, concerned with establishing hierarchies of leaders and followers, while “r2” was relatively relaxed about authority and much more concerned with mission and outreach. When Douglas Geivett and Holly Pivec state that “the mainnar[New Apostolic Reformation] teaching on apostles” is that “they must govern,” they are stating something that is true of some but not of all who speak of “apostles” and the “apostolic.”58It is especially in connection with C. Peter Wagner and some of the larger independent charismatic churches in theusathat “apostolic” authority is conceived of as a necessary restructuring

56

57

58

William K. Kay, in Apostolic Networks in Britain: New Ways of Being Church(Carlisle, Cum- bria,uk: Paternoster Press, 2007), highlights the missional aspects of “apostolic” churches in Britain today. For a different perspective, more focused on numerical growth and on the personalities of those regarded as “apostles,” see C. Peter Wagner’s Churchquake! How the New Apostolic Reformation is Shaking up the Church as We Know It (Ventura,ca: Regal, 1999) and Apostles Today (Ventura, ca: Regal, 2006). A sharp critique of contemporary apostolic movements appears in R. Douglas Geivett and Holly Pivec,God’s Super-Apostles: Encountering the Worldwide Prophets and Apostles Movement (Wooster, oh: Weaver Book Company, 2014).

Andrew Walker, Restoring the Kingdom: The Radical Christianity of the House Church Movement (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1985).

Geivett and Pivec,God’s Super-Apostles, 8.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

20

70

mcclymond

of the entire global church. This is much less the case in Britain, Europe, and other global regions, as both Andrew Walker’s and William Kay’s analyses indi- cate. My own experience would indicate that leaders and laypersons involved in the post-Toronto network discussed here are more “r2” than “r1.” While these post-Toronto leaders are not publicly critical of C. Peter Wagner’s views and the more authoritative (or authoritarian) conception of “apostles,” they themselves do not embrace or promote this interpretation.

In the post-Toronto network(s) that are the focus of this essay, leaders may in some cases consider themselves “apostles” but generally do not call themselves that. They may accept the designation when applied to them by others and yet balk at using the “A-word” in reference to themselves. They object to and may make jokes about those who print the title “Apostle” on their business cards. Most believe that a true apostle must have numerous, impressive signs and wonders associated with their ministry. What is more, an apostle must not only plant churches but also lead movements among unreached people groups. The same principle of external identification and naming applies to prophets and to prophethood. Prophets need to be recognized as such by others and not simply be self-proclaiming or self-promoting individuals.59

The attitude toward prophecy in Global Awakening circles allows consid- erable latitude in identifying who is or is not a prophet and what utterances are or are not prophetic. For Clark, this is not an all-or-nothing issue. He dis- tinguishes “false prophets” from “wrong prophets.” In other words, a prophet can make a mistake without being decisively and permanently rejected from all exerciseofpublicpropheticministry.Clarkandothersalsodistinguish between the “gift of prophecy” (that many occasionally exercise) and the “office of the prophet” (limited to a small number of tested, seasoned individuals).60 Clark’s training model encourages learning and experimentation in activating one’s gifts, without the fear of being rejected and condemned if one errs in some minor way. Clark encourages people to attempt to give prophetic words, but urges them to do so with a spirit of humility and not a ringing declamation of “Thus saith the Lord!” They are to inquire whether the words mean anything to the person receiving them. Spirit-given prophecy, for Clark, is principally aimed

59

60

This pragmatic approach is congruent with Max Weber’s conception of prophetic “charis- ma.” How does one identify who has “charisma”? In terms of Weberian sociology, one looks for someone who has followers who regard him or her as heaven-sent and who believe that God is directing them through this person.

Clark’s teaching on the limits of prophetic gifting is paralleled by that of the founder of the International House of Prayer, Mike Bickle, inGrowing in the Prophetic: A Practical Biblical Guide to Dreams, Visions, and Spiritual Guides(Lake Mary,fl: Charisma House, 2008).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

21

after toronto

71

at bringing encouragement rather than expressing rebuke or judgment toward particular persons. Those giving prophetic messages should refrain from offer- ing specific instructions regarding romantic and/or marriage relationships and from speaking oracles of divine judgment.

Assessing the Assessments: Hunt’s Sociological View and Post-Toronto Insider Views

It is not easy to assess a movement that is still moving, just as it is hard to sketch a bird in flight or to photograph a moving automobile. One ends up with a blurry or indistinct image. What we are here calling the post-Toronto move- ment is still unfolding from year to year. Toronto and post-Toronto literature, much of it written by and for insiders, offers insight, as do on-site observa- tionsandconversationswithleadersandlaypersons.Moreover,thesociological perspectives of Stephen Hunt and others provide an external check—and a possible corrective—to deploy alongside insider accounts of these movements.

One of the more promising ideas pioneered by Hunt lies in his notion of an apologetic motivation for the “signs and wonders” movement of the 1980s. The purported “signs” reflected a desire to find “proof” to buttress the super- naturalistic worldview of Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity, and perhaps to make a credible case for Christianity generally in a postmodern context in which rational argumentation on behalf of faith is less convincing than tangi- ble or first-hand demonstrations of the power of faith. Yet, “the theme of power” that Hunt identified in the Vineyard movement of the 1980s seems not to have carried over into the Toronto movement of the 1990s. By and large, Toronto participants have had an “emotive encounter” with God rather than a “power encounter.” This does not mean that a concern for apologetics or “proof” disap- peared during the 1990s, but that the “proof” may have taken on another form.

To borrow terminology from the 1980s and 1990s, we might speak of “high tech / high touch.” John Naisbitt, in his bestseller, Megatrends (1982), and the later book, High Tech / High Touch (1999), used this phrase to capture a para- doxical aspect of contemporary culture.61 Just as there was a desire to adopt ever more powerful and complex forms of consumer technology, there was also a desire among many people to escape from consumer technology. Successful

61

John Naisbitt, Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives(New York: Warner Books, 1982), and Naisbitt, High Tech/High Touch: Technology and Our Search for Meaning (New York: Broadway Books, 1999).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

22

72

mcclymond

marketers, argued Naisbitt, would take both impulses into account, offering high-tech services combined with deliberately and deeply interpersonal styles of interaction. Underlying this “high tech / high touch” divide is anambivalence toward scientific rationality. Contemporary people want to think, act, and feel in a way congruent with science, and yet not feel that they are somehow limited or constrained by science.

Applying Naisbitt’s perspective to the Charismatic Christianity of the 1980s and 1990s, we might say that Wimber’s 1980s “power evangelism” represented the “high tech” side of things—an outwardly demonstrable action of God that can be verified with empirical evidence and shown to be scientifically demonstrable. When a tumor disappears after prayer and the doctors cannot explain what has happened, then the Christian believer feels himself or herself to be rationally justified in seeing God’s hand at work. Science and faith seem here to converge. In contrast, the 1990s Toronto movement might be viewed as the “high touch” aspect—an intensely personal and inward experience of God that cannot possibly be verified by anyone else but that is deeply meaningful to the person who experiences it. What makes the Vineyard, Toronto, and post- Toronto movements culturally pertinent is their wholehearted embrace of this dichotomy between outward and inward aspects of God’s presence and activity in the world.

The far-sighted Philip Rieff, in his celebrated work The Triumph of the Ther- apeutic(1966), had already foreshadowed the shift toward “high touch.”62Rieff thought that Freudian psychology had facilitated a replacement of the truths of faith with the purely relativistic “truths” of therapy. Jungian psychology, with its focus on the “collective unconscious” and “archetypes,” subjectivized the field of religion and in effect placed each individual within his or her own private religious universe. The result was what Rieff called “psychological man”—a col- lection of isolated pleasure-seekers, all heedless of both the burdens and the benefits of communal life. Rieff thus linked the “triumph of the therapeutic” not only to an inward or introspective focus but to a narcissistic self-preoccupation and self-seeking. Whether or not the Toronto or post-Toronto movements qual- ify as “therapeutic” in Rieff’s pejorative sense would largely depend on whether individual religious experiences have social and public meanings or conse- quences as well as individual meanings or consequences.

There is evidence to indicate that many of those involved in the Toronto and post-Toronto movements became engaged in public service and were not

62

Philip Rieff,The Triumph of the Therapeutic: Uses of Faith After Freud (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987 [1966]).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

23

after toronto

73

merely seeking after individual religious experiences. One of the noteworthy features of the Toronto movement reported by many participants was a rekin- dling of love. Especially affected were those who were already Charismatics but who experienced a lack of vitality or need for spiritual refreshment.63 Many weary or burned-out Christian workers said that they felt a new joy and zest for God. Pastors and their spouses reportedly experienced renewal in their marriage relationships. Still others—including Heidi and Rolland Baker, Randy Clark, and John and Carol Arnott—indicate that they entered into greater fruit- fulness in their respective ministries as a consequence of their Toronto expe- riences. Margaret Poloma’s interviews show that many Toronto participants, and not just a few of the leaders, reported new experiences of God’s love and expressed this through tangible acts of love toward others.64 While there are fewer visitors to Toronto as of 2015 than there were five, ten, or twenty years pre- viously, this does not mean that the movement has ended, as Mark Cartledge notes: “If taken on its own, and in the narrow sense of the decline in the number of visitors to the church, then it would appear to have become institutionalized and routinized, but when taken as part of these ongoing and evolving networks it can still be seen as an important force within Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity.”65

If there is a shared story among those affected by the Toronto movement, then it begins with an inner work of spiritual renewal that precedes the outer work of ministry.66 The Bakers are especially emphatic in stressing that Chris-

63

64 65 66

A thought-provoking first-person narrative appears in Michael Mitton,The Heart of Toron- to: Exploring the Spirituality of the “Toronto Blessing” (Cambridge,uk: Grove Books, 1995). Mitton includes an interesting meditation on an experience of spiritual laughter on the part of Graham Cray, who was Principal at Ridley Hall at Cambridge. Cray wrote: “The immediate aftermath is not that I have laughed more, but when I have found myself dealing with situations in a very broken world, I have found that tears have been nearer the surface … The laughter has served to make the tears easier” (Mitton, Heart, 15; citing Church of England Newspaper, November 11, 1994). This account suggests that the experience of laughter led to affective deepening. It challenges the objection that laughter is incongruous in a world where Christians ought to be weeping instead, since Cray’s experience started with laughter yet ended with tears.

See Poloma, Main Street Mystics, and Lee, Poloma, and Post,The Heart of Religion. Cartledge, “Catch the Fire,” 235.

Cartledge uses different terminology from mine, yet says something analogous: “Funda- mentally it is a form of religiosity that is driven by the dynamics of its own spiritual process of search-encounter-transformation … and the group spirituality process becomes a net- work movement based on a centripetal-catharsis-centrifugal dynamic” (“Catch the Fire,” 237; emphasis original). By highlighting the moment or occasion with God (“encounter”

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

24

74

mcclymond

tian service and effective ministry must begin in intimacy with God. And inti- macy implies time spent with God. For Heidi Baker, this means countless hours of basking in God’s presence, whether silently soaking in God’s love or exu- berantly expressing praise to God in spoken praise, in song, or in dance. Rol- land Baker commented that “Heidi is fundamentally an introvert, longing for hours alone in prayer and meditation.”67 Her introversion is not obvious to an unpracticed eye as she wanders about the orphanage in Pemba, warmly greet- ing and hugging each person that she meets. Heidi Baker’s inward focus may have something to do not only with her temperament but also with the daunt- ing challenges of life among the Mozambican orphans. She and Rolland may have had no choice but to turn to God for strength and guidance while serving in such a difficult setting.

Whatever the causes, the Bakers’ lifestyle of inward turning to God and out- ward turning to serve replicates a pattern seen often in the history of Christian spirituality. Called “withdrawal to return,” this theme appears in Jesus’ ministry, in the lives of the Desert Fathers and Mothers, and in the so-called practical mystics such as St. Teresa of Avila. It is no small feat for the Bakers not only to have met the physical and spiritual needs of so many Mozambicans, but also to have modeled to other Christians the proper ordering of what classical authors calledvita contemplativa et vita activa(“the contemplative life and active life”).

While this inner-to-outer pattern appears commonly in the post-Toronto ministries, it is striking to see some of the differences as well. They show a func- tional specialization among themselves—stressing “soaking prayer” and inner healing (the Arnotts), training in healing for physical healing and prophecy (Randy Clark), teaching on the power of God’s kingdom and the reality of the supernatural (Bill Johnson), missionary sending and church planting from a base in the usa (Ché Ahn), and praising God through exuberant and uninhib- ited worship (Georgy Banov).68The Bakers’ ministry in Mozambique seems to

67 68

or “cartharsis”), Cartledge ends up with a three-stage rather than a two-stage process. Per- haps I see a more gradual process instead of an “encounter.” Yet, I agree in affirming an inward turn that precedes the outward.

Rolland Baker, as quoted in Stafford, “Miracles in Mozambique,” 23.

Philip Richter wrote in the late 1990s of the so-called “McTorontoization” of the Toronto Blessing, described in Mark Cartledge’s words as the “exporting of a fairly identical product all over the world, even if there is some local variation.” Cartledge, “Catch the Fire,” 222, citing Philip Richter, “The Toronto Blessing: Charismatic Evangelical Global Warming?” in S. Hunt, M. Hamilton, and T. Walter, eds.,CharismaticChristianity:SociologicalPerspectives (Basingstoke, uk: Macmillan, 1997), 97–119, citing 116. Yet, “fairly identical” is not an apt description of the post-Toronto ministries surveyed here. Some scholars have perhaps

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

25

after toronto

75

be the most encompassing in incorporating all these features—healing, train- ing, preaching, teaching, worshipping—and adding to them the “mercy min- istry” of caring for the poorest of the poor. Randy Clark with Global Awakening adds something distinctive as well with his bold spiritual experimentalism and his stress on what he calls “little ole me”—the ordinary believer in Christ who Clark believes is capable in Christ of accomplishing great things if he or she has been properly trained and then acts in obedience and in faith.

The post-Toronto ministries might offer grounds for hopefulness about the future prospects for global Pentecostalism. To be sure, the growing ranks of “post-Charismatics” and “post-Pentecostals” are cause for concern.69According to classical pentecostal views, Spirit-baptism is a once-for-all and permanent transition to a new state of Christian experience, and so “de-Pentecostalization” ought not to happen. Moreover, the early Pentecostals regarded the spiritual outpouring of the early 1900s as the definitive, end-times revival. What they did not expect was a gradual stagnation of their own “Spirit-filled” churches. Yet today many native-born (or non-immigrant-based) Assemblies of God congre- gations in the usa are no longer growing numerically and see only occasional manifestations of charismatic gifts.70 This raises the question: Might we then refer to some congregations (as well as some individuals) as “post-pentecostal”? Could an entire denomination become “post-pentecostal”? The question is worth pondering. The idea that a once-pentecostal church or denomination should cease to be such is not as unthinkable as it might have been to an ear- lier generation.

The post-Toronto movements considered in this essay—Catch the Fire, Iris- Arco Ministries, and Global Awakening—are aware of the danger to churches and ministries that lose their fire, fervor, and charisma. Randy Clark and Bill Johnson say that they want “their ceiling” to be “the floor” for the rising gener-

69

70

been misled by economic metaphors and through an overreliance on Rodney Stark’s “supply-side” theory. It is not that a charismatic “product” is, so to speak, manufactured in one location and then distributed globally. To attempt a biological metaphor, one might say that a possibly beneficial “virus” is disseminated and yet mutates wherever it travels. See David Barrett, et al., World Christian Trends, ad 30–ad 2200: Interpreting the Annual Christian Megacensus(Pasadena,ca: William Carey Library, 2001), 287. “Postpentecostals,” for Barrett, are those who leave pentecostal denominations, while “postcharismatics” are those “no longer regularly active” in the renewal.

Margaret M. Poloma, The Assemblies of God at the Crossroads: Charisma and Institu- tional Dilemmas (Knoxville, tn: University of Tennessee Press, 1989). Poloma, with John C.Green,offersasequelinTheAssembliesofGod:GodlyLoveandtheRevitalizationofAmer- ican Pentecostalism(New York: New York University Press, 2010).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

26

76

mcclymond

ation. Their aim is not to preserve or conserve their own charisma but instead to see greater spiritual efficacy and “anointing” among their followers. Randy Clark expresses the point in the very title of his book on “impartation”—“There is more!” It is a message that strikes a chord in the hearts of many Pentecostals and Charismatics who are hungry for a deeper experience of God and for more effective service to God. Every historic renewal movement—monasticism, the medieval religious orders, mysticism, Protestantism, Puritanism, Jansenism, Pietism, Methodism, the Holiness Movement—has tended over time to lose momentum and focus. The renewal itself has had to be renewed. From a cen- tury’s retrospect, Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity may be less like a house wired with electricity and more like a battery that becomes depleted and needs recharging. On this basis, we might say that spiritual Christian renewal is never a finished process but remains an ongoing challenge.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 50–76

27