Conversions at Coral Ridge

robindch

Coral Ridge Ministries, run by D. James Kennedy, is a large and well-resourced US-based christian evangelical organization which, from time to time, runs courses on how to convert more people to its own variation of christianity. Chris Hedges (who wrote the excellent 'War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning' and also 'Losing Moses on the Freeway: The 10 Commandments in America') went along to one of these courses and wrote about what he saw in a long and interesting article entitled Jesus ‘Love-Bombs’ You.

I'm interested to find out how christians and others view this kind of conversion -- do you believe that it is ethical to convert people in the way that Kennedy advocates? Are such conversions actually genuine? Do you unconditionally support such conversions? Do you know anybody who's been converted by such means? Are there any dangers in this?

PDN

I've seen Kennedy on TV a few times. He pulls an interesting range of exaggerated facial expressions.

I think the author of the article nails his colours to the mast very early in his piece.

I attended the seminar as part of the research for my book “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.”

I would be very interested in reading a similar article if it was written with a measure of objectivity (eg in Time or Newsweek by a reputable journalist), then we might actually learn something about Kennedy and his methods.

If an author goes to Kennedy's seminars with the presupposition that Kennedy is a fascist who is waging war on America, then obviously he is going to quote whatever he can out of context in order to prove his point. You would get exactly the same result if you sent Ann Coulter to an ACLU meeting and asked her to review it.

robindch

I don't believe so -- Hedges is a well-respected reporter who's worked on Pulitzer-prize winning teams at the NYT and has written perceptively and extensively about how easy it is to manipulate people if you can control the right lever, as well as about other topics in the publications you mention (Time, (cough) Newsweek and others). Your dismissal of his book suggests you've already decided that something called "american facism" cannot exist -- what makes you so sure, presumably without having read the book, that his facts and conclusions are wrong?

But regardless of what his opinion is, he's including plenty of direct quotes from the sessions run by Kennedy -- are you saying that he made these quotes up? Alternatively, have you seen the documentary Jesus Camp which comes to pretty similar conclusions about religious manipulation?

I should add that I've seen Hedges in several documentaries from PBS and CBC and he comes across as a careful and honest reporter (two adjectives which I wouldn't choose to apply to somebody like Coulter).

wolfsbane

robindch said:

Coral Ridge Ministries, run by D. James Kennedy, is a large and well-resourced US-based christian evangelical organization which, from time to time, runs courses on how to convert more people to its own variation of christianity. Chris Hedges (who wrote the excellent 'War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning' and also 'Losing Moses on the Freeway: The 10 Commandments in America') went along to one of these courses and wrote about what he saw in a long and interesting article entitled Jesus ‘Love-Bombs’ You.

I'm interested to find out how christians and others view this kind of conversion -- do you believe that it is ethical to convert people in the way that Kennedy advocates? Are such conversions actually genuine? Do you unconditionally support such conversions? Do you know anybody who's been converted by such means? Are there any dangers in this?

Thanks for that fasinating article, Robin. By way of answering your questions, let me deal with points from article itself:

There is a false, but effective, fiction that one has to be born again to be a Christian.

That IS the definition of a Christian, in the original sense of the term:
John 3:7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

The Christian right refuses to acknowledge the worth of anyone’s religious experience unless—in the words of the tired and opaque cliché—one has accepted “Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior.”

Yes, it is a rather over-used expression, but accurate nevertheless.

The meltdown, often skillfully manipulated by preachers and teams of evangelists, is one of the most pernicious tools of the movement. Through conversion one surrenders to a higher authority. And the higher authority, rather than God, is the preacher who steps in to take over your life.

True conversion is the surrender of the person to God. Surrender to men is a wicked and sad perversion of this - and no doubt Hedges has seen much of that, as I have. Some of it is deliberate, as with the cults and with empire-builders within Christian churches. But a lot of it is the result of poor theology (Free-willism especially) leading the zealous to use psychological techniques to get ’results’. As a consequence, the evangelical churches are being filled with folk who think think they are Christians but in reality are no more than psychological converts.

Being born again, and the process it entails, is more often about submission and the surrender of moral responsibility than genuine belief.

Real conversion involves both genuine belief and surrender to God.

I attended a five-day seminar at Coral Ridge in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., where I was taught, often by D. James Kennedy, the techniques of conversion. The callousness of these techniques—targeting the vulnerable, building false friendships with the lonely or troubled, promising to relieve people of the most fundamental dreads of human existence from the fear of mortality to the numbing pain of grief—gave to the process an awful cruelty and dishonesty.

The techniques he goes on to describe are a mixture of sensible advise on opening conversations with strangers and exploitative psychological grooming. The latter has no proper place in authentic Christianity. It is the worldly, business approach rather than the spiritual, Christian approach.

The conversion, at first, is euphoric. It is about new, loving friends, about the conquering of human anxieties, fears and addictions, about attainment through God of wealth, power, success and happiness.

True conversion brings primarily peace with God. That helps us remove fears and addictions. We are also conscious of being in the family of God. That is a good ground for happiness. But wealth, power and success are not promised. The preachers who promise that are deceivers, mostly interesting in getting it for themselves at our expense. The Christian life will tend to prevent poverty-through-waste-and-laziness, but it also forbids ruthless ambition and luxurious lifestyles.

The intense interest by a group of three or four evangelists in a potential convert, an essential part of the conversion process, the flattery and feigned affection, the rapt attention to those being recruited and the flurry of “sincere” compliments are a form of “love bombing.” It is the same technique employed by most cults, such as the Unification Church or “Moonies,” to attract prospects. It was a well-developed tactic of the Russian and Chinese communist parties, which share many of the communal and repressive characteristics of the Christian right.

Yes, ‘love bombing’ aptly describes feigned love for the purposes of ‘recruitment’. Real Christianity is about truly loving those we evangelise, and especially those who are our fellow-believers.

The convert is gradually drawn into a host of church activities by his or her new friends, leaving little time for outside socializing. But the warmth soon brings with it new rules. When you violate the rules, you sin, you flirt with rebellion, with becoming a “backslider,” someone who was converted but has fallen and is once again on the wrong side of God. And as the new converts are increasingly invested in the church community, as they cut ties with their old community, it is harder to dismiss the mounting demands of the “discipler” and church leaders.

Becoming a true Christian will give one new tastes and new responsibilities. We naturally seek to learn more of God’s word, want more of fellowship with His people, seek to do those things which please God. There is a danger of cutting one’s self off too much from our former society, but wisdom is required. For example, it may be good to continue with our fund-raising club for the local charity, but it would not be good to continue to go out drinking with the boys at the weekend. The ‘rules’ are not arbitrary, man-made ones - they are God’s will for us, laid out in the Bible. If one begins to find immoral activities gaining their former appeal, or actually reverting to them, then the Church needs to firmly counsel on how wrong and dangerous that is.

The only proper relationship is submission to those above you,

The true Christian submits to God, and to his pastors only so far as they follow Christ.

the abandonment of critical thought and the mouthing of thought-terminating clichés that are morally charged. “Jesus is my personal Lord and Savior” or “the wages of sin are death” is used to end all discussion.

We should be critical of anything men may say, but not what God says - if we are truly His children. These two ‘clichés’ are truths to lead into discussion, so no need to use them as conversation-stoppers.

Rules are incorporated slowly and deliberately into the convert’s belief system.

Biblical rules should be stated up-front.

These include blind obedience to church leaders,

That would be a very anti-Biblical rule.

the teaching of an exclusive, spiritual elitism that demonizes all other ways of being and believing,

Christianity is exclusive, affirming that Jesus is the only way to God. But it should cause one to be humble rather than proud, for we are only sinners saved by His grace, not spiritual self-made giants.

and a persecution complex that keeps followers mobilized and distrustful of outsiders.

Persecution is the norm for most Christians in history. The Lord Jesus told us to expect no less. Outside the West, Christians today know a lot of it.

The result is the destruction of old communities, old friendships and the independent ability to make moral choices. Believers are soon encased in the church community.

Cults use such techniques to subjugate their members - but real Christianity knows only God as Moral Arbiter, so the true Christian is free to make his choices as far as what other men think.

They are taught to emphasize personal experience rather than reasoning, and to reject the reality-based world.

Again, this is not authentic Christianity. In it personal experience is tested by the objective Word.

For those who defy the system, who walk away, there is a collective banishment.

In real Christianity, those who walk away - or are put out for unrepented sin - are not persecuted but are exhorted to repent. They are made to know they are no longer in fellowship as fellow-believers, not by persecution but by denial of church fellowship (the Lord’s supper, being welcomed as ‘Brother’, etc.).

There is a gradual establishment of new standards for every aspect of life.

Any standards that are immoral must change. But any that are indifferent may remain. For example, smoking dope must go; eating chocolate may stay.

Those who choose spouses must choose Christian spouses.

As taught in the Bible.

Families and friends are divided into groups of “saved” and “unsaved.”

A recognition of reality.

The movement, while it purports to be about families, is the great divider of families, friends and communities.

Indeed so: many unbelievers are very upset when one of their number turns to God. Persecution is often a result. Whose fault is that, the persecuted or the persecutor?

It competes with the family and those outside its structure for loyalty. It seeks to place itself above the family, either drawing all family members into its embrace or pushing those who resist aside. There were frequent prayers during the seminar I attended for relatives who were “unsaved,” those who remained beyond the control of the movement.

If it is a matter of ‘the movement’ then it is a sinful demand for loyalty. The real Christian is to be loyal to Christ.

Many of these prayers, including one by a grandmother for her unsaved grandchildren, were filled with tears and wrenching pain over the damnation of those they loved.

A proper response to the danger we see them in. I assume Mr. Hedges would be tearful if his family became Christians, for example.

The new ideology gives the believers a sense of purpose,

Good.

feelings of superiority

Bad. Not based on Biblical understanding.

and a way to justify and sanctify their hatreds.

Again, not based on anything the Bible teaches.

For many, the rewards of cleaning up their lives, of repairing their damaged self-esteem, of joining an elite and blessed group are worth the cost of submission. They know how to define themselves. They do not have to make moral choice. It is made for them. They submerge their individual personas into the single persona of the Christian crowd. Their hope lies not in the real world, but in this new world of magic and miracles. For most, the conformity, the flight away from themselves, the dismissal of facts and logic, the destruction of personal autonomy, even with its latent totalitarianism, is a welcome and joyous relief. The flight into the arms of the religious right, into blind acceptance of a holy cause, compensates for the convert’s despair and lack of faith in himself or herself. And the more corrupted and soiled the converts feel, the more profound their despair, the more militant they become, shouting, organizing and agitating to create a pure and sanctified Christian nation, a purity they believe will offset their own feelings of shame and guilt. Many want to be deceived and directed.

I’m sure this is a fair description of many professing Christians in America. It doesn’t make them real Christians, nor does it condemn real Christianity.

It makes life easier to bear.
Freedom from fear, especially the fear of death, is what is being sold. It is a lie, as everyone has to know on some level, even while they write and rewrite their testimonies to conform to the instructors’ demands. But admitting this in front of other believers is impossible. Such an admission would be interpreted as a lack of faith. And this too is part of the process, for it fosters a dread of being found out, a morbid guilt that we are not as good or as Christian as those around us. This dread does not go away with conversion or blind obedience or submission. This unachievable ideal forces the convert to repress and lose touch with the uncertainties, ambiguities and contradictions that make up human existence.

Yes, those who profess faith under these false terms will eventually find they are living a lie. It is one reason so much immorality and godless behaviour is found in American churches.

We were instructed to inform potential converts that Jesus came to Earth and died “to pay the penalty for our sins and to purchase a place in heaven for us” and that “to receive eternal life you must transfer your trust from yourself to Jesus Christ alone for eternal life.”

That is basically the gospel.

We were told to ask the convert if he or she is willing “to turn from what you have been doing that is not pleasing to Him and follow Him as He reveals His will to you in His Word.”

That is a call to repentance.

If the covert agrees to accept a new way of life we are to bow our heads and pray, with the convert repeating each line after us.
“Lord Jesus, I want You to come in and take over my life right now. I am a sinner. I have been trusting in myself and my own good works. But now I place my trust in You. I accept You as my own personal Savior. I believe you died for me. I receive You as Lord and Master of my life. Help me to turn from my sins and to follow You. I accept the free gift of eternal life. I am not worthy of it, but I thank You for it. Amen.”
And when it is over the new believers are told “Welcome to the family of God.”

There is a danger in this formalization of the repentance process. But it is true that IF the penitent sincerely means these words, they will be saved. The danger is that many think the mere saying of them is enough.

They are told to read a chapter a day in the Gospel of John and that they will be visited again in a week to talk about the Bible. They are encouraged to pray, because God “promised to hear and answer our prayers.” They are told to find “a good Bible-believing church and become a part of it.” They are told to join a Christian fellowship group. They are told to witness to those in their family. With this, the process of deconstructing an individual and building a submissive follower, one who no longer has any allegiance to the values of the open society, begins.

Provided the submission is to God and not men, this is a proper process. The true Christian will indeed have values that are counter-culture to the ‘open society’ around him.

Do you not think Hedges is in danger of supporting a fascism, elevating the ‘open society’ to something one must slavishly obey? Is Secular Fascism any better than the American Fascism he fears?

PDN

robindch wrote:

I don't believe so -- Hedges is a well-respected reporter who's worked on Pulitzer-prize winning teams at the NYT and has written perceptively and extensively about how easy it is to manipulate people if you can control the right lever, as well as about other topics in the publications you mention (Time, (cough) Newsweek and others). Your dismissal of his book suggests you've already decided that something called "american facism" cannot exist -- what makes you so sure, presumably without having read the book, that his facts and conclusions are wrong?

But regardless of what his opinion is, he's including plenty of direct quotes from the sessions run by Kennedy -- are you saying that he made these quotes up? Alternatively, have you seen the documentary Jesus Camp which comes to pretty similar conclusions about religious manipulation?

I should add that I've seen Hedges in several documentaries from PBS and CBC and he comes across as a careful and honest reporter (two adjectives which I wouldn't choose to apply to somebody like Coulter).

No, I have not decided that 'American fascism' does not exist. Nor did I dismiss Hedges' book. What I said was that he is approaching Kennedy with his mind made up. If he were to find that Kennedy is just a nice old gentleman then he would have wasted his time attending Coral Ridge, so he has a vested interest to come up with something bad. It would be the same as if I attended a pro-abortion rally to research a pro-life book called "Murdering Babies" and then published my impressions of the rally and pretended it was objective journalism.

As for the direct quotes, I never implied that Hedges invented them, but I would like to hear them in context. It is quite easy to see how such quotes could be used perfectly innocently in a training exercise.

For example, I teach Evangelism and Church Growth to seminary students. As part of my course I examine the ethics of adopting methods of persuasion from other fields of life (such as sales and marketing) and from other religious organisations. We look at common sales techniques as used by door step salesmen. I say (and this is verbatim from my course notes), "The salesman must establish a rapport with the prospect. Imagine I am a salesman. I notice the prospect has golf trophies on his mantlepiece, so I ask him about golf. I may even pretend to be keen on golf myself (even though I’m not). Now, of course it is a given that we, as Christians do not lie – but why else do we view it as being unethical for those engaged in evangelism to uncritically adopt the mentality and methods of the marketing world?”

I also say, “Many false cults, such as the Unification Church or Moonies, practice something called ‘love bombing’. What is love bombing? To do this you have to never leave the potential recruit alone. Members of the group must continually hug him, tell him how much he’s appreciated etc. In an incredibly short time the potential recruit will become so dependent upon these outward expressions of love that he is prepared to swallow any load of old nonsense in order to remain wanted and valued by his new friends. Now, of course we, as Christians, find such cynical manipulation to be abhorrent. But what does this teach us about how people are disconnected in modern society? How can we meet that need, as the Church, with genuine compassion?”

Now, imagine that you are writing a book called "Irish Fascism. The Religious Right's Threat to Ireland". You have submitted a draft to your publisher, but your editor has told you that you must get more concrete examples, and you are reminded that your deadline is looming (as a published author I assure you that this happens). So you attend one of PDN's courses and, from the above quotations, you omit everything not in boldface. Now you have direct quotes from PDN in your book, where I say "I notice the prospect has golf trophies on his mantlepiece, so I ask him about golf. I may even pretend to be keen on golf myself (even though I’m not)" and "you have to never leave the potential recruit alone. Members of the group must continually hug him, tell him how much he’s appreciated etc. In an incredibly short time the potential recruit will become so dependent upon these outward expressions of love that he is prepared to swallow any load of old nonsense in order to remain wanted and valued by his new friends".

Is this what happened with Kennedy? I don't know. He may be a harmless, if slightly pompous sounding, old preacher. He may be a dangerous, exploitive man. I don't know - but I'm not going to base my opinion on a report from someone who went to Kennedy's course with only one aim, to dig some dirt. That's why I would love to hear a report from an objective source.

Scofflaw

PDN wrote:

What I said was that he is approaching Kennedy with his mind made up. If he were to find that Kennedy is just a nice old gentleman then he would have wasted his time attending Coral Ridge, so he has a vested interest to come up with something bad.

A journalist is not required to report the whole truth, but to assume that they are not reporting the truth at all is not necessarily warranted.

Similarly, to assume that a journalist is approaching something with his/her mind made up is a reasonable hypothesis - but one that the journalist may be equally aware of.

Judging by published writings alone can never tell you whether a commentator, no matter how partisan, genuinely approaches things with their mind made up. Do we know how many groups, individuals, seminars etc Hedges went to? How many of them did he categorise as potentially fascist? How many of them turned out to be "nice old gentlemen" and thereby a waste of Hedges' time (from the point of view of his thesis)?

Your thesis is tenable if Hedges has written about all the groups he has considered, and found them all potentially fascist. Otherwise, the problem is that by considering published writing alone, "survivorship bias" makes your thesis impossible to prove - you only see what an established partisan writer has chosen to write about, in support of his position. Ironically, his very partiality prevents his publications from being a guide to whether he is genuinely prejudiced.

cordially,
Scofflaw