Talk:Revival meeting

US

The revival meeting is essentially a US phenomenon, related to the Great Awakening. I'm not sure what the banner about US bias is all about. Pustelnik (talk) 00:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

There might be differences of style in other countries... who knows? It's hard to say, because there are no sources/citations in this article, anyway. How do you alert that there are no sources? I'm still a Wikipedia noob. WinterRose

Cleanup tag

Hello. I tagged this page because it has a number of issues and needs attention. It does not cite any references or sources, it contains a list of miscellaneous information, and it needs to be globalised. I don't have the requisite knowledge to do any of this, since I came here to find out about these meetings - I don't know anything about them other than what's written here. 81.141.73.47 (talk) 08:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

It does NOT need to be globalized. Stop it!

A "revival meeting," specifically called that, is, historically, a decidedly American (primarily in the US, and Canada) Christian phenomenon... one, indeed, associated with the Great Awakening. Yes, indeed, other faith traditions, cultures and/or countries may have some kind of rough equivalent (and American/Canadian-style "revival meetings" may well have subsequently become a phenomena in Europe and certain other places), but they're not specifically called, in English, "revival meetings" in the same sense that that specific term has considerable meaning to persons in the US (and, to some degree, Canada); nor -- and this is important -- do they have the same character(istics).

Granted, the Internet has made the world a smaller, and more socially and economically globalized place. However, that does not mean that everything around here must be globalized; or that certain phenomena which may well be equivalent to what happens in other non-US countries or faiths must necessarily be internationalized to accommodate them, rather than their being their own narrow thing.

If other faith traditions in other countries have the equivalent of traditional US "revival meetings," then perhaps this article should mention the similarity, and then link the reader to those faiths' and/or countries' own articles about their own equivalent traditions.

The term "revival meeting," though, has its own place in the American lexicon. It should not be treated as the description of a "meeting," which just happens to oh-by-the-way be of the "revival" type, or for purposes of something called "revival." If that's all it was, then perhaps some of the criticisms and demands written of on this page would have some merit. But true "revival meetings," as Americans and Canadians understand them, are somewhat more than that; have considerably more meaning, and deserve their own place in history.

For Americans (and some Canadians), "revival meetings" -- as a term, originated in the US, and necessarily containing both those words, and in that order -- means one and only one thing: An assembly (as opposed to a more organized and permanent congregation) of Christian believers (or potentially believing curiosity seekers), usually sitting on folding chairs, usually in a tent out at the edge of town (or sometimes in a big gym or auditorium somewhere in town), where the likes of [[Elmer Gantry (film)|Elmer Gantry] or Jonas Nightengale get up on stage and whip the crowd into a decidedly Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christian frenzy, complete with traditional hymnody (or, in the case of more modern such events, contemporary praise music), unabashed and charismatic showmanship, random utterances of "Amen!" from the audience, waving of arms, palms-to-the-ceiling prayer, lots of calling one another "brother" and "sister," multiple passings of the offering plate, and maybe even a little unethical and disingenuous slight of hand to achieve the appearance of a miracle or two.

It's a decidedly hot, sweaty, earthy, passionate, impulsive event -- often including faith healing, and lots of falling out -- which has no analog in any other faith tradition, country or culture.

So, let's all stop finding fault with the article because it doesn't encompass all forms of whatever some might consider to be one culture (or faith) or another's rough equivalent. Again, not everything needs to be Internnationalized, or diluted so that everyone can feel all warm and fuzzy. A "revival meeting" -- as a complete and decidedly American (and Canadian) term, including both words, and in that order -- is its own thing in the universe, and deserves its own article without anyone questioning whether it's sufficiently inclusive.

That it needs references and citations is another matter. It does, indeed, need that. But let's not even CONSIDER removing it, or trying to water it down by making it inclusive of other faith traditions, countries or cultures.

I write all this, by the way, as a very progressive Christian who has never much liked revival meetings; but who nevertheless values and respects them as an important aspect of both Christian and North American history which no one should try to dilute into an article which includes anything other than what it is.

Sorry to be so blunt, but this whole business of either non-Americans trying to make articles about American phenomenon inclusive of that which is not American; or Americans denying history -- good or bad -- by doing things like softening or diluting the facts to make articles here less offensive, is driving me nuts! History is what it is... warts and all. Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn should not, for example, be taught using desecrated (in my opinion) copies of the book in which every occurance of the word "nigger" is replaced with the word "slave."[1] We all need to get a spine, for godsake!

This article definitely needs to better capture the true essence of an American "revival meeting." That's the first improvement it needs.

It then needs good references and citations. No argument, here.

And it also needs to have a section which explains that other faith traditions have roughly analogous things, and then there needs to be references and links to their separate articles.

Period. Simple as that.

But this article does NOT need to be "internationalised." (A word, by the way, which we all ignorant rednecks -- at least as so many in the "international" community would have others believe -- in the US just happen to spell with a "z")

I, therefore, humbly -- okay... maybe not so humbly... maybe a little angrily -- suggest that the...

...notice be immediately removed from the article. Indeed, the other notices are valid, but not that one. If other countries, cultures and/or faiths around the globe want to cover their approximate analog to a true North American "revival meeting," then someone from them can go write their own articles, to which this one, I'm sure, would be happy to refer, and to link.

Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) 01:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)