Nastiness Diagnosis. Anthropology. Religion. Gender. Justice. A Personal Notepad For the General Public.
The God who answers by Fire is God.
I Kings 18:24
“One cannot fully understand cultural practices unless ‘cultura’, in the restrcited, normative sense of ordinary usage, is brought back into ‘culture’ in the anthropological sense, and the elaborated taste for the most refined objects is reconnceted with the elementary taste for the falvours of food.” — Bourdieu
“acquisition of legitimate culture by insensible familiarization with the family circle tends to favour an enchanted experience of culture which implies forgetting the acquisition. The ‘eye’ is a production of history reproduced by education. ”
The early studies of personal changes of glossolalics who attended Life in the Spirit Seminars (1972) at a Roman Catholic Church in Albuquerque, New Mexico and an Episcopal Church in
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1977, 16 (4): 383-393.
Religious Glossolalia: A Longitudinal Study of Personality Changes
4. From the beginning of the training through the follow-up, the No Tongues
group remained higher in Hostility and Depression than the other two
groups. Similarly, they were higher than the other groups in combination
scores of State Anxiety, Depresssion, Hostility, Trait Anxiety, and Guilt
considered together. It should be noted that Guilt (considered by itself) was
unrelated to groups or testing time.
changes in Trait
Anxiety, while in the predicted direction, occurred in both glossolalics and non-
glossolalics alike. Thus, there is little evidence for the pervasive resolution of
neurosis or re-establishment of the ego resulting from becoming glossolalic which
Kelsey (1968) and Lapsley and Simpson (1964) proposed. (p391)
(But this is because the researchers ignore that the very expected function and value
of this seminar is to reduce anxiety and have better life!!!!!)
Thus, it could be inferred that the Life in the
Spirit Seminar itself, rather than the experience of becoming glossolalic, provoked
changes toward personality integration.
(OK, here you go)
Some interesting characteristics of those who did not become glossolalic (i.e., the
No Tongues Group) were noted. They were initially higher in State Anxiety. They
began and remained higher than the other two groups on Hostility and Depression, (p392)
In contrast to what Kildahl (1972) proposed, those who do not
become glossolalic may be more disturbed than those who do. Future research could
well address itself in a predictive manner to this hypothesis. Being more anxious,
hostile, and depressed may predispose a person to being unable to become
glossolalic. The experience of speaking in tongues is one in which a great deal of trust
and surrender is involved. It could be that some persons are too inhibited or
constricted to respond in this manner.