TENRIKYŌ TIMELINE

1798 (18th day of 4th month, lunar calendar):  Miki was born into the Maegawa family in Sanmaiden Village, Yamabe County, Yamato Province (present-day Nara Prefecture).

1810:  Miki married Nakayama Zenbei of Shoyashiki Village.

1816:  Miki attended a training course known as the fivefold transmission (gojū sōden) at the Zenpuku Temple of Jōdo Shin Buddhism.

1837:  Miki’s son, Shūji, began to suffer from pains in his legs. Nakano Ichibei, a mountain ascetic (shugenja), performed prayer rituals (kitō) over the next twelve months.

1838 (23rd day of 10th month):  An incantation (yosekaji) was performed for Shūji with Miki as the medium. During the incantation, Miki went into trance and had a revelation from Tenri-Ō-no-Mikoto.

1838: (26th day of 10th month):  Miki was settled as the Shrine of Tsukihi (tsukihi no yashiro), marking the founding of the religious teaching. She remained in seclusion for the next three years.

1853:  Zenbei passed away at the age of sixty-six. Kokan, Miki’s youngest daughter, went to Naniwa (present-day Osaka) to spread the name of Tenri-Ō-no-Mikoto.

1854:  Miki’s daughter’s childbirth marked the beginning of the “Grant of Safe Childbirth” (obiya yurushi).

1864:  Iburi Izō of Ichinomoto Village came to see Miki for the first time.

1864:  The construction of the Place for the Service (tsutome basho) began.

1865:  Miki went to Harigabessho Village to confront Sukezō, who claimed the religious authority in place of Miki.

1866:  Miki began to teach the songs and hand movements for the service (tsutome).

1867:  Shūji gained official permission to conduct religious activities from the Yoshida Administrative Office of Shinto (Yoshida jingi kanryō).

1869:  Miki began writing the Ofudesaki (The Tip of the Writing Brush).

1874:  Miki began to bestow the truth of the Sazuke (sazuke no ri) for physical healing.

1875:  The identification of the Jiba (jiba sadame) took place.

1876:  Shūji obtained a license to run a steam bath and an inn as a way to allow worshippers to gather.

1880:  Tenrin-Ō-Kōsha was formally inaugurated under the auspices of the Jifuku Temple.

1881:  Shūji passed away at the age of sixty-one.

1882:  The steam bath and the inn were closed down. Tenrin-Ō-Kōsha was officially dismissed by the Jifuku Temple.

1882:  Miki completed the writing of the Ofudesaki.

1885:  The movement to establish the church (kyōkai setsuritsu undō) began to be conducted with Shinnosuke as the leader.

1887 (26th of 1st month by the lunar calendar):  Miki “withdrew from physical life” (utsushimi wo kakushita) at the age of ninety.

1887:  Iburi Izō became the Honseki and began to deliver divine directions (osashizu) as well as bestow the Sazuke on behalf of Miki.

1888:  Shintō Tenri Kyōkai was established in Tokyo under the direct supervision of the Shinto Main Bureau. The location was subsequently moved back to present-day Tenri.

1888:  The Mikagura-uta (The Songs for the Service) was officially published by Tenri Kyōkai.

1896:  The tenth anniversary of the foundress was observed.

1896:  The Home Ministry issued its Directive No. 12 to enforce strict control on Tenri Kyōkai.

1899:  The movement for sectarian independence (ippa dokuritsu undō) began.

1903:  Tenrikyō kyōten (The Doctrine of Tenrikyō), also known as Meiji kyōten, was published.

1907:  Iburi Izō passed away, marking the official end of the era of the divine directions.

1908:  Tenri Seminary (Tenri kyōkō) and Tenri Junior High School were founded respectively.

1908:  Tenrikyō gained sectarian independence from the Shinto Main Bureau.

1908:  Nakayama Shinnosuke, the first Shinbashira, became the superintendent (kanchō) of Tenrikyō.

1910:  Tenrikyo Women’s Association (Tenrikyō fujinkai) was founded.

1914:  Nakayama Shinnosuke, the first Shinbashira, passed away at the age of forty-eight.

1915:  Nakayama Shōzen became the superintendent of Tenrikyō at the age of nine. (Yamazawa Tamezō served as the acting superintendent until Shōzen came of age in 1925.)

1918:  Tenrikyo Young Men’s Association (Tenrikyō seinenkai) was founded.

1925:  Tenri School of Foreign Languages (Tenri gaikokugo gakkō) was established along with what would later become Tenri Central Library (Tenri toshokan). Also, Tenrikyō Printing Office (Tenrikyō kyōchō insatsusho) and the Department of Doctrine and Historical Materials (Kyōgi oyobi shiryō shūseibu) were established.

1928:  The Ofudesaki was officially published.

1938:  Nakayama Shōzen announced the adjustment (kakushin) to comply with the state authority’s demand.

1945 (August 15):  Nakayama Shōzen announced the restoration (fukugen) of the teaching.

1946:  The Mikagura-uta was published and offered to local churches.

1948:  The Ofudesaki, accompanied with commentaries, as well as the first volume of the Osashizu (The Divine Directions) were published and offered to local churches.

1949:  Tenri School of Foreign Languages was reorganized as Tenri University.

1949:  Tenrikyō kyōten (The Doctrine of Tenrikyō) was officially published.

1953:  Nakayama Shōzen announced the construction of Oyasato-yakata Building-complex (Oyasato yakata).

1954:  Tenri City was instated.

1966:  Tenrikyo Children’s Association (Tenrikyō shōnenkai) was established.

1967:  Nakayama Shōzen, the second Shinbashira, passed away at the age of sixty-two. Nakayama Zenye became the third Shinbashira.

1970:  Tenrikyō left the Sect Shinto Union (Kyōha Shintō rengōkai).

1986:  The centennial anniversary of the foundress was observed.

1998:  Nakayama Zenji became the fourth Shinbashira

1998:  Tenrikyō held the “Tenrikyo-Christian Dialogue” between Tenri University and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome.

2002:  Tenrikyō held the “Tenrikyo-Christian Dialogue II” between Tenri University and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Tenri.

2013:  Nakayama Daisuke became the designate successor to the position of the Shinbashira.

2014:  Nakayama Zenye, the third Shinbashira, passed away at the age of eighty-two.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

On the 18th day of the 4th month in 1798, Miki was born as a daughter of Maegawa Hanshichi in Sanmaiden Village, Yamabe County, Yamato Province (present-day Nara Prefecture). She was known to be diligent in household work and was a devout adherent of Jōdo Shin Buddhism since her childhood. In 1810, she married Nakayama Zenbei of a nearby village at the age of thirteen and was entrusted with all the household work of Nakayama family in 1813. She gave birth to her first child, Shūji, in 1821 and then to five daughters two of whom died early (Tenrikyo Doyusha Publishing Company [TDPC] 2014:1-27).

In 1837, Shūji was afflicted with pain in his legs, and Nakayama family had Nakano Ichibei, a shugenja (ritual practitioner associated with a mountain religious sect), perform prayer rituals (kitō) for him over the next twelve months. On the 23rd day of the 10th month, an incantation (yosekaji) was performed for Shūji with Miki acting as spirit medium, during which God descended into Miki’s body and claimed to take Miki as the “Shrine of God” (kami no yashiro). After three days of fierce negotiation between God and the members of Nakayama family, Miki was acknowledged as the Shrine of God on the 26th day of the 10th month upon the consent by her husband, thus marking the founding of the teaching (TDPC 2014:28-39). In the current doctrinal view of Tenrikyō, Miki’s life for the next fifty years is referred to as the Divine Model (hinagata), and it is believed that her mind was completely in accordance with God’s will. In contrast, Shimazono (1998) has emphasized that Miki’s religious thought developed through a gradual process of self-inquiry rather than as a result of sudden revelation.

For the next three years or so, Miki secluded herself in a storehouse and later began giving away her belongings and her family’s possessions to the extent of eventually dismantling the house building. Miki’s unusual actions caused distrust from her relatives and villagers and led the family into poverty. In 1854, she began what is now known as the Grant of Safe Childbirth (obiya yurushi), which was intended to assure safe childbirth without observing traditional customs and taboos relating to women’s defilement (kegare) (TDPC 2014:40-70). In addition to the significance of breaking gender-related taboos, Miki may have used this practice to allow those around her to understand the idea that divine providence is most evident in the body of a woman in pregnancy, which embodies the fundamentally passive nature of human body (Watanabe 2015:27). Along with crossing the boundaries of conventional customs, Miki is said to have interacted with people seeking healings including those of outcaste areas (buraku). The breaching of these taboos increased her alienation from others in her village (Ikeda 2006:82-124). Also, doctors and mountain ascetics reportedly confronted Miki, with violence at times, as she gained adherents from those religious communities (TDPC 2014:90-96). This was also related to the fact that Miki’s presence as a female religious leader challenged the male-oriented religious authority of mountain ascetics (Hardacre 1994). As a way to avoid these confrontations, Miki’s followers (despite her reluctance) sought to gain official authorization from the Yoshida Administrative Office of Shintō (Yoshida jingi kanryō) in Kyoto so that they could hold gatherings at their private residence. This official authorization was granted in 1867 but was later voided when the Shintō office was abolished in 1870 (TDPC 2014:99-106).

Following the dismantling of the main house, Miki embarked on the construction of the tsutome basho (the Place for performing religious services) in 1864 with the initiatives of early followers especially Iburi Izō, who was a carpenter by profession (TDPC 2014:71-89). In 1866, Miki began to teach the form of service (tsutome) that was to be used in her movement. The service involves songs and accompanying hand gestures and dance that are performed in tune with the melodies of nine musical instruments. (See the Ritual section for more details.) This ritual would come to be performed at the Jiba, a site which Miki identified in 1875 in the premises of the Nakayama residence to mark the place of original human conception (TDPC 2014:107-18). In addition to making arrangements for the ritual, Miki began writing what would later come to be called the Ofudesaki (The Tip of the Writing Brush). Written from 1869 to 1882, the text contains a total of 1,711 verses in seventeen parts written in the waka style of poetry (TDPC 2014:119-23). Meanwhile, Miki began to mark herself out as the Shrine of God by wearing a red cloth (akaki) in 1874, and in the same year she began to bestow in various forms the truth of the Sazuke (the Divine Grant), which allowed her followers to conduct healing prayers for those suffering from illness (TDPC 2014:145-46). In 1881, Miki began the construction of the Kanrodai (the Stand for the Heavenly Dew), a hexagonal stand of thirteen stone blocks that demarcates the Jiba. A wooden model of the Kanrodai had been already made by Iburi Izō as early as in 1873 and was placed at the Jiba in 1875, the same year in which Miki identified the Jiba. The construction of the stone-made Kanrodai came to halt in 1882, however, when the police confiscated the stones from Miki’s house (TDPC 2014:221-32). From about 1880-1881, Miki began to tell her followers various stories containing her teachings, and the record of the stories as written by her followers are referred to as kōki (the Divine Record) (TDPC 2014:233-42).

In the aftermath of the Meiji Restoration (1868), Miki and her movement encountered surveillance and prosecution from political authorities as a non-authorized religious group. She was arrested eighteen times between 1875 and 1886. To mitigate the tension, Shūji obtained a license to run a steam bath and an inn so as to allow Miki’s followers to gather at the residence. Moreover, he managed to gain authorization from the Jifuku Temple of Kongōsan and established Tenrin-Ō-Kōsha as a legitimate sub-organization of the Jifuku Temple in 1880, although the Kōsha would be abolished two years later along with the bath and inn (TDPC 2014:206-77). As was the case with the official authorization from Yoshida Shintō, Miki consistently opposed any move to comply with the authorities in ways that could compromise her teaching. In such circumstances, Nakayama Shinnosuke, Miki’s grandson who had become the head of Nakayama family, began an initiative to establish an independent church (kyōkai setsuritsu undō) in 1882. He was granted the permission to establish a church under the direct supervision of the Shinto Main Bureau (Shintō honkyoku) in 1885, but the official authorization from the government was yet to be achieved. There was an internal tension between Miki, who urged her followers to perform the service, and Shinnosuke and other followers, who were keen to gain official authorization so as to prevent any suppression of Miki. This tension was resolved on the lunar calendar date of first month 26th, 1887 (February 18th in Gregorian calendar), when followers performed the service to comply with the request of Miki. Soon after the service ended, Miki passed away at the age of ninety. In Tenrikyō, it is believed that Miki withdrew from physical life (utsushimi wo kakushita) and is still alive (zonmei) overseeing the movement as well as working for the salvation of human beings (TDPC 2014:278-319). As a way to embody this doctrinal idea, it is said that she is served with three meals a day and a bath is run for her, among other things, at the Foundress’ Sanctuary of Tenrikyo Church Headquarters (fieldwork observation). Also related to this notion is that her photograph has never been made public by the Church Headquarters, and this also serves as a way to preserve the sacredness of Miki as the Shrine of God (Nagaoka 2016).

After the death of Miki, Iburi Izō became the Honseki (main seat; i.e. a person who bestows the Sazuke on behalf of Miki) while Shinnosuke served the role of the Shinbashira (central pillar; i.e., the spiritual and administrative leader of the movement). In 1888, the religious movement gained official authorization as Shintō Tenri Kyōkai under the direct supervision of the Shinto Main Bureau in 1888. This led to formations of many churches under Tenri Kyōkai, amounting to some 1,300 churches by 1896. Also in 1888, Tenri Kyōkai published the Mikagura-uta (The Songs for the Service), which is the compilation of the songs taught by Miki. The rapid growth of the religious movement and its focus on faith healing, however, in turn invited criticism from the wider society, particularly from journalists that labeled the group as an “evil cult” (inshi jakyō) on the grounds that the religious movement emphasized superstition and magical healings over modern medical treatment. Similar public criticism was also directed against other new religious groups including Renmonkyō. This social tension developed to the point where the Home Ministry issued its Directive No. 12 in 1896, which enforced strict control and surveillance of the religious movement. As a way to respond to the public scrutiny and criticism, Tenri Kyōkai began to campaign for sectarian independence (ippa dokuritsu undō) in 1899. To meet the government’s criteria for a legitimate religious organization, the group developed an institutionalized religious organization and a systematized doctrine known as the Meiji version of Tenrikyō kyōten (The Doctrine of Tenrikyō), which complied with the government’s regulation that required religious doctrines to be in line with the State Shinto (kokka Shintō). In 1908, the group was granted permission to become an independent religious organization as one of the recognized religions in the thirteen Sect Shinto sects (kyōha shintō jūsanpa) (Astley 2006:100; Nagaoka 2015:75-77; TOMD 1998:56-65).

After gaining sectarian independence, the religious group, now with the name Tenrikyō, enjoyed a relatively peaceful time with regards to political and social pressure under the leadership of Nakayama Shinnosuke, who was the Shinbashira as well as the superintendent (kanchō) of Tenrikyō. With official sanction, Tenrikyō revitalized its efforts of propagation in the subsequent years, particularly by organizing public lectures in such places as factories across the country. This was influenced by the government’s policy of kokumin kyōka (national edification) marked by the initiative known as sankyō kaidō (three religions conference) in 1912, which brought together the representatives of Shinto, Buddhist, and Christian sects for the purpose of strengthening social order in Japan. As a result of the propagation efforts, Tenrikyō experienced rapid growth in the years leading up to 1920, especially in urban regions with a high population growth due to the influx of people from rural areas. In the meantime, Nakayama Shōzen became the superintendent of Tenrikyō in 1915 after the death of Shinnosuke in the previous year (Lee 1994:39-44; Ōya 1996:59-72; TOMD 1998:65-75).

In the following years, Tenrikyō developed further and established various sub-organizations. In 1925, Tenri School of Foreign Languages (Tenri Gaikokugo Gakkō) was established along with what would later become Tenri Central Library (Tenri toshokan). The language school was intended to support followers going overseas for missionary work, which had already begun toward the end of 1890s in Japan’s neighboring countries and regions such as Korea, Manchuria, and Taiwan as well as in immigrant-based regions including Hawaiʻi and the U.S. West Coast. Tenrikyō also established Tenrikyō Printing Office (Tenrikyō kyōchō insatsusho) and the Department of Doctrine and Historical Materials (Kyōgi oyobi shiryō shūseibu) as well as educational facilities such as a nursery, kindergarten, and elementary school. The Osashizu (The Divine Directions; a compilation of divine messages delivered through Iburi Izō) and the Ofudesaki began to be published in 1927 and 1928, respectively. In 1933 and 1934, the construction of the Foundress’s Sanctuary (Kyōsoden) and the South Worship Hall of the Main Sanctuary (Shinden) were completed, respectively, and the Kagura Service was performed around the model Kanrodai. These doctrinal and ritual developments, however, came to be hampered by the initiative known as the adjustment (kakushin) in 1939, which came in the wake of the National Mobilization Act (kokka sōdōin hō). To comply with the state’s demand in the face of war efforts, Tenrikyō made various changes including the removal of certain verses from the Mikagura-uta as well as withdrawing the Ofudesaki and the Osashizu from circulation (TOMD 1998:71-75). While Tenrikyō’s official discourse claims that the religious organization complied with the state on the surface, Nagaoka (2015) has demonstrated how Tenrikyō’s doctrines and practices were (re-)configured through the interaction with the state after the death of Miki. (See Issues/Challenges below for a related discussion.)

In the immediate aftermath of World War II on August 15, 1945, Nakayama Shōzen announced the restoration (fukugen) of Tenrikyō’s teachings into the one as taught by the foundress. He restored the Kagura Service in the same year, and over the next years he published the three scriptures, namely the Ofudesaki (1948), the Mikagura-uta (1946), and the Osashizu (1949), all of which had been prohibited by the government during the war. In 1949, he published Tenrikyō kyōten based on the three scriptures to replace the Meiji version of the doctrine. As a biography of the foundress, he published Kōhon Tenrikyō kyōsoden (the manuscript edition of the Life of Oyasama, Foundress of Tenrikyo) in 1956. In 1953, Shōzen announced the construction of Oyasato-yakata Building-complex (Oyasato yakata) that would surround the sanctuary to embody a model of the Joyous Life world. In further advancing Tenrikyō’s propagation, Shōzen made an official announcement of the promotion of an overseas mission in 1961, seeking to spread the name of the religion in various parts of the world (TOMD 1998:76-80)

With the death of the second Shinbashira in 1967, Nakayama Zenye, Shōzen’s son, became the third Shinbashira. Under his leadership, Tenrikyo started to place emphasis on the religious education of church members. While following in the footsteps of his predecessor who had opened a broad path to the development of the tradition in various fields, the third Shinbashira primarily focused on enhancing the quality of each church community through seminars on doctrine as well as the service performance. In the meantime, Tenrikyō left the Sect Shintō Union (Kyōha Shintō rengōkai) in 1970 and later abolished some of the Shintō-related materials such as himorogi (or more precisely masakaki, a pair of sacred tree branches to which five-coloured silk clothes as well as a ritual sword, mirror, and magatama beads are attached) and shimenawa (a rope that marks the sacred space) in 1976 and 1986, respectively. It also stopped conducting the ritual of tamakushi hōken in 1986. Moreover, the construction of the East and West Worship Halls of the Main Sanctuary was completed in 1984. In 1998, Nakayama Zenye passed on leadership to his son, Nakayama Zenji, who now serves as the fourth Shinbashira. Meanwhile, Tenrikyō held two events of “Tenrikyo-Christian Dialogue” between Tenri University and the Pontifical Gregorian University, the first time in Rome in 1998 and second time in Tenri in 2002. The two events each involved a symposium that brought together academics from both universities as well as some external scholars to exchange theological/doctrinal views on common themes including revelation, salvation, family, and education. In 2013, Nakayama Daisuke, Zenji’s adopted son, became the designated successor to the position of the Shinbashira. In 2014, Nakayama Zenye, the third Shinbashira, passed away at the age of eighty-two (Tenri Daigaku Fuzoku Oyasato Kenkyūsho 1997:286; Tenrikyō Dōyūsha 2016:112; 122, 142, 166, 175, 197, 199; Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no Taiwa II Soshiki Iinkai 1998; Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no Taiwa II Soshiki Iinkai 2005; TOMD 1998:80-88).

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

The underlying principle of Tenrikyō’s present official teaching is prescribed in Tenrikyō kyōten, the postwar doctrinal text first published in 1949 with the authorization of the second Shinbashira and was later translated into English with the title The Doctrine of Tenrikyo.

The doctrine states that human beings were created by the divine being called Tenri-Ō-no-Mikoto, also referred to as God the Parent (oyagami). In the story of human creation known as the Truth of Origin (Moto no ri), which is also the title of one of the chapters of the doctrinal text, the human creation is said to have taken place 900,099,999 years before the founding of the teaching in 1838 (Tenrikyo Church Headquarters [TCH] 1993:20-23). The story teaches that God the Parent created human beings for the purpose of seeing them lead the Joyous Life (yōki gurashi), the happy, self-less state of human life to be attained in the present world rather than in an afterlife (TCH 1993:12-19). In this view of salvific truth, which expresses a this-worldly orientation that is also characteristic of other Japanese new religions, the mind (kokoro) is defined as the basis of human existence and is indeed considered to be the only thing that belongs to human beings. This is expressed in a commonly cited phrase, “the mind alone is yours” (kokoro hitotsu ga waga no ri) (TCH 1993:52). The human body, which exists in relation to the mind, is described as a “thing lent, a thing borrowed” (kashimono karimono) from God the Parent. The official interpretation of this expression is that the human body is being kept alive by God’s providence (TCH 1993:50-52). The divine providence with which human beings are sustained is referred to as God the Parent’s “complete providence” (jūzen no shugo), which delineates ten aspects of God’s workings relating to the creation and sustenance of human life as the entirety of divine functioning in the human body (TCH 1993:30-32). This relationship between the human body and God further extends to an idea that the existence of all things including human beings and the physical world are reliant upon the providence of God (TCH 1993:32). Described as such, the concept of God is viewed as a synonym of the phenomenal world itself, an idea that is encapsulated in a scriptural phrase, “This universe is the body of God” (Ofudesaki III:40, 135).

In light of this ontological view, the human mind comes to play a key role in Tenrikyō’s soteriological discourse. In the process toward the realization of the Joyous Life, the mind is considered to be the determinant of human experiences and all the phenomena in the world. In this view, God the Parent is believed to provide human beings with divine blessings, such as good health or harmonious relationships with others, depending on the ways in which they use their minds. In this way, the human mind is believed to be able to affect the ways in which divine blessings are provided to human beings. The doctrine makes a distinction between what counts as a proper use of the mind and what does not. The doctrine states that, in order to achieve the world of joyousness, human beings are required to rid themselves of what is called the “dusts of the mind” (kokoro no hokori), a metaphor signifying self-centered thoughts that are considered to be the cause of negative occurrences such as illnesses and troubles. These dusts of the mind are miserliness, covetousness, hatred, self-love, grudge-bearing, anger, greed, and arrogance, while falsehood and flattery should also be avoided (TCH 1993:53). In a symbolic sense, these dusts are believed to accumulate and eventually develop into “causality” (innen), which affects the conditions or circumstances of one’s life in an unwanted manner in the present life and, after one passes away for rebirth, in the next life (TCH 1993:50-57). The doctrine states, however, that these negative phenomena are not punishments per se but rather “divine guidance” (tebiki) with which God the Parent urges human beings to purify their self-centered thoughts (TCH 1993:45-49).

It is postulated that, when the dust of the mind is completely purified, human beings can attain the quality of “true sincerity” (makoto shinjitsu), which represents a state of mind that fully accords with God the Parent’s intention that human beings live their lives by helping one another. In the process of purification, human beings ought to engage in “hinokishin,” which is defined as a selfless, thankful action based on the mind of “joyous acceptance” (tanno), a state of mind that seeks to accept any life events as manifestation of God’s guidance with a sense of joy and spiritedness (TCH 1993:60-83). Having attained the mind of true sincerity, human beings can experience the state of Joyous Life. In this manner, Tenrikyō’s soteriological discourse maintains that one can experience joy in the phenomenal world by perceiving things just as they appear. With their minds purified, human beings can find manifestations of divine blessings in what seem to be daily mundane occurrences and, with that very awareness, can attain the mind of joyousness.

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Tenrikyō has developed an array of ritual practices that relate to the soteriological discourse in its doctrine. The most important formalized ritual is called the service (tsutome), which involves symbolic ritual dance and the tune of accompanying nine musical instruments that are performed along the songs based on the words in the Mikagura-uta. [Image at right] At the monthly service on the twenty-sixth of every month (which commemorates the dates of the founding of the teaching as well as the “physical withdrawal” of the foundress) and at other grand services, the Church Headquarters conducts a ritual known as the Kagura Service (kagura-zutome), the name of which derives from Shinto’s traditional theatrical dance known as kagura. In the Kagura Service, ten performers conduct the ritual dance with the Kanrodai as the center while wearing Kagura masks (kagura men) symbolizing the mythical figures described in the Truth of Origin. The service is intended to be a symbolic expression of the Joyous Life as well as the divine providence of God the Parent at the time of the creation of humankind. The Kagura Service is then followed by the Dance with Hand Movements (teodori), which is performed by three men and three women on the dais of the Main Sanctuary. The service is also conducted at a monthly service of local churches in a slightly different form, with six performers dancing to the tune of the same nine musical instruments without Kagura masks. In both cases, the performers portray and spiritually enact religious symbols through the use of their bodies in the Service. Aside from the monthly and grand services, there are also morning and evening services, which are conducted both at the Church Headquarters and at local churches throughout the year, with only the seated service (suwari-zutome) being performed with three of the nine musical instruments (TOD 2004:48-57, 2010:375-382; TOMD 1998:37-40).

Another prominent ritual is a healing rite known as the Sazuke (the Divine Grant), which is performed to pray for the recovery of someone who is afflicted with illnesses and disorders. The Sazuke involves recitation of the name of God and corresponding hand gestures, and the ritual performer strokes the afflicted part of the body of the person concerned. The Sazuke can only be administered by a Yoboku (an initiated member), who has received the truth of the Sazuke (sazuke no ri) from the Foundress through the Shinbashira after going through a systematized procedure of attending a lecture known as Besseki for a total of nine times. The Besseki lecture outlines basic tenets of Tenrikyō, including the Truth of Origin, the dusts of the mind, the body as a thing lent, thing borrowed, the Divine Model of the Foundress, the significance of the service and the Sazuke, and other topics. Through attending the series of lectures, which has the same content each time, the listener is expected to cultivate an orientation of the mind that desires the salvation of others for the rest of his or her life. Compared to the service, which is a collective ritual embodiment of the principle of God the Parent’s providence, the Sazuke is primarily an individual ritual performance that occurs between two persons. The efficacy of the healing ritual is believed to rely upon the sincerity of the one who administers the Sazuke and that of the one who receives it, thus corresponding to the doctrinal claim that the mind constitutes the fundamental basis of human experiences. Because of its nature as a healing ritual, the Sazuke is used by Tenrikyō missionaries to spread their religious teachings to non-followers (TOMD 1998:40-43; TOD 2004:58-59).

As is implied by the particular locality associated with the Kagura Service and the bestowal of the Sazuke, Tenrikyō places a strong emphasis on the significance of the Jiba as the origin of human life as well as the source of salvation. This cosmological centrality of the Jiba in the doctrine is largely embodied in the religious practice of returning to the Jiba (ojiba gaeri). Also referred to as the Pilgrimage to the Jiba in English translation, this religious practice is described metaphorically as a journey to return to the Home of the Parent (oyasato) of all humanity (TOD 2010:137-138, 168-171). This is indeed very much emphasized in the current Japanese official website of Tenrikyo Church Headquarters (Tenrikyō kyōkai honbu), particularly the web page intended for non-followers (Personal note).

Returning to the Jiba can take place as a journey of individual persons or a group and may involve participation in associated and ceremonies along with the most important meaning of visiting the sacred place itself. In the sense of pilgrimage, Tenrikyō followers from all walks of life from different regions and countries come together at the Jiba as fellow children of God and pray for the realization of the Joyous Life during the service (Inoue 2013:177; cf. Ellwood 1982). Aside from the services conducted at the Jiba, Tenrikyo Church Headquarters hold various kinds of training courses for followers including the Spiritual Development Course (shūyōka) as well as conventions and other events of Tenrikyō associations such as the Young Men’s Association  (seinenkai), the Women’s Association (fujinkai), the Student Association (gakuseikai), and the Children’s Association (shōnenkai). Further solidifying the centrality of the Jiba are educational and social welfare institutions built around the Church Headquarters, with a full lineup of facilities from kindergarten to university as well as, for instance, Tenri Yorozu-Sodansho Foundation’s Ikoi no Ie Hospital (TOMD 1998:100-27). [Image at right] Furthermore, the religious organization holds large anniversary events for the foundress on (and around) January 26 every ten years, with the latest one being the 130th anniversary as observed on January 26, 2016. This special event brings large numbers of people to the Jiba as an occasion to renew their commitment to follow the foundress’ teaching.

In addition to these formal rituals, there are some less structured, day-to-day practices that are based on doctrinal concepts. One of them is hinokishin, which normally takes the form of social engagement such as litter picking in public places, cleaning public facilities, etc. These actions of hinokishin are seen to be an expression of gratitude to God for the blessings the followers receive on a daily basis and in effect serve as a way to reach out to the wider society (fieldwork observation). At a more organized level, Tenrikyō has been organizing what is known as the Disaster Relief Hinokishin Corps (saigai kyūen hinokishin tai) to regions in Japan (and in recent years in Taiwan) in the wake of major natural disasters since early twentieth century, including the Great Hanshin Earthquake (1995) and the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (2011). (See the Issues/Challenges section for a related discussion.)

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Tenrikyō is generally considered to be one of the largest Japanese new religious organizations, particularly among the ones that came into being at the turn of Japan’s modernization. Though the number of adherents is hard to grasp in Tenrikyō, which does not have a proper rite of passage apart from attendance at the Besseki lecture, a statistical review published by the religious organization based on reports from local churches claims 1,216,137 adherents in and outside Japan combined as of 2008. The number is slightly lower than that of 1986, the year of foundress’s centennial anniversary, when it marked the highest number in the post-war period at 1,687,220 (Tenrikyō Omote Tōryōshitsu Chōsa Jōhōka 2008:8). As has been briefly mentioned in the history of the religious group, Tenrikyō had experienced a higher growth in the number of adherents during the pre-war period. In 1896, for example, it claimed the membership of 3,137,113 based on the number of people who paid the membership fee (kōkin) (Arakitōryō Henshūbu 2002:38). Over the course of its development, Tenrikyō has spread to different parts of Japan from Hokkaidō to Okinawa, with church communities mainly concentrated in regions such as Kinki and Setouchi regions, which experienced rapid population growth as a result of industrial development around 1920s (Ōya 1996:71; Tsujii 1997).

Aside from its presence in its country of origin, Tenrikyō has expanded to more than thirty overseas countries and regions (TOD 2009), with the first move taking place in the Korean Peninsula in as early as 1893 (Kaneko K. 2000). Much of its church following is found in countries and regions with a sizable number of Japanese immigrants, including Brazil with approximately 20,000 (Yamada 2010); Hawaii, with 2,000-2,500 (Takahashi 2014); and the U.S. mainland with approximately 2,000 (Kato 2011). There also are significant member pools in Japan’s former Japanese colonies, including South Korea, with approximately 270,000 (Lee 2011); and Taiwan, with approximately 20,000–30,000 (Fujii 2006; cf. Huang 2016). It is estimated that people of Japanese origin comprise the majority of followers in the immigrant-based regions as well as in other regions including Europe, but non-Japanese make up a large proportion or the entirety of adherents in some of the former Japanese colonies as well as in several other regions such as the Republic of the Congo (Fujii 2006; Lee 2011; Mori 2013).

Followers of Tenrikyō living in Japan as well as in other parts of the world are considered to be part of the larger organization under Tenrikyo Church Headquarters (Tenrikyō kyōkai honbu). The organizational structure of Tenrikyō is mainly based on a centripetal principle centered on the religious authority of Tenrikyo Church Headquarters located at the Jiba. [Image at right] This principle involves two threads of organizational logic that are based on spiritual relationship and regional relationship, respectively. The first has to do with a parent-child relationship in which spiritual parents (ri no oya) are those who provide spiritual guidance to members who are, in terms of the religion, their children (ri no ko, “spiritual children”). In the organizational structure, this logic appears in the form of lineage (keitō). The Church Headquarters has about 240 directly supervised churches, the majority of which are known as grand churches (daikyōkai). These directly supervised churches each are connected with the Church Headquarters as their parent. The directly supervised churches in turn have their branch churches (bunkyōkai), thus comprising a chain of parent-child relationships in an institutional lineage structure. From a legal and financial point of view, a Tenrikyō church is an independent and autonomous social entity, but it is thus connected with other superior or subordinate churches in the wider spiritual hierarchy (Yamada 2012:325-28; cf. Morioka 1989:311-18). The second organizational logic concerns a network of churches in respective geographical regions. In Japan, each prefecture is defined as a diocese (kyōku) and is overseen by a Church Headquarters’ administrative office known as a diocese office (kyōmu shichō). In overseas countries, an equivalent function is undertaken by a mission headquarters (dendōchō), a mission center (shucchōsho), or a mission post (renrakusho), respectively, depending on the size of the church following in the country or region concerned. These regionally-based organizational units are intended to enhance the communication and interaction between followers belonging to different church lineages in a given geographical region. A Tenrikyō church is thus symbolically connected with the Church Headquarters in terms of the two interlacing organizational structures, with the spiritual relationship traditionally being the primary source of connection (Yamada 2012:325-28).

The leadership of the church hierarchy centers on the religious authority of the Shinbashira, which literally means the “central pillar.” As the administrative and spiritual leader of the entire Tenrikyō organization, the Shinbashira takes charge of officiating religious rites including the Kagura Service as well as bestow the Sazuke on behalf of the foundress (TOMD 1998:100). It is mandated that the Shinbashira should bear the family name of Nakayama, and the selection of a successor to the position is considered based on the lineage of the foundress (TOD 2010:389). As has been mentioned in the historical description above, the position of the Shinbashira has been traditionally held by direct male descendants or close male relatives in the lineages of the foundress. Under the Shinbashira, there are different ranks of church officials including the Director-in-Chief of Administrative Affairs (omote tōryō), the Director-in-Chief of Religious Affairs (uchi tōryō), headquarters executive officials (honbu-in), headquarters female officials (honbu fujin), and other ranks of senior and junior officials (TOD 2010:139-40). One can observe that most of these positions under the Shinbashira at the Church Headquarters are held by the descendants of the early followers. This family-oriented designation of leadership positions in the Church Headquarters to a large degree mirrors the internal structure of grand churches and branch churches (fieldwork observation).

Despite its close-knit institutional hierarchy centered on the religious authority of the Jiba, there have been numerous cases of schism particularly after the death of the foundress. Normally referred to as heretics (itan) by the Church Headquarters, these groups emerged at certain historical junctures of Tenrikyō’s development with a distinctive claim of salvific truth and related rituals that highlight certain aspects of Nakayama Miki’s teaching. The leaders of these groups have tended to view themselves as legitimate successors of the foundress. Depending on the time period in which these groups took form, they were marked with (1) an expectation for a prophetic figure descending from the spiritual lineage of Nakayama Miki and Iburi Izō; (2) an expectation for the appearance of a prophetic figure capable of effecting social change before the arrival of the end time; and (3) the emergence of religious leaders capable of performing mystical or magical healings. It must be noted that these cases of schism originated from the individual experiences of particular figures existing in periphery areas of the wider religious institution rather than as a result of organizational schism of a particular church. Some of these schismatic groups are Honmichi, Tenrin-Ō-Kyōkai, Shūyōdan Hōseikai, Morarojī Kenkyūsho, Seishōdō Kyōdan, Ōkanmichi, among many others (Yumiyama 2005).

In overseas contexts, one can identify a case of organizational schism in postwar South Korea. Unlike the aforementioned instances of schism in the Japanese context, Tenrikyō’s schism in South Korea was mainly triggered by a socio-political climate engendered by anti-Japanese sentiment in South Korean society. At the height of anti-Japanese sentiment in the public sphere coupled with the South Korean government’s suppression against religions of Japanese origin, a group of Tenrikyō followers in South Korea announced that they were changing their object of worship from a shrine to a model of Kanrodai in 1985. This has in turn led to the split of another group of followers aligning with the Church Headquarters’ orthodox view of the object of worship (Jin 2015, 2016).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Of all the possible issues and challenges facing the movement, five in particular are worth mentioning, namely, overseas mission, gender issues, Tenrikyō’s roles in society, assessment of prewar history, and membership decline.

In the context of overseas mission, some of the characteristics identifiable as associated with Japanese culture in Tenrikyō’s doctrines, practices, and its institutional and material cultures have had rather ambivalent consequences. The association with Japan and Japanese culture, such as the shrine being the object of worship, has been considered to be a source of difficulty for propagating the religious teaching in South Korea, where anti-Japanese sentiment runs high (Jin 2015, 2016). In a place like Brazil, the centripetal principle of the organizational structure of Tenrikyō has at times led to the appreciation of Japan and its language among followers of Japanese descent, effecting in further consolidation of Tenrikyō as an ethnic religious community (Yamada 2012). At the same time, however, the association with Japan and Japanese culture has served as a resource to attract non-Japanese people in some other regions. This includes Taiwan, where some parts of the population view Japan as a model to follow in contrast to that of the Nationalist government from the mainland China (Huang 2016), and the Republic of Congo and Nepal, where the symbol of religious authenticity is converged with the image of Japan as an industrially developed nation among local members (Mori 2013:131-34; Marilena Frisone, personal communication). Also worth noting in terms of the association with Japan is that Tenrikyō has used Japanese cultural resources (e.g., in the form of Japanese language schools) as a way of increasing the visibility of the group and attracting potential members in such regions as France, New York, and Singapore, where Tenrikyō has established Japanese cultural centers. In relation to the language, the Mikagura-uta can be sung only in the original Japanese except in South Korea, where it is sung in Korean, something that has occurred due to the political circumstances in the country in addition to the similar grammatical structure of the two languages. To address this linguistic limitation, there has been a grassroots initiative in recent years among followers in English-speaking countries to create a “Singable-Danceable Mikagura-uta” (utatte odoreru Mikagura-uta) that can be sung and danced in English (fieldwork observation; see also Inoue 2015). Another potential issue with regards to the overseas mission is that members need to go to the Jiba to become a Yoboku and attend some of the seminars and courses required to obtain certain qualifications, which can be at times difficult for overseas followers due to the time and financial cost for the travel (fieldwork observation).

As is implied in the description of the organizational structure, Tenrikyō also shows ambivalence in its doctrinal views and institutional practices relating to gender orientation. Despite originating from a female leader, Tenrikyō has developed and maintained a rather male-oriented organizational structure with, for example, having only one female honbu-in in its history (Watanabe 2015:15). It also emphasizes the relationship between husband and wife based on the modern sense of gender division of labor with some remaining influence of the household ie system of premodern society, a view that was developed based on a particular interpretation of the foundress’s words in the context of Japan’s modern period (Kaneko J. 2003). It is in fact pointed out that while Miki emphasized the salvation of both men and women as well as contravening traditional taboos concerning women’s bodies, she did not necessarily go beyond the conventional gender roles of men as fathers and women as mothers (Ambros 2013). At the same time, however, the foundress did not necessarily consider married life as an ideal way of living for everybody, for example, encouraging women with certain religious roles such as Kokan to live a single life. In recent times, moreover, the practice of foster parents in local churches is said to show an example of the practice of a “church family” (kyōkai kazoku), which in some ways transcends the configuration of modern nuclear family (Kaneko J. 2003).

Where it concerns social issues, Tenrikyō has been quite active in some social welfare activities including foster parents as well as in disaster relief hinokishin activities in the wake of natural disasters (TOMD 1998:138-141; see also Ambros 2016; Kaneko A. 2002; Kisala 1992). At the same time, however, it has been pointed out that Tenrikyō does not take a clear stance towards certain social or political issues, largely due to the emphasis on the spiritual dimension of salvation in the postwar doctrine (Hatakama 2013). This aspect can be said to have been partly addressed by the initiative of Tenri Yamato Culture Congress (Tenri Yamato bunka kaigi) with the publication of its proceeding known as Michi to shakai (Tenrikyō and Society) in 2004, which contains discussions of various topics including bioethics, environmental issues, and family issues such as domestic violence. The discussion in the book highlights some of the doctrinal concepts as guiding principles to understand these issues from Tenrikyō’s doctrinal viewpoint, i.e., in terms of organ transplants viewing the body as “a thing lent, a thing borrowed,” the universe as the body of God for environmental issues, causality and free use of mind for family issues, to name but a few. The discussion tends to avoid taking sides in controversial issues, although it expresses a certain degree of reservation against the practice of organ transplant on the basis of the teaching of a thing lent, a thing borrowed. In recent years, there has been relatively less concerted efforts to address social issues from Tenrikyō’s standpoint, but individual issues are occasionally discussed in the group’s official publications including Michi no tomo magazine, Tenri jihō newspaper, and Arakitōryō magazine.

As for the interpretation of prewar history, Tenrikyō’s official view has it that the religious institution complied with Japan’s modern state ideology by modifying its doctrines and practices on the surface level while maintaining in the undercurrent the original teaching and practices as taught by Miki (Tenrikyō Omote Tōryōshitsu Tokubetsu Iinkai 1995:44-46). In recent years, however, some scholars have questioned and nuanced this view, which they call the “discourse of two-tier structure” (nijū kōzō ron), by applying historical approaches that highlight a certain level of historical continuity between the prewar and postwar doctrines and practices (see for example Hatakama 2006, 2007, 2012; Nagaoka 2015). Though these scholarly views may not converge with those of scholars affiliated with Tenrikyō, there has recently been an attempt of scholarly dialogue at a special session entitled “Reviewing the Current State of Research on Tenrikyō: Historical Approaches” (Tenrikyō kenkyū no genzai: Rekishi kara tou) at the 2014 annual conference of the Japanese Association for the Study of Religion and Society (“Shūkyō to shakai” gakkai) (Nagaoka et al. 2015). In this panel, historians sought to nuance the evaluation of prewar history in Tenrikyō’s official doctrinal discourse, which are in one way or another shared among scholars studying new religions, by employing approaches derived from the study of deconstruction and postcolonial studies. The discussion in the panel involved responses from scholars affiliated with new religions including Tenrikyō and Konkōkyō, thus being a rare case of a dialogue between two parties sharing different views on the prewar history of new religions (Nagaoka et al. 2015).

As has been briefly mentioned above, the movement has faced a declining membership in recent years, with the membership dropping approximately by 200,000 every ten years between 1986 and 2006. In a statistical review published in 2008, the declining membership is attributed to the passing of elderly followers, the declining number of people starting to attend the Besseki lectures as well as those who receive the truth of the Sazuke, and the declining number of Yoboku who participate in church activities (Tenrikyō Omote Tōryōshitsu Chōsa Jōhōka 2008:8-9, 14, 26, 29). To address this issue, Tenrikyo Church Headquarters has made various attempts to date. These include the manual distribution of the movement’s weekly newspaper, Tenri jihō, among followers living in the same region (Michi no Tomo Henshūbu 2009:10-13) as well as launching training courses such as Tenrikyo Basics Course (Tenrikyō kiso kōza) and Three Day Course (Mikka kōshūkai), which are designed for people who are new to Tenrikyō and followers who cannot take a long leave from work, respectively (Michi no Tomo Henshūbu 2003a, 2003b). These initiatives, among others, are intended to help missionaries to attract new members to the movement as well as help churches to encourage existing members to learn and practice the teaching.

IMAGES

Image #1: Photograph the Ofudesaki (The Tip of the Writing Brush)

Image #2: Photograph of the instruments used in the performance of tsutome.

Image #3: Photograph of the Sazuke ritual being performed by a Yoboku.

Image #4: Photograph of the Tenri Yorozu-Sodansho Foundation’s Ikoi no Ie Hospital.

Image #5: Photograph of the headquarters of Tenrikyō (Tenrikyō kyōkai honbu).

REFERENCES

Primary Sources

Arakitōryō Henshūbu. 2002. “Oyasama go-nensai wo moto ni kyōshi wo furikaeru.” Arakitōryō 209:8-71.

Michi no Tomo Henshūbu. 2009. “’Tenri jihō fukyū he no torikumi.” Michi no tomo 119:8-25.

Michi no Tomo Henshūbu. 2003a. “Kyōka ikusei no shin shisutemu to wa: Tenrikyō kiso kōza.” Michi no Tomo 113:8-15.

Michi no Tomo Henshūbu. 2003b. “Kyōka ikusei no shin shisutemu: Mikka kōshūkai.” Michi no Tomo 113:10-19.

Tenrikyo Church Headquarters. 1998. Ofudesaki: The Tip of the Writing Brush. Tenri: Tenrikyo Church Headquarters.

Tenrikyo Church Headquarters. 1996. The Life of Oyasama, Foundress of Tenrikyo: Manuscript Edition. Third Edition. Tenri: Tenrikyo Church Headquarters.

Tenrikyo Church Headquarters. 1993. The Doctrine of Tenrikyo. Tenth Edition. Tenri: Tenrikyo Church Headquarters.

Tenri Daigaku Fuzoku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. 1997. Kaitei Tenrikyō jiten. Tenri: Tenrikyō Dōyūsha. 

Tenrikyō Dōyūsha, ed. 2016. Bijuaru nenpyō Tenrikyō no hyaku sanjū nen: Meiji 21 nen (1888)—Heisei 27 nen (2015). Tenri: Tenrikyo Dōyūsha.

Tenrikyo Doyusha Publishing Company. 2014. Tracing the Model Path: A Close Look into The Life of Oyasama. Tenri: Tenrikyo Doyusha Publishing Company.

Tenrikyō Omote Tōryōshitsu Chōsa Jōhōka, ed. 2008. Dai 8 kai kyōsei chōsa hōkoku. Tenri: Tenrikyō Kyōkai Honbu.

Tenrikyō Omote Tōryōshitsu Tokubetsu Iinkai, ed. 1995. Sekai tasuke he saranaru ayumi wo: “Fukugen” gojū nen ni atatte. Tenri: Tenrikyo Dōyūsha.

Tenrikyo Overseas Department. 2010. A Glossary of Tenrikyo Terms. Tenri: Tenrikyo Overseas Department.

Tenrikyo Overseas Department. 2009. “A Statistical Review of Tenrikyo.” Tenrikyo, January 26, pp. 4.

Tenrikyo Overseas Department. 2004. Yoboku’s Guide to Tenrikyo. Tenri: Tenrikyo Overseas Department.

Tenrikyo Overseas Mission Department. 1998. Tenrikyo: The Path to Joyousness. Tenri: Tenrikyo Overseas Mission Department.

Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no Taiwa Soshiki Iinkai. 1998. Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no taiwa. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no Taiwa II Soshiki Iinkai. 2005. Tenrikyō to Kirisutokyō no taiwa II. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Tenri Yamato Bunka Kaigi, ed. 2004. Michi to shakai: Gendai “jijō” wo shian suru. Tenri: Tenrikyo Dōyūsha.

Secondary Sources

Ambros, Barbara. 2016. “Mobilizing Gratitude: Contextualizing Tenrikyō’s Response after the Great East Japan Earthquake.” Pp. 132-55 in Disasters and Social Crisis in Contemporary Japan: Political, Religious, and Sociocultural Responses, edited by Mark R. Mullins and Koichi Nakano. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

Ambros, Barbara R. 2013. “Nakayama Miki’s View of Women and Their Bodies in the Context of Nineteenth Century Japanese Religions.” Tenri Journal of Religion 41:85-116.

Astley, Trevor. 2006. “New Religions.” Pp. 91-114 in Nanzan Guide to Japanese Religions, edited by Paul L. Swanson and Clark Chilson. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.

Ellwood, Robert. 1982. Tenrikyo: A Pilgrimage Faith: The Structure and Meanings of a Modern Japanese Religion. Tenri: Oyasato Research Institute, Tenri University.

Fujii, Takeshi. 2006. “Sengo Taiwan ni okeru Tenrikyō no tenkai.” Tenri Taiwan gakuhō 15:63-75.

Hardacre, Helen. 1994. “Conflict between Shugendō and the New Religions of Bakumatsu Japan.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 21:137-66.

Hatakama, Kazuhiro. 2013. “Oshie no ashimoto wo terasu: ‘Fukugen’ to shakai.” Pp. 59-83 in Gendai shakai to Tenrikyō, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Hatakama, Kazuhiro. 2012. “Kōhon Tenrikyō kyōsoden no seiritsu.” Pp. 193-240 in Katarareta kyōso: Kinse kingendai no shinkōshi, edited by Kazuhiro Hatakama. Kyoto: Hōzōkan.

Hatakama, Kazuhiro. 2007. “Hataraki Hinokishin” Pp. 85-130 in Tenrikyō no kosumorojī to gendai, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Hatakama, Kazuhiro. 2006. “’Fukugen’ to ‘Kakushin.’” Pp. 137-73 in Sensō to shūkyō, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Huang, Yueh-po. 2016. “Colonial Encounter and Inculturation: The Birth and Development of Tenrikyo in Taiwan.” Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions 19:78-103.

Ikeda, Shirō. 2006 [1996]. Nakayama Miki to hisabetsu minshū: Tenrikyō kyōso no ayunda michi. Tokyo: Akashi Shoten.

Inoue, Akihiro. 2013. “’Ojiba gaeri’ no junrei ron.” Pp. 167-83 in Gendai Shakai to Tenrikyō, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Inoue, Akihiro. 2015. “Eigo ken ni okeru Tenrikyō dendō: Hawai, Hokubei wo chūshin ni.” Shūkyō to Shakai 21:171-73.

Jin, Jonghyun. 2016. “Kankoku ni okeru Tenrikyō no tenkai: Sengo no kattō to henyō wo megutte.” Jisedai jinbun shakai kenkyū 12:181-97.

Jin, Jonghyun. 2015. “Sengo no Kankoku ni okeru Nikkei shinshūkyō no tenkai: Tenrikyō no genchika wo megutte.” Kankokugaku no furontia 1:42-59.

Kaneko, Akira. 2002. Kaketsukeru shinkōsha tachi: Tenrikyō saigai kyūen no hyakunen. Tenri: Tenrikyō Dōyūsha.

Kaneko, Juri. 2003. “Can Tenrikyō Transcend the Modern Family? From a Humanistic Understanding of Hinagata and Narratives of Foster Care Activities.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 30:243–58.

Kaneko, Keisuke. 2000. Kaitei zōho Tenrikyō dendōshi gaisetsu. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Kato, Masato. 2011. “Nikkei Amerikajin Tenrikyō shinja no kenkyū: San Furanshisuko Bei Eria zaijū Nikkei Shin-Nisei shinja no jirei wo tōshite.” Pp. 83-113 in Amerikasu no Tenrikyō: Nanboku Amerika ni okeru dendō no shosō to tenbō, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūsho. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Kisala, Robert. 1992. Gendai shūkyō to shakai rinri: Tenrikyō to Risshō Kōseikai no fukushi katsudō wo chūshin ni. Tokyo: Seikyūsha.

Lee, Won Bum. 2011. “Kankoku ni okeru Nihon no shinshūkyō.” Pp. 55-84 in Ekkyō suru Nikkan shūkyō bunka: Kankoku no Nikkei shinshūkyō, Nihon no Hanryū Kirisutokyō, edited by Won Bum Lee and Yoshihide Sakurai. Sapporo: Hokkaidō Daigaku Shuppankai.

Lee, Won Bum. 1994. “Kindai Nihon no tennōsei kokka to Tenri kyōdan: Sono shūdanteki jiritsusei no keisei katei wo megutte.” Pp. 18-62 in Nanno tame no “shūkyō” ka: Gendai shūkyō no yokuatsu to jiyū, edited by Susumu Shimazono. Tokyo: Seikyūsha.

Mori, Yōmei. 2013. Dendō shūkyō ni yoru ibunka sesshoku: Tenrikyō Kongo dendō wo tsūjite. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Morioka, Kiyomi. 1989. Shinshūkyō undō no tenkai katei. Tokyo: Sōbunsha.

Nagaoka, Takashi. 2016. “Kyoso no kazoku shashin wo meguru oboegaki.” Pp. 378-90 in Ishibashi hyōron: Cultures/Critiques bessatsu, edited by Ishibashi hyōron henshūbu. Osaka: Kokusai Nihongaku Kenkyūkai.

Nagaoka, Takashi. 2015. Shinshūkyō to sōryokusen: Kyōso igo wo ikiru. Nagoya: Nagoya Daigaku Shuppankai.

Nagaoka, Takashi, et al. 2015. “Tenrikyō kenkyū no genzai: Rekishi kara tou.” Shūkyō to Shakai 21:159-68.

Ōya, Wataru. 1996. Tenrikyō no shiteki kenkyū. Osaka: Tōhō Shuppan.

Personal Note. n.d. I wish to thank Marilena Frisone for drawing my attention to this point.

Shimazono, Susumu. 1998. “Utagai to shinkō no aida: Nakayama Miki no tasuke no shinkō no kigen.” Pp. 71-117 in Nakayama Miki, sono shōgai to shisō: Sukui to kaihō no ayumi, edited by Shirō Ikeda, Susumu Shimazono, and Kazutoshi Seki. Tokyo: Akashi Shoten.

Takahashi, Norihito. 2014. Imin, shūkyō, kokoku: Kingendai Hawai ni okeru Nikkei shūkyō no keiken. Tokyo: Hābesutosha.

Tsujii, Masakazu. 1997. “Gendai sekai ni okeru Tenrikyō no fukyō dendō: Kyōkai tōkei wo tegakari ni.” Pp. 47-76 in Tenrikyō no fukyō dendō, edited by Tenri Daigaku Oyasato Kenkyūjo. Tenri: Tenri Daigaku Shuppanbu.

Watanabe, Yū. 2015. “Kyōso no shintai: Nakayama Miki kō.” Kyōseigaku 10:6-44.

Yamada, Masanobu. 2012. “Tenrikyō no kyōdan keiei rinen to Burajiru ni okeru tenkai.” Pp. 324-42 in Gurōbaruka suru Ajia kei shūkyō: Keiei to māketingu, edited by Hirochika Nakamaki and Wendy Smith. Osaka: Tōhō Shuppan.

Yamada, Masanobu. 2010. “Tenrikyo in Brazil from the Perspective of Globalization.” Revista de Estudos da Religião 10:29–49.

Yumiyama, Tatsuya. 2005. Tenkei no yukue: Shūkyō ga bunpa suru toki. Tokyo: Nihon Chiiki Shakai Kenkyūsho.

Post Date:
13 March 2017

HEAVEN’S GATE TIMELINE

1927 Bonnie Lu Trousdale was born in Houston, Texas.

1931 Marshall Herff Applewhite was born in Spur, Texas.

1952 Applewhite enrolled at Austin College in Sherman, Texas.

1954 Applewhite graduated from Austin College with a music degree.

1966 Applewhite was appointed Assistant Professor at University of St. Thomas in Texas.

1970 Applewhite was dismissed from University of St. Thomas.

1972 Applewhite and Nettles met at Bellaire General Hospital in Houston, Texas.

1973 Applewhite and Nettles left Houston, claiming to be ‘‘The Two.”

1973 Applewhite and Nettles were imprisoned for automobile theft and fraud.

1975 “The Two” organized public meetings.

1976 (21 April) Applewhite and Nettles announced that the “Harvest is closed” and that there would be no further opportunities offered to seekers.

1976 (Summer) The Two set up a remote camp near Laramie, Wyoming.

Late 1970s Group was organized into “cells.”

1985 Nettles died of liver cancer.

1991-1992 Total Overcomers Anonymous made the “last call.”

1993 Total Overcomers Anonymous made a “final offer.”

1994 Public meetings resumed.

1996 (October) Heaven’s Gate group rented a ranch at Santa Fe, San Diego.

1996 The Hale Bopp comet appeared.

1997 39 Heaven’s Gate members committed suicide.

1997 Wayne Cooke (Jstody) committed suicide.

1998 Chuck Humphrey (Rkkody) committed suicide.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Bonnie Lu Nettles Trousdale was born in Houston, Texas and grew up in a Baptist family. She became interested
in the occult, and joined the Theosophical Society (Houston Lodge) in 1966. She also had an interest in channeling. She trained as a nurse, and first met Marshall Herff Applewhite in a hospital in Houston in 1972. The exact circumstances are disputed (Balch 1995:141).

Applewhite was the son of a Presbyterian minister and, having obtained a philosophy degree, entered Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, Virginia. He abandoned his theological studies after a single semester, deciding to study music instead. He obtained a master’s degree in the subject from the University of Colorado, and embarked on an academic career, obtaining a position at the University of Alabama, and later at St. Thomas’s University in Houston. In 1970, he was dismissed from the university.

Applewhite met Nettles, and the pair established a close friendship. Their relationship was spiritual rather than sexual, and they came to believe that their acquaintance was in fulfillment of biblical prophecy. In 1973, they proclaimed themselves as the Two Witnesses mentioned in the Book of Revelation (Revelation 11:1-2), and they hired a car to take their message to various U.S. and Canadian states. The couple’s failure to return the hired car, together with credit card fraud by Nettles, led to their arrest and subsequent prison sentences (Applewhite; in Chryssides 2011:19-20).

It was during his six-month period in prison that Applewhite appeared to have developed his teachings. They subsequently focused less on occultism, but more on UFOs and the notion of The Evolutionary Level Above Human (TELAH), which he and Nettles began to teach after being re-united. They believed that there would be a “demonstration” that would provide empirical proof of extraterrestrials who would arrive to collect their “crew.” (Applewhite 2011:21-22).

In order to assemble a “crew,” the couple advertised numerous public meetings. Their first advertisement read:

“UFO’S
Why they are here.
Who they have come for.
When they will leave.
NOT a discussion of UFO sightings or phenomena
Two individuals say they were sent from the level above human, and are about to leave the human level and literally (physically) return to that next evolutionary level in a spacecraft (UFO) within months! “The Two” will discuss how the transition from the human level to the next level is accomplished, and when this may be done.”
“This is not a religious or philosophical organization recruiting membership. However, the information has already prompted many individuals to devote their total energy to the transitional process. If you have ever entertained the idea that there may be a real, PHYSICAL level beyond the Earth’s confines, you will want to attend this meeting” (Chryssides 1999:69).

In its early days the group was called the Anonymous Sexaholics Celibate Church, but this was soon changed to Human Individual Metamorphosis (HIM), which alluded to the group’s aim of aspiring to TELAH. The Two typically gave themselves pseudonyms of matching pairs. In the early days they referred to themselves as Guinea and Pig, alluding to the idea that they were all participating in a cosmic experiment that the Next Level was undertaking. Other adopted names were Bo and Beep, and Do (pronounced “doe”) and Ti, the name by which the public later came to know them (Chryssides 2011:186).

The Two organized 130 meetings at various venues in the U.S. and Canada. At Waldport, near Eugene, Oregon in September, 1975 there were some 200 attendees, and 33 of them decided to join. Joining entailed giving up their conventional lifestyle, leaving home and going “on the road” with Do and Ti, and obtaining food and accommodation (and sometimes cash) in exchange for labor.

Later that year, Do and Te decided to withdraw from public view. They decided that the group should be divided into “cells,” dispersing to various parts of the country. Each member was assigned a partner of the opposite sex, but no physical relationship was permitted. This was one of a number of strict rules that were imposed on followers. Sex was prohibited; members had to cut their ties with the outside world; they were not permitted to watch television or read newspapers; and friendships of any kind of socializing were to be given up. Personal adornment was disallowed: women could not wear jewelry and men were required to shave off beards. It was at this point that members assumed new names ending in “-ody,” such as Jwnody (pronounced “June-ody”) or Qstody (“Quest-ody”). The suffix “-ody” was apparently a corruption of the leaders’ assumed names “Do-Ti,” and the prefix was a contraction of a personal name or some abstract quality associated with the member (DiAngelo 2007:21-22). Many of the group were unable to accept the austere lifestyle, and roughly half of them left.

In 1976, Do and Ti re-appeared and asked followers to meet them at a remote camp near Laramie, Wyoming. The group was divided into “star clusters,” smaller groups, but not dispersed this time. At this point, the group began to wear the “uniforms” with which they came to be associated: nylon anoraks and hoods. The group’s finances also improved, although the precise reasons for this are unclear. Some have suggested that two members inherited a legacy of $300,000, but others have attributed their financial improvement to the services offered by group members, principally technical writing, information technology, and automobile repairs (Balch 1995:157; DiAngelo 2007:50-51).

In the early 1980s, Nettles’ health began to deteriorate. She was diagnosed with cancer, and one of her eyes had to be surgically removed in 1983. She died two years later. Applewhite told the rest of the group that she had abandoned her body in order to arrive at the Next Level, where she would await the others.

The group made itself publicly visible once more in 1992 under the name of Total Overcomers Anonymous (or simply Total Overcomers, or TO). An advertisement by TO was placed in USA Today May 27, 1993, informing readers that the Earth was about to be “spaded under” because of its inhabitants’ lack of evolutionary progress. It made a “final offer” for people to contact the group, which secured around twenty respondents.

This final period in the group’s life was marked by renewed vigor. Concerned about continuing sexual urges, some members had resorted to medication to control their hormones. Others went further; a few, including Applewhite himself, underwent castration. This period, Applewhite taught, was humanity’s “last chance to advance beyond human,” and his message was more urgently apocalyptic than ever before (Balch 1995:163; DiAngelo 2007:57-58).

In 1996, the group rented a mansion in Rancho Santa Fé, some 30 miles outside of San Diego. The group
continued with its IT consultancy work, under the name of Higher Source. During the third week in March, 1997, the group requested that there should be no visitors. There had been reports about the arrival of Hale-Bopp comet, and Applewhite believed that there was a spacecraft behind it that contained a Representative of the Kingdom of Heaven.

During this final week, Rio DiAngelo (NEody) left the group on the grounds that he had “work to do outside the class for the Next Level” (DiAngelo:104). The rest of the group began to make video-recordings of farewell messages. DiAngelo kept in contact with the group, but he failed to receive e-mail replies on Monday, March 24. The following day he received a package containing the recorded messages. On Wednesday he returned to the mansion with a friend and discovered the 39 bodies, including Applewhite. All but two of the group were laying under purple shrouds; they were wearing black trousers and Nike trainers. Those who wore spectacles had laid them out neatly at their sides; and a small baggage case lay beside each bed (DiAngelo 2007:105-09).

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

In common with several UFO-religions, Heaven’s Gate combined belief in UFOs with biblical ideas, particularly, although not exclusively, drawing on the Book of Revelation. Nettles and Applewhite cast themselves as the Two Witnesses mentioned in the book, who had the responsibility of delivering the message to humankind. The group’s key teachings are contained in their website, “ How and When Heaven’s Gate May Be Entered.”

According to Heaven’s Gate’s cosmology, there existed three types of being: those living on earth, those inhabiting The Evolutionary Level Above Human, and ‘adversarial space races’ known as the Luciferians. These Luciferians are “fallen” ancestors of TELAH members. They created a civilization with advanced technology, and continue to retain some of their scientific knowledge. They can build spacecrafts and carry out genetic engineering. However, they are morally degenerate, perpetrating misinformation among the human race, abducting humans for genetic experiments, and securing their allegiance for their nefarious purposes (Applewhite 1993).

The bodies of these Next Level (TELAH) beings are physical, although markedly different from human bodies.
They have eyes, ears, and a rudimentary nose, and have a voice box, although they do not need to use it since they can communicate telepathically. These Next Level members have “tagged” selected individuals with “deposit chips” or souls, in order to prepare them for the Next Level Above Human. These humans need to make progress towards “metamorphic completion” with the aid of the Next Level “Reps’” (representatives’) teachings. Some individuals decide “not to pursue,” thereby making themselves followers of Lucifer. Others may make insufficient progress, in which case they will be “put on ice” until the Next Level Reps re-visit the earth; they will then be given a new physical body.

Such terrestrial visits by the Next Level are rare. The last was two thousand years ago, when one of the Older Members of TELAH sent a representative to earth. This was his son, Jesus, also referred to as “the Captain,” who brought an “away team” with him with the task of preaching the message of how the kingdom of God might be entered. However, the Luciferians incited the human race to kill the Captain and his crew, and encouraged them to propagate false teachings. Such falsehoods include the belief that Jesus was born as an infant. The truth, Applewhite affirmed, is that Jesus’ body was ‘tagged’ by an Older Member. He matured spiritually until his baptism, which heralded his earthly mission, and his transfiguration, which completed his spiritual maturation. At his resurrection, Jesus assumed a new Next Level body and was taken up to heaven by a UFO at his ascension.

Two millennia later another “away team” entered selected human bodies. This time it was a male and female couple: the “Admiral” (also called the “Father”) was Bonnie Nettles, who worked through Marshall Applewhite (the “Captain”), purportedly proclaiming Jesus’ message and continuing his incomplete work. To underline the fact that the Two worked as one, they chose complementary names like Bo and Peep, and Ti and Do. Their mission was to collect “tagged” individuals who had been selected for the Next Level. As with Jesus’ followers, Applewhite’s community was to cut all earthly ties, and to train for the coming opportunity to enter the Next Level.

Little time was left. The Earth was coming to the end of its 6,000-year life, and Earth was suffering irreparably from pollution and dwindling resources. It had now to be “spaded over” in order to be made ready for the next era. The year 1997, arguably, fell exactly 2,000 years after Jesus’ birth, which Applewhite dated (in common with many historians) as 4 B.C.E. The arrival of the Hale Bopp comet in that year was therefore regarded as a significant portent. The group’s belief that there was a “companion” body behind it indicated the presence of the TELAH spacecraft that had arrived to enable the members to leave the world and join Ti’s crew.

The collective suicide supposedly enabled Applewhite’s followers to rise again in the new Next Level bodies. It was regarded as a triumph rather than a disaster. As he taught, “The true meaning of ‘suicide’ is to turn against the Next Level when it is being offered.” The passage in Revelation which speaks of the Two Witnesses concludes, “Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, ‘Come up here’. And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on” (Revelation 11:12).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Apart from the final suicide in March, 1997, the Heaven’s Gate group had few, if any, practices that could be described as rituals. The only activities that could be described as “ritual,” or perhaps more accurately as pieces of symbolism, were The Two’s practice of having two members sit on either side of them during public lectures: they were to serve as “buffers” to deflect negative energy from the audience. Another ritual feature was Applewhite’s practice of lecturing beside an empty white chair: this was for his deceased partner, Ti, who was believed to be still present in spirit. There were also periods known as “tomb time” during which members were not allowed to speak to each other. Such periods could last for several days, and they caused some members to report an awareness of spaceships that had supposedly come into close range.

Despite the relative absence of formal rituals, the group had a highly structured routine. According to Balch, there was “a procedure for every conscious moment in life” (Lewis 1995:156). Members were required to give up contacts with the world and their former lives. In the last years of the group, members wore androgynous clothing resembling that of monks. Detailed rules of behavior were laid down in “The 17 Steps,” which gave instructions about how to performing assigned tasks, and lists of “Major Offenses” and “Lesser Offenses” were meticulously defined. Applewhite kept a procedure book, which was updated every day. Members were assigned “check partners” to whom they had to report daily, inquiring whether any aspect of their behavior differed from their “Older Members,” Ti and Do (DiAngelo 2007:27-29).

There were rules about food and clothing. Applewhite prohibited fish and mushrooms, and at one point in the group’s life members had a six-week period of fasting in which they only consumed “Master Cleanser,” a drink made from lemon or lime juice combined with maple syrup and cayenne pepper (DiAngelo 2007:47).

This group had its own distinctive vocabulary for describing its teachings and practices. For example, the body was described as one’s “vehicle,” one’s mind as the “operator,” the house as a “craft,” and money as “sticks.” Breakfast, lunch and dinner were called the first, second, and third “experiments” respectively, and recipes were “formulas.”

Importantly, group members did not go out UFO-spotting. Applewhite declared that he was the Next Level’s sole contactee (Balch 1995:154).

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Applewhite and Nettles were the exclusive leaders of the group until the latter’s death in 1985, when Applewhite assumed full control. As mentioned above, the group was split into “cells” in the late 1970s and subsequently reunited.

During its history the group adopted various names: Anonymous Sexoholics Celibate Church, Total Overcomers
Anonymous (1991-92), Human Individual Metamorphosis (HIM), and finally Heaven’s Gate. The trading name of the group’s web design company was Higher Source.

At its peak, the group had around 200 members. The number who committed suicide on March 22-23, 1997 was 39, including Applewhite. Three other members were not present. Two subsequently took their own lives in the same ritual manner, while Rio DiAngelo remains alive and committed to spreading the group’s message. Although the Heaven’s Gate organization died with its members, its website has been mirrored, and remains online.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

The most obvious issue raised by Heaven’s Gate is how a group of followers can be brought to commit collective suicide. The group was not subject to any external threat, and there is no evidence that Applewhite’s supporters were mentally ill, vulnerable, or unduly credulous. The event gave further impetus to “brainwashing” theories, to which the public has given credence, and which are fuelled by the anti-cult movement and the media. The presence of brainwashing becomes less plausible, however, when one considers that only a very small proportion felt constrained to give up worldly ties to follow Nettles and Applewhite, and the majority of those subsequently left the group.

A further issue relates to the media coverage of Heaven’s Gate. The inevitable portrayal of such groups as “bizarre” and “wacky” “cults” gained further momentum through the media’s use of so-called “cult experts.” These commentators tend to lack formal qualifications in relevant academic fields such as religion, psychology, sociology, or even counseling, and in reality are vociferous anti-cult spokespersons. The Heaven’s Gate group was largely unknown, either in the academic community or among the public, but this did not appear to prevent these spokespersons from expressing opinions about the group. This was in contrast to academics who later gained expertise on Heaven’s Gate’s history and doctrines, but needed adequate time to study and reflect on the events.

Allied to the theme of public and media perceptions of Heaven’s Gate is the profiling of group members. Those who join NRMs are often assumed to be young and impressionable, but this was certainly untrue of Heaven’s Gate. Although the youngest member was 26, the oldest was 72, and the average age was 47. Most of the group were well-educated, indeed professional people, and did not conform to the popular or anti-cult stereotypes.

Three further issues have been identified for academic discussion: the role of the internet, the theme of violence, and millennialism. When the news of the Heaven’s Gate deaths first hit the headlines, the internet was in its infancy, and the public were largely ignorant about its nature and potential. Because much of its material could be viewed worldwide, many assumed that it was a powerful recruiting tool. Although Applewhite’s group was one of the first NRMs to use the World Wide Web, and although there is evidence that at least one seeker found the group through its web site, there is no evidence that its web presence was instrumental in attracting substantial numbers of followers, most of whom were attracted through the leaders’ more traditional public lectures. In 1997, the internet was largely confined to providing information, and arguably, since most web surfers would view information outside the group’s environment, they would be in a better position to reflect and evaluate its ideas than they would have been in more traditional settings.

Perhaps surprisingly, it is not simply the anti-cult movement that identifies Heaven’s Gate as an example of millennial violence. James R. Lewis (2011:93) writes about “The Big Five,” which encompass the Peoples Temple, Waco’s Branch Davidians, the Solar Temple, Aum Shinkrikyo, and Heaven’s Gate. Such characterization is debatable. The Heaven’s Gate group was certainly not “big,” and it was not violent, unless one simply means that it ended with multiple unnatural deaths. Members did not harm others and, although they owned a few guns, possessing such weapons is commonplace in the U.S., and they were not used.

Heaven’s Gate is sometimes characterized as a “millennial” group. This term needs to be used with some caution. The group was millennial in the sense of preaching an imminent end to affairs on earth (it would soon be “spaded over”), and the fact that its members’ demise occurred exactly two millennia after Jesus’ presumed birth date is no doubt significant. However, despite Applewhite’s preoccupation with the Book of Revelation, the group never believed in any thousand-year period during which Satan would be bound (Revelation 20:2). Applewhite taught from the Bible but, as Zeller (2010) has pointed out, uses “an extraterrestrial hermeneutic.”

REFERENCES

Applewhite, Marshall Herff. 1993. “‘UFO Cult’ Resurfaces with Final Offer.” Accessed from http://www.heavensgate.com/book/1-4.htm on 28 December 2012.

Applewhite, Marshall Herff. 1988. “’88 Update—The UFO Two and their Crew.” Pp.17-35 in Heaven’s Gate: Postmodernity and Popular Culture in a Suicide Group, edited by George D. Chryssides. Farnham: Ashgate.

Balch, Robert W. 1995. “Waiting for the Ships: Disillusionment and the Revitalization of Faith in Bo and Peep’s UFO Cult.” Pp. 137-66 in The Gods Have Landed: New Religions from Other Worlds, edited by James R. Lewis. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Chryssides, George D., ed. 2011. Heaven’s Gate: Postmodernity and Popular Culture in a Suicide Group. Farnham: Ashgate.

Chryssides, George D. 1999. Exploring New Religions. London and New York: Cassell.

DiAngelo, Rio. 2007. Beyond Human Mind: The Soul Evolution of Heaven’s Gate. Beverly Hills CA: Rio DiAngelo.

Lewis, James R., ed. 2011. Violence and New Religious Movements. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Lewis, James. 1995. The Gods Have Landed: New Religions from Other Worlds. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Zeller, Benjamin E. 2010. “ Extraterrestrial Biblical Hermeneutics and the Making of Heaven’s Gate.” Nova Religio 14:34-60.

SUPPLEMENTARY RESOURCES

Balch, Robert W. 2002. “Making Sense of the Heaven’s Gate Suicides.” Pp. 209-28 in Cults, Religion and Violence, edited by David G. Bromley and J. Gordon Melton. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Balch, Robert W. 1998. “The Evolution of a New Age Cult: From Total Overcomes Anonymous to Death at Heaven’s Gate: A Sociological Analysis.” Pp. 1-25 in Sects, Cults, and Spiritual Communities, edited by William W. Zellner and Marc Petrowsky. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Balch, Robert W. 1985. “When the Light Goes Out, Darkness Comes: A Study of Defection from a Totalistic Cult.” Pp 11-63 in Religious Movements: Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers, edited by Rodney Stark. New York: Paragon House Publishers.

Balch, Robert W. 1980. “Looking Behind the Scenes in a Religious Cult: Implications for the Study of Conversion.” Sociological Analysis 41:137-43.

Balch, W. Robert and David Taylor. 2003. “Heaven’s Gate: Implications for the Study of Religious Commitment.” Pp. 211-37 in Encyclopedic Sourcebook of UFO Religions, edited by James R. Lewis. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.

Balch, W. Robert and David Taylor. 1977. “Seekers and Saucers: The Role of the Cultic Milieu in Joining a UFO Cult.” American Behavioral Scientist 20:839-60.

Brasher, E. Brenda. 2001. “The Civic Challenge of Virtual Theology: Heaven’s Gate and Millennial Fever in Cyberspace.” Pp. 196-209 in Religion and Social Policy, edited by Paul D. Nesbitt. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

Chryssides, George D. 2013 (forthcoming). “Suicide, Suicidology and Heaven’s Gate.” In Sacred Suicide, edited by James R. Lewis. Farnham: Ashgate.

Chryssides, George D. 2005. “Heaven’s Gate: End-Time Prophets in a Post-Modern Era.” Journal of Alternative Spiritualities and New Age Studies 1:98-109.

Davis, Winston. 2000. “Heaven’s Gate: A Study of Religious Obedience.” Nova Religio 3:241-67.

Goerman, L. Patricia. 2011. “Heaven’s Gate: The Dawning of a New Religious Movement.” Pp. 57-76 in Heaven’s Gate: Postmodernity and Popular Culture in a Suicide Group, edited by George Chryssides. Farnham: Ashgate.

Goerman, L. Patricia. 1998. “Heaven’s Gate: A Sociological Perspective.” M.A. thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.

Lalich, Janja. 2004. “Using the Bounded Choice Model as an Analytical Tool: A Case Study of Heaven’s Gate.” Accessed from http://www.culticstudiesreview.org/csr_member/mem_articles/lalich_janja_csr0303d.htm on April 15, 2005.

Lewis, James R. 2003. “Legitimizing Suicide: Heaven’s Gate and New Age Ideology.” Pp. 103-28 in UFO Religions, edited by Christopher Partridge. London: Routledge.

Lewis, James . 2000. “Heaven’s Gate.” Pp. 146-49 in UFO’s and Popular Culture, edited by James R. Lewis. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Marty, E. Martin. 1997. “Playing with Fire: Looking at Heaven’s Gate.” Christian Century 114: 379-80.

Miller, D. Patrick, Jr. 1997. “Life, Death, and the Hale-Bopp Comet.” Theology Today 54:147-49.

Muesse, Mark W. 1997. “Religious Studies and ‘Heaven’s Gate’: Making the Strange Familiar and the Familiar Strange.” Chronicle of Higher Education, April 25.

Nelson, Dear. 1997. “To Heaven on a UFO? Heaven’s Gate Forces Us to Ask if It’s ‘Stupid’ to Die for Our Beliefs.” Christianity Today 41:14-15.

Peters, Ted. 2004. ”UFOs, Heaven’s Gate, and the Theology of Suicide.” Pp 239-50 in Encyclopedic Sourcebook of UFO Religions, edited by James R. Lewis. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

Peters, Ted. 1998. “Heaven’s Gate and the Theology of Suicide.” Dialog 37:57-66.

Robinson, Gale Wendy. 1997. “Heaven’s Gate: The End?” Journal of Computer and Mediated Communication. Accessed from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue3/robinson.html on 5 April 2005.

Rodman, Rosamond. 1999. “Heaven’s Gate: Religious Otherworldliness American Style.” Pp 157-73 in Bible and the American Myth: A Symposium in the Bible and Constructions of Meaning, edited by Vincent L. Wimbush. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.

Urban, Hugh. 2000. “The Devil at Heaven’s Gate: Rethinking the Study of Religion in the Age of Cyber-Space.” Nova Religio 3:268-302.

Wessinger, Catherine. 2000. How the Millennium Comes Violently: From Jonestown to Heaven’s Gate. New York: Seven Bridges Press.

Zeller, Benjamin E. 2006. “Scaling Heaven’s Gate: Individualism and Salvation in a New Religious Movement.” Nova Religio 10:75-102.

Post Date:
30 December 2012

AZUSA STREET TIMELINE

1870 (May 2) William Joseph Seymour was born in Centerville, LA.

1905 Seymour became a student of Charles Parham in Parham’s new Bible school in Houston, TX.

1906 (April) Seymour accepted, with Parham’s blessing, an invitation to speak in a small Holiness Church in Los Angeles, CA.

1906 (September) Seymour, with the help of two members of the congregation, began the newspaper Apostolic Faith.

1908 (May 3) Seymour married Jennie Evans Moore, an early convert.

1908 Many white members of the congregation left the mission, some to found similar revivals and congregations in other cities.

1909-1913 The revival gradually declined. Seymour remained as pastor of the Apostolic Faith Mission.

1922 (September 28) Seymour died of a heart attack.

1922-1931 Jennie Moore Seymour continued the mission as pastor until the building in which the revival took place was lost in foreclosure.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

The Azusa Street revival was a landmark moment in the history of the Pentecostal movement, and today virtually all Pentecostal groups trace their origins to Azusa Street. It was not, however, the only, or even the first, Pentecostal source. While much of what happened at Azusa Street was indeed distinctive it, was not entirely unprecedented. It was, in a way, the logical outcome of several generations of historical and theological development (Blumhofer 1993:3-6).

The revival was seen by the faithful in an already well-understood religious context. The end of the world was coming soon and God, through an “outpouring of the Holy Spirit,” was empowering those who would accept for one last burst of evangelism and preparation before it was too late. Also, those who were “baptized in the spirit” could hope to join the saints who would be taken in “the rapture.” This understanding had grown, over several generations, from the Wesleyan concept of “complete sanctification” (Blumhofer 1993:11-42).

The history of popular religion in the United States, and to a lesser extent in Canada and the United Kingdom, had been one of successive waves of revivalist renewal. Scholars recognize three distinct periods of revival-based “Great Awakening” before the turn of the twentieth century. Each had involved progressively more “spirit oriented” or supernatural emphasis. The Methodists spawned the Holiness movement built on concepts of piety and sanctification through a “second (or third) act of grace” or “baptism of the spirit,” which followed conversion (and in some formulations, after sanctification) and made believers able to resist temptations to sin (Knoll 1992:373-86).

This general idea, in various forms, led over time to a highly developed theology of the actions of the Holy Spirit in the lives of individuals, and to a number of new denominations. This movement, beginning in the late nineteenth century, was sometimes called “The Latter Rain,” a reference to Joel 2:23-29, which describes an early rain that starts the plants and a latter rain that prepares the plants for harvest. Especially in Holiness churches, there was both a well-developed hope for yet another “outpouring,” and predictions that it would be worldwide and would lead to extensive missionary activity before the beginning of the End Times. Many, perhaps most, believers who observed reports of widespread revival activity became convinced that that “outpouring,” or Latter Rain, was already underway (Blumhofer 1993:43-62).

In the United States, there was the Zion City movement near Chicago, where a whole new town had been constructed along theocratic lines by followers of an Australian born evangelist, John Alexander Dowie. In New England there was the Shiloh community of Frank Weston Sandford, a student of Christian and Missionary Alliance founder A. B. Simpson. There were also several other highly successful and widely publicized revivals around the country, and especially in the Southeast. But by far the most influential event in this context was the Welsh revival of 1904-1905. This event was widely noticed, even in the U.S., and involved very large numbers. Many of these venues incorporated “spirit blessings,” such as healing and prophecy, and in a number of cases, glossolalia (Blumhofer 1993:43-62; Goff 1988:17-106).

About 1900, Charles Fox Parham, an independent Holiness evangelist based at the time in Topeka, Kansas, studied the work of
several spirit-oriented revival organizations that had led to glossolalia. Parham connected this phenomenon with the description in Acts 2:4 of the day of Pentecost, and concluded that “speaking in tongues” was actually the initial proof of the “spirit baptism.” He also thought that other phenomena, such as interpretation, healing and prophesy, were all gifts of an ecstatic “outpouring” of the spirit. He coined the term “apostolic faith” for his understandings (Blumhofer 1993:43-62).

Parham, a Kansas frontier farm boy, was once a Methodist lay preacher who was seriously uncomfortable with authority, church or otherwise. He caught the Holiness spirit and began his own mission, including a healing home and later a Bible school where some students spoke in tongues after fasting and lengthy prayer sessions. After several successful revivals, he moved the school to Texas, following the spread of his reputation. There he met and encouraged a student named William Seymour, who could only participate in classes by sitting in the hallway outside the classroom or behind a curtain because of his race. (Goff 1988:17-106)

William J. Seymour was an unlikely founder of a world faith. He was born in Centerville, Louisiana, the first son of former slaves. His early years were spent in the abject poverty of Reconstruction-era freed black farm workers on a sugar plantation. Hoping for better times, he left in early adulthood and followed a somewhat nomadic existence, working mainly as a waiter in city hotels in Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, possibly Missouri, and Tennessee. In Cincinnati, he had a near-fatal case of smallpox, losing one eye and ever after wearing a beard to hide the scars. In Indianapolis, Seymour had joined the Methodist Church, but he soon moved to the Church of God Reformation Movement based in Anderson, Indiana. This conservative Holiness group was then called the Evening Light Saints. With this group he was sanctified and called to preach. He later moved to Houston, Texas, looking for relatives; it was there that he met Parham through a friend and part-time pastor of a small, black Holiness congregation, Lucy Farrow. (Pete 2002-2012; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; “Bishop William J. Seymour” n.d.)

Seymour knew Farrow because he was a member of her church. But she was also employed by the Parham family and traveled with them, and on occasion had “spoken in tongues.” While Farrow was on one such trip, Seymour filled in for her. At one of the meetings where Seymour preached was a visitor from California, Neely Terry, on a trip to see relatives nearby. At home in Los Angeles, Terry was part of a small mission on Santa Fe Street led by Julia Hutchins. This congregation consisted largely of followers of Hutchins who had all been expelled from the Second Baptist Church because of Hutchins’ Holiness teachings. She felt the need to have a male assistant in order to continue her work effectively. Neely recommended Seymour, and Hutchins invited him. (“The Road to Azusa” n.d.; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.)

It was Parham’s message of apostolic faith that Seymour preached when he arrived in Los Angeles. But Seymour’s spark of apostolic faith landed in the tinder of hope for a visit (or “outpouring”) of the Holy Spirit, which had become part of the Holiness culture and expanded with the holiness movement. The result was the ecstatic reenactment of the day of Pentecost in a backwater industrial neighborhood of Los Angeles. The flame of Pentecostalism that he ignited has become the second largest group of Christians in the world, after Roman Catholics. At the time, however, the message was rejected by Hutchins and the Southern California Holiness Association. Nonetheless, Seymour began holding prayer meetings with Terry, her cousins and several members who did not reject his approach, including Edward Lee in whose home nearby Seymour was lodging. Lucy Farrow, sent by Parham, was soon there to help (Cauchi 2004; Blumhofer 2006:20-22; “Bishop William J Seymour” 2004-2011).

The Azusa Street Revival actually began, in fact, in the home of Terry’s cousins, Richard and Ruth Asberry on Bonnie Brae Street. A number of those attending a “prayer meeting” led by Seymour were moved by a religious experience to “speak in tongues,” that is, to verbalize in something other than their native (or previously learned) language in April of 1906. Word of this phenomenon spread very rapidly and crowds of those drawn by these reports soon outgrew the available space. A search of the area turned up an abandoned church building at 312 Azusa Street where makeshift facilities were developed from available materials, such as boards placed across backless chairs. ( Cavaness, Barbara n.d.; “Bishop William J Seymour” 2004-2011). almost every day. Several aspects of these meetings were unusual at that time. First, worshipers included both blacks and whites at the peak of the “Jim Crow” segregationist era. Second, the leadership of women was recognized and encouraged well before suffrage, and developed beyond the traditional supporting roles. The initial beliefs that the Holy Spirit eliminated race, class and gender differences, that racial lines were “washed away by the blood,” in the words of one of Seymour’s white assistants, and that women were qualified for leadership roles were soon strongly criticized, however, and did not survive past 1909. Third, the meetings were largely unstructured and spontaneous, with testimony, preaching, and music proceeding without any established order, often without evident leadership. Fourth, the meetings involved and encouraged a very highly charged emotional atmosphere. And finally, in a most distinctive aspect, many attendees exhibited unorthodox behavior such as falling down and seemingly passing out (called by the faithful “being slain in the spirit”), “speaking in tongues,” interpreting tongues, prophesying, and miraculous healing. All these behaviors were strongly encouraged and drew the attention of the secular media as well as visitors from across the country and around the world. Worshipers included those of almost every race and class, a highly unusual mixing at the time. A Los Angeles newspaper described it as a “weird Babel of tongues,” and even Charles Parham, when he visited, was outspoken in his consternation with what he saw. (Goff 1988:17-106; Blumhofer 1993:56-62; “Bishop William J Seymour” 2004-2011; Cauchi 2004; Blumhofer 2006:20-22; Knoll 2002:151-52).

Those who had the unorthodox experiences listed above were not simply moved by a powerful sermon. Many had been praying intensely for hours or days for such a moment. Indeed, some of those hoping for an “outpouring of the Spirit” were part of the culture of their Holiness denominations and had been praying for this outpouring for much longer. The signs and wonders, the tongues, prophecy and miracles were seen as evidence that they had “broken through.” Attention of other evangelicals was drawn through the revival’s newspaper Apostolic Faith, founded in late 1906. The publication reached a circulation that may have been as high as 50,000. It was distributed nationwide, and a few copies went abroad. (“History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d; Dove 2009).

The most intense portion of the revival lasted for about three years, until most of the white, and female, leaders departed in 1909, many to start their own ministries or to join in others. One white woman who had edited the newspaper, and may have wanted to marry Seymour, left when Seymour married Jennie Evans Moore. She took the mailing list with her. The Azusa Street Apostolic Faith Holiness Mission, as the church itself was called, lasted as a small, mostly black Holiness congregation past Seymour’s death in 1922 until the building was lost in foreclosure in 1931 (“History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; “The Apostolic Faith” 2004-2012; Cauchi 2004).

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

The Azusa Street Revival lasted only a few years and involved no formal or written theology. It grew out of a general Holiness background and much of its doctrinal structure may be deduced by looking at common Holiness beliefs of the time, with one major addition, glossolalia (“speaking in tongues”) as evidence of “Spirit Baptism” (Knoll 1992:386-7).

Specific beliefs, beyond those held by Christians generally, would include:

* That the Holy Spirit continued to be active in the world and to bring a “baptism of the spirit” in individual lives, providing the power for service, evangelism and resistance of temptation (Knoll 1992:386-7).

* That glossolalia was the biblical, initial evidence of this baptism (Knoll 1992:386-7).

* Acceptance of a dispensationalist-premillennialist world view, belief that they lived in the last period, or dispensation, of history and that Jesus millennial return was imminent. This doctrine included the belief that the contemporary period of revival was a last chance to evangelize the world before it was too late. Further, that those who had been baptized in the spirit would be among the living saints snatched up to heaven (sometimes called “the rapture”) before the seven years of tribulation began. This belief system placed substantial emphasis on concern with end times (eschatology), and usually considered the Book of Revelations as prophesying events of the soon to come end times (Blumhofer 1993: 55-62).

* Acceptance of an early form of Biblical literalism that presaged the Fundamentalist Movement (Blumhofer 1993: 55-62).

* Salvation (initial conversion) as being by faith (Cauchi 2004).

* That God, through the Holy Spirit, continued to provide for healing of sickness. (Knoll 1992:386-7)

* Mainline churches (“denominationalists”) had institutionalized religion to the point of losing the spark of revival and recognition of the contemporary work of the Holy Spirit (Knoll 1992:381).

* An enthusiastic embrace of a restorationist dream for Christianity, seeking to return to the life of apostolic faith and first century practices (Blumhofer 1993: 1, 4).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Revival worship services at The Azusa Street Mission were scheduled for 10:00 a.m., noon and 7:00 p.m., but they frequently ran together, making them continuous. Occasionally they ran through the night. Services were held seven days a week during much of the duration of the revival (Cauchi 2004).

There was no order of service, usually no instruments to accompany music, and often no obvious individual leadership or sermon. Frequently Seymour would simply come in, open a Bible on the cloth covered plank altar, and then sit down, covering his head with a shoe box while he prayed. Testimony, periods of silence, prayer and music would proceed spontaneously. Attendees described the services as being led by the Holy Spirit. There was a receptacle at the rear of the church for those who wished to contribute, but there was no offering taken (Cauchi 2004).

The atmosphere was very highly charged, emotionally intense. People were packed tightly, often swaying in ecstatic prayer, some dancing in joy. Many people would shout throughout the meeting and some would moan while others would fall on the floor in a trance, “slain in the spirit.” The singing was sporadic, usually a cappella, repetitive (there were no hymnals) and not infrequently in tongues. There were repeated altar calls for salvation, sanctification, healing and baptism of the Holy Spirit. Prayers of thanksgiving were usually loud and frequently in tongues. On occasion, those feeling a particular urgency would move, sometimes with one or two of the leaders, to an upstairs room where they could pray with more focus and intensity, often for healing. The meetings lasted as long as there was anyone in the room with anything to say or testimonial letters to read (Blumhofer 1993:59; Cauchi 2004; “Weird Babel of Tongues” 1906:1).

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

The leadership of the Azusa Street Revival was largely informal and consisted of predominantly female volunteers who gathered around William Seymour. Only a few have been personally identified. Prominent figures who have been identified during the revival period would include Jennie Evans Moore, Lucy Farrow, Julia Hutchens, Frank Bartleman, Florence Louise Crawford, and Clara Lum. There was also a governing board of twelve, and it is worth noting that half or more of the members of this group also were women (“Women Leaders” n.d.; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; Cauchi 2004).

After Seymour himself, the first person with known leadership status was Jennie Evans Moore, a convert made in the very early prayer meeting days on Bonnie Brae Street. It has been often reported that when she was “baptized in the spirit” she became able to play the piano, which she had been unable to do previously. She continued to exercise this gift her whole life. She later became Seymour’s wife and evidently played a supporting role, although she did sometimes preach when Seymour was not present. Moore remained as pastor of the Azusa Street Apostolic Faith Holiness Mission after Seymour died in 1922. An early convert, Edward Lee, with whom Seymour lodged, and Richard and Ruth Asberry, in whose home the revival actually began, also remained involved (“History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; Cauchi 2004).

Very soon after the prayer meetings began to take hold, Seymour asked Parham for help, specifically for his friend Lucy Farrow. Parham responded affirmatively and sent Farrow to Los Angeles. All that is known about Lucy Farrow’s background is that she was born into slavery in Virginia and that she was a niece of the black abolitionist Frederick Douglass. Prior to her arrival in Houston about 1890, she had lived in Mississippi. She had given birth to seven children, only two of whom lived, and was a widow by the time she met Seymour. She was about 55 years old and the pastor of a small, black Holiness church in the Houston area at the time. She also worked as a governess and cook for Charles Parham’s family. Seymour came to Houston, looking for relatives, in1903 and joined her church. He served, at her invitation, as interim pastor of her church while she traveled back to Galena, KS with the Parham family. It was on this trip that she had her “baptism of the spirit.” Farrow joined Seymour during the Bonnie Brae period, and was the person who laid hands on Seymour at the time of his “baptism of the spirit”. She continued to participate in the revival at Azusa Street for about four months before traveling with Julia Hutchins to Liberia as a Missionary. Farrow eventually returned to Azusa to live in a “faith cottage” behind the main building, and to pray and minister to those seeking deeper faith. She later returned to Houston to live with a son and died there in 1911 (Cauchi 2004; “The Life and Ministry of Lucy Farrow” n.d.; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.)

Julia Hutchens was a member of the Second Baptist Church of Los Angeles when she learned the Holiness message at a revival meeting. She began to teach Holiness beliefs to others in her congregation, and eventually she and eight families were expelled from their church as a result. They began to meet as a Holiness mission on Santa Fe Street, possibly associated with the Church of the Nazarene. Neely Terry was a member of that group. Not being a minister herself, Hutchins felt the need for someone to help her. Terry recommended Seymour whom she had met at Farrow’s church in Houston while visiting relatives there. While she was initially reluctant to embrace the concept of tongues and “spirit baptism,” she soon had the experience at the Bonnie Brae Street meetings. Hutchens then joined in the Revival, along with her congregation. She later traveled to Liberia with Lucy Farrow (Cavaness n.d.; Cauchi 2004; “The Road to Azusa” n.d.).

Frank Bartleman, an itinerant evangelist who was originally from Pennsylvania, by the time of the Azusa Street Revival had developed a pattern of being ready to go anywhere the Lord called, but not for very long. He had been licensed to preach in a Baptist church in his home state, but in the meantime had drifted in a distinctly Holiness direction. He had most recently been involved in street missions in Los Angeles, but he had also recently developed a reputation among Holiness publications as a reliable and inspired journalist. He had also started publishing and distributing tracts on Holiness subjects. Bartleman was drawn to Azusa Street as soon as he heard about it and soon became involved in publicizing it. Within a few weeks of his involvement, the San Francisco earthquake struck. Bartleman quickly prepared a tract linking the two by suggesting that both were God’s action in the world and also that the earthquake had been predicted in prophecy at Azusa. The pamphlets were widely circulated and were probably responsible for an early increase in attendance and media attention for the revival. Unlike the pattern he had established earlier, Bartleman remained at Azusa for some time before returning to itinerancy. Using diaries he had kept at Azusa, Bartleman wrote a number of articles and books including How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles (1925). He died in 1936 (Goff 1988:114; Cauchi 2004).

Florence Louise Crawford, the mother of two and the wife of a building contractor, had been active in social work and women’s organizations in spite of suffering from a childhood injury and spinal meningitis. She assumed a leadership role in Azusa, working on the newspaper and organizing branches in Seattle and Portland, Oregon. She later left her husband, returned to the Oregon mission, developed it into the Apostolic Faith denomination, and became its general overseer for the rest of her life. She was joined in this work by Clara Lum (Cauchi 2004).

Clara Lum, also a white woman, was a stenographer and may have served as Seymour’s secretary. She was instrumental in founding the mission’s newspaper, Apostolic Faith, and was evidently in love with Seymour. A publication of Florence Crawford’s Apostolic Faith denomination reports that Charles Harrison Mason, founder of the Church of God in Christ, advised Seymour not to marry her, evidently because of the scandal that an interracial marriage would cause. No biographical information is available on her, but when Seymour married Jennie Evans Moore, she left Azusa Street to join Florence Crawford in Oregon, taking with her the mailing list for the Apostolic Faith newspaper, which they continued. However, they used the Portland mission’s address for donations and did not mention Azusa Street, thereby cutting off much of Seymour’s access to publicity and financial support (Cauchi 2004; “Failed Inter-racial Love Interests” n.d.; “The Apostolic Faith” 2004-2011).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

The early challenge to the Azusa Street Revival was simply doctrinal, but as the revival began to develop the criticism grew apace. If the happenings on Azusa Street scandalized its critics, their comments tended toward the intemperate at very least. When William Seymour reached Los Angeles in 1906 he went almost immediately to the small Holiness mission on Santa Fe Street to which he had been invited. The church was affiliated with the Southern California Holiness Association. That first Sunday Seymour preached Parham’s apostolic faith message, including tongues as evidence of “spirit baptism”. When he returned the next week, he found the door padlocked against him. It turns out that even though Neely Terry had heard Seymour preach Parham’s message in Texas, and had convinced Julia Hutchins to invite him, when Hutchins and her church elders actually heard the message, they was uncomfortable and expressed their reservations to the Holiness Association. That group also found the “new thing” Seymour preached to be contrary to Holiness doctrine that sanctification and “baptism with the spirit” were the same thing. They were also concerned because Seymour himself had not yet had the experience (“Bishop William J. Seymour” 2004-2011; Pete 2001-2012).

Seymour was staying with a member of the congregation, Edward Lee. Lee, Terry, Terry’s cousin, Richard Asberry, and his wife, Ruth, along with several others did not support Seymour’s banning. This small group began to gather for “prayer meetings,” soon moving to the Asberry’s Bonnie Brae address where the revival began to take hold. Lee was among the first to speak in tongues. He was followed by Jennie Evans Moore, a neighbor (later Seymour’s wife) and eventually by Julia Hutchins. A few days later, so did Seymour, which ended that initial controversy (“Bishop William J. Seymour” 2004-2011; Cavaness, Barbara. n.d.)

However, soon after the move to Azusa Street, criticism heated up again. The Los Angeles Times headed its story “Weird Babel of Tongues” and continued, “Breathing strange utterances and mouthing a creed which it would seem no sane mortal could understand, the newest religious sect has started in Los Angeles.” Another newspaper reported “…disgraceful intermingling of the races…they cry and make howling noises all day and into the night. They run, jump, shake all over, shout at the top of their voice, spin around in circles, fall out on the sawdust blanketed floor jerking, kicking and rolling all over it.….These people appear to be mad, mentally deranged or under a spell. They claim to be filled with the spirit. They have a one eyed, illiterate, Negro as their preacher who stays on his knees much of the time with his head hidden…. They repeatedly sing the same song, ‘The Comforter Has Come’.” Indeed, those attending the revival were popularly referred to as “Holy Rollers” and “Tangled Tonguers” (“Weird Babel of Tongues.” The Los Angeles Daily Times 1906; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; Wilson 2006).

Charles Parham himself, when he visited some weeks later was even less charitable. “Men and women, whites and blacks, knelt together or fell across one another; a white woman, perhaps of wealth and culture, could be seen thrown back in the arms of a big ‘buck nigger,’ and held tightly thus as she shivered and shook in freak imitation of Pentacost. Horrible, awful shame.” Parham was quickly “uninvited” to the Azusa Street services and subsequently attempted, with little success, to start a competing revival nearby. Mainstream churches and religious leaders, often through denominational publications, were also frequently critical, some on the basis of specifically conflicting theology, others of the revival’s decorum (Goff 1988:130, 132, 133; “History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; “Azusa Street Critics” 2004-2011).

While the revival thrived for three years amid a variety of criticisms, it ultimately dissolved into a number of early divisions, a pattern that continued for a number of years. Particularly frustrating for some was the fact that racial separation returned very quickly, with many of the black converts joining Charles Mason’s branch of The Church of God in Christ which remains today one of the largest predominantly black denominations. White converts, through a series of small denominations, eventually founded the Assemblies of God, the largest single Pentecostal denomination. There were early divisions even within this group, however, and several other large Pentecostal denominations resulted. Although the revival itself did not survive, virtually all contemporary Pentecostals and Charismatics in other denominations consider Azusa Street to be their source. Today there are at least five hundred million Pentecostals and Charismatics in the world, which may comprise as much as one quarter of all Christians, and collectively they constitute the fastest-growing segment of Christianity (“History of the Azusa Street Revival” n.d.; Holstein 2006; Blumhofer 2006).

REFERENCES

“Azusa Street Critics.” n.d. 312 Azusa Street. Accessed at http://www.azusastreet.org/AzusaStreetCritics.html on 26 April 2012.

Bartleman, Frank. 1925. How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Frank Bartleman.

“Bishop William J. Seymour.” n.d. 312 Azusa Street. Accessed at http://www.azusastreet.org on 20 April 2012.

Blumhofer, Edith. 2006. “ Azusa Street Revival.” Azusa Street Mission. Accessed at http://www.religion-online.org showarticle.asp? title 3321 on 8 April 2012.

Blumehofer, Edith. 1993 Restoring the Faith Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Cauchi, Tony. 2004. “William Seymour and the History of the Azusa Street Outpouring.” Revival Library. Accessed at http://www.revival – library.org/pensketches/am…/Seymourazusa.html.

Cavaness, Barbara. n.d. “Spiritual Chain Reactions: Women Used of God.” The Network. Accessed at www.womeninministry.ag.org/history/spiritual_chain_reactions.cfm on 26 April 2012.

Dove, Stephen. 2009. “Hymnody and Liturgy in the Azusa Street Revival 1906 – 1908.” Pneuma 31 (2). Accessed at http://dx.doi.org/10 on 25 April 2012.

“Failed Inter-racial Love Interests Could Have Led to Demise of Azusa Street Revival.” n.d. Metropolitan Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction C.O.G.I.C. Accessed at http://www.azusa.mejcogic.org/apostolicfaithpub.html on 27 April 2012.

Goff, James R., Jr. 1988. Fields White Unto Harvest. Fayettville: University of Arkansas Press.

“History of the Azusa Street Revival.” n.d. Friendly Church of God in Christ. Accessed at http://www.friendlycogic.com/azusa/azusa on 6 April 2012.

Holstein, Joanne. 2006. “ Azusa (A susa) Street Revival.” Becker Bible Studies. Accessed at http://www.guidedbiblestudies.com/library/asusa_street_revival. htm on 25 April 2012.

Knoll, Mark A. 1992. A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Knoll, Mark A..2002. The Old Religion in a New World. Grand Rapids, MI/ Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Pete, Reve’ M. 2001-2012. “African-Americans of the Holiness Movement.” In The Impact of Holiness Preaching as Taught by John Wesley and the Outpouring of the Holy Ghost on Racism, Chapter 8. Accessed at http://www.revempete.us/research/holiness/africanamericans. Html on 26 April 2012.

“The Apostolic Faith.” 2004 – 2012. 312 Azusa Street. Accessed at :www.azusastreet.org/TheApostolicFaith.htm on 27 April 2012.

“The Life and Ministry of Lucy Farrow.” n.d. Zion Christian Ministry. Accessed at http://www.zionchristianministry.com/azusa/the-life-and-ministry-of-lucy-farrow/ on 26 April 2012.

“The Road to Azusa.” n.d. Metropolitan Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction C.O.G.I.C. Accessed at http://www.azusa.mejcogic/roadazusa.html on 22 April 2012.

“Weird Babel of Tongues.” 1906. The Los Angeles Daily Times. April 18, 1906. Accessed at http://312azusastreet.org/beginnings/latimes.htm.

Wilson, Billy. 2006. “The Miracle on Azusa Street.” The 700 Club. Accessed at http://www.cbn.com/700 club/bios/billywilson 030706.aspx on 13 June 2012.

“Women leaders.” n.d. Scattered Christians. Accessed at http://www.scatteredchristians.org/Pentecostal Women.html on 27April 2012.

Post Date:
17 June 2012