chistory_charmov – From Death Into Life

CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT

INTRODUCTION

The expression “charismatic movement” is used to refer to a movement among the historic Christian churches that began in the late 1950’s. In earliest stages of the movement it was referred to as “neo-Pentecostal”; but since the 1960s it has been most often been referred to as the “charismatic renewal” or as the “charismatic renewal movement.” Its participants are usually called “charismatics.” The term comes from the plural Greek word charisma which means “free, graciously given gifts.” The word charisma occurs Rom. 1:11; 5:15, 16; 6:23; 12:5, 8; I Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 12:4, 9, 28, 30, 31; II Cor. 1:11; I Tim. 4:14; II Tim. 1:6; I Pet. 4:10; and charismata in Rom. 11:29. The word is almost exclusively used by the Apostle Paul in the New Testament, excepting I Pet. 4:10. In the New Testament it is used sometimes in a broad general sense, but more often it is used to refer specifically to the gracious gifts given by the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12:4), and manifested by Christians (I Cor. 12:7) according to His will (I Cor. 12:11), in proportion to faith (Rom. 12:6), and for the benefit of the whole Christian fellowship (I Cor. 12:7), and for the work of the ministry. The purpose of these gifts is edification, not revelation. Two lists of the “gifts” are given (Rom. 12:6-8; I Cor. 12:8-10); in addition, I Cor. 7:7 refers to an additional gift of self-control making possible a celibate life, and I Pet. 4:10 describes generosity in hospitality as gifts (charisma). In I Tim. 4:14 and II Tim. 1:6 Paul uses the term with reference to the evangelistic gift. The term today is used to refer to the religious movement claiming a restoration in the churches of the more spectacular “gifts,” such as healing, prophecy, and “tongues speaking.” The term has been used to refer to “charismatic leadership” in contrast to institutionalized, formal leadership.

THE HISTORY OF THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT

The beginning of the modern charismatic movement may be dated to the year 1960 when national publicity was given to certain events connected with the ministry Denis Bennett, who at the time was the rector of St. Marks Episcopal Church in Van Nuys, California. He reported his experience in 1959 of the baptism of the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues. This particular event marked the beginning of the modern Charismatic Movement. More and more groups of traditional Protestant churches began to look for this special work of the Spirit. Since then it has grown into a movement within the mainline churches: first, such Protestant churches as Episcopal, Lutheran, and Presbyterian (in the early 1960s); second, the Roman Catholics (beginning 1967); and third, the Greek Orthodox (about 1971). In 1967, a band of Roman Catholics at Pittsburgh’s Duquesne University received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The next year, additional groups of Catholics at University of Notre Dame and several locations in Michigan were likewise affected. The charismatic movement has affected almost every historic church and has spread to many churches and countries beyond the United States. Its continual growth has resulted in many national, regional, and local conferences, production of a wide range of literature, and increasing attention to theological and doctrinal problems both within and outside the movement. The challenge to the churches that has resulted since 1960 is apparent in the many official denominational documents – national, regional, continental – on the charismatic movement and its results.

The new charismatic movement was at first called neo-Pentecostalism. But in order to avoid the theological problems raised by the speaking in tongues among the Pentecostals, these new charismatics began to refer to themselves as “charismatics.” They wanted to stay within the historic church bodies; thus the charismatics exist almost totally outside the official Pentecostal denominations. Several independent churches or ministries, including those of Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, Chuck Smith, Pat Robertson, and John Wimber, were also promoting an emphasis on the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.

The immediate background of the charismatic movement is “classical Pentecostalism,” dating from the early twentieth century, with its emphasis on speaking with tongues (glossolalia) as evidence of the baptism with (or in) the Holy Spirit. It is represented by denominations such as Church of God in Christ, Assemblies of God, United Pentecostal Church, Pentecostal Holiness Church, Foursquare Gospel Church, and the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee). These Pentecostal denominations were not just people who had the gift of tongues, but was about an experience that happened subsequent to or at the same time as conversion, called the Baptism of Holy Spirit, in which believers in Christ began to speak in tongues, when they were prayed for to receive the baptism. But among these Pentecostals there was different theological interpretations of the baptism of the Spirit. The original Pentecostals at the beginning of 20th century were from a holiness background who identified the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with John Wesley’s doctrine of the second work of grace, the first work of grace being salvation at conversion and the second work of grace was the eradication of the sinful nature. According to these early Pentecostals, they took speaking in tongues as the sign of the second work of grace that would remove the sinful nature from the believer. Most of the holiness denominations, like the Nazarenes, and the Free Methodist, rejected this speaking in tongues as the sign of the second work of grace. These holiness people who believed that speaking in tongues was sign of second work of grace were driven out of their denominations, and formed the early Pentecostal denominations. During the first decade of the 20th century there was a real move of the Spirit and it spread through the non-holiness denominations. Many have had an experience of speaking in tongues. But because their denominations held that speaking in tongues was among the gifts of the Spirit that ceased at the close of the formation of the New Testament, these who had this experience were also driven out of their denominations and near the end of first decade of the 20th century they formed their own Pentecostal denominations, the largest of them was the Assemblies of God, which did not identify the baptism of Spirit with the second work of grace.

THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

But what was this Pentecostal experience? There was no unanimous agreement. Some believed it was an empowerment for Christian service, others believed that it was work of Spirit to control the sinful nature, but not to eradicate it as the holiness Pentecostals believed. But as a study of the Scriptures, particularly the book of Acts where the term “baptism of the Holy Spirit” was used (Acts 1:5), will show that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was the initial infilling by Holy Spirit. In a Christian’s life there may be many filling with the Holy Spirit (Acts 4:31); Paul exhorted the Christians to be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18-19); thus the baptism of the Holy Spirit was only the first or initial experience of being filled with the Holy Spirit. And this was often accompanied by speaking in tongues, which was called later by Charismatics: “one’s prayer language” (“praying in the Spirit”, Eph. 5:19). The phrase “to be baptize with the Holy Spirit” was first used by John the Baptist (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33) of Him who was to come after John, that is, the Christ or Messiah. Luke reports in Acts that the risen Jesus said,

“John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5).

This is obviously a reference to the coming of the Holy Spirit at the first Pentecost, of which Jesus also said,

“But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

This baptism with the Holy Spirit was an empowerment for service. Later Peter refers to Pentecost as the baptism with the Spirit when he explains what happened at the conversion of Cornelius, the centurion:

“As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?” (Acts 11:15-17).

How did Peter recognize that Holy Spirit fell on them? Because the same thing happened to them that happened to Peter and the others at Pentecost, they spoke with other tongues or languages (Acts 2:4; 9:44-47). This baptism with the Spirit of Cornelius, and those with him, was a sign to Peter, and to those with him, that the Spirit was also given to the Gentiles. Luke also refers to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost as being filled with the Spirit;

“And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:3-4).

This coming of Spirit to them, which is the baptism with the Spirit, is the initial in-filling of the Spirit. Later they were again filled with Spirit (Acts 4:31). Thus each believer, like these first believers, may be baptized with the Spirit as the initial in-filling of the Holy Spirit and may be refilled with the Spirit as the Spirit sees fit. Paul exhorted the Ephesian believers to be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18). The Greek verb here translated “to be filled” is in the present tense, which indicates a continuous or repeated action. Thus Paul is exhorting the Ephesians to be filled over and over again with the Spirit. Some object to the use of the phrase “baptized with the Spirit” to refer the initial filling of the Spirit, but this is not important, as long as they recognize that Christian believers should be filled with the Spirit and that there must be a first filling of the Spirit which may occur at conversion or later. Whether they speak in tongues at this first filling of the Spirit, which they may do as the Spirit leads, is between them and the Spirit. But if anyone makes an issue with God of not speaking with tongues, he may not be filled the Spirit until he yields. This yielding to the Spirit is the necessary condition for being filled with Spirit. Paul makes it clear in his letter to Romans that presenting our bodies and its members to God is the logical implication of our acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord and Savior (Rom. 6:13; 12:1-2); and that includes presenting or yielding one’s tongue. This does not mean that the Christian believer has to become morally perfect or that he must clean up his life before he can be filled with the Spirit; the Holy Spirit will take care of cleaning up the believer’s life after he is filled with the Spirit.

One more point; speaking in tongues at the initial filling of the Spirit is not necessarily the gift of tongues of which Paul speaks in I Cor. chapters 12 to 14. While all believers may speak in tongues at the initial filling of Spirit, not all have the gift of tongues and the accompanying gift of interpretation of tongues for ministry in the body of believers. This is based not on the book of Acts, but on I Cor. 12 & 14, where Paul teaches that tongues is one of the several manisfestations of the Holy Spirit for the common good. The Spirit distributes the gifts of the Spirit as he wills (I Cor. 12:11). As Paul makes clear in I Cor. 12, the gifts of the Spirit are manifestations of the Spirit in the body of Christ for the common good (I Cor. 12:7). The empowering of the gifts and ministries of the Spirit are to be concrete expressions of love for one another in the body of Christ and those outside. And the preaching of Gospel should be accompanied by signs and wonders, and the gifts of the Spirit:

“It [the so great salvation] was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will”
(Heb. 2:3-4).

True Christians (not nominal Christians, in name only) have the Holy Spirit. True Christians have accepted Christ and put their faith in Him and His death and resurrection. And as such they have received the Holy Spirit. To be born again and to be alive to God is by the Holy Spirit. He is the Sprit of life in Christ Jesus (Rom. 8:2). The Holy Spirit does this by revealing Christ and convicting (convincing) the unsaved of their need for Christ (John 16:7-11); He presents Christ to the unbeliever in the preaching of the Gospel. And to receive Christ is also to receive the Holy Spirit. Paul writes in Romans 8:9 to the believers at Rome,

“But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. If anyone have not the Spirit of Christ,
this one is not his.”

To be “in the Spirit” is to be saved, and to be “in the flesh” is to be unsaved (Romans 7:5). But not everyone who has the Spirit dwelling in him is filled with Spirit; some are not “walking according to the Spirit,” but “according to the flesh” (Romans 8:4; Gal. 5:16, 25). And to walk according to the flesh is to attempt to live the Christian life by human effort alone apart from the Spirit of God; such ones attempt to live up to divine standard in the law. They are under law and thus experience only defeat and frustration (Rom. 6:14 and Rom. 7:18-19). They are trying to do what only the Holy Spirit can do. To be under law is to walk according the flesh (by human effort). To walk according to the Spirit and to be led by the Spirit is not to be under law (Gal. 5:18). Those who walk according to the Spirit bring forth the fruit of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit cannot be had apart from the Spirit; no human effort can produce that fruit. Those who walk according the Spirit fulfill the law without being under law. “For he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law” (Rom. 13:8-10). The goal is not moral perfection (conforming to the divine standard in the law) but is love; love of God and love of our neighbor. This goal can be reached only if one is filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18-20).

SPEAKING IN TONGUES

In the charismatic movement, speaking in tongues – glossolalia – occupies an important place. Speaking in tongues is generally understood to be communication with God in a language other than the one known to the speaker. A person does the speaking – that is, he freely uses his human vocal apparatus – but it is claimed that the Holy Spirit gives the utterance. It is viewed as a transcendent speech by the enabling of the Holy Spirit.

Speaking in tongues is considered by some charismatics to be miraculous utterance of an unlearned foreign language (so in classical Pentecostalism). This is claimed, first, on the basis of the narrative in Acts 1, that since the Scriptures say that the disciples “began to speak in other tongues’ and “each one heard them speaking in his own language,” the disciples must have been speaking languages and tongues of the listeners. Second, there is frequently given testimony that on occasions people have heard their own language spoken by someone who was totally ignorant of what he was saying. Other charismatics hold that the otherness of tongues is qualitative rather than quantitative; that is, the “other tongues” are not natural (i.e. human languages) but spiritual. Accordingly, if someone says that he heard a person speaking his own language, this is understood as occurring because the Holy Spirit is immediately interpreting what was said (hence it was not a hearing of but a hearing in one’s own language). From this perspective, there is no difference between the tongues referred to in Acts 2 and I Cor. 12-14. The former was not a foreign language and the latter is ecstatic speech; both are utterance of the Holy Spirit that can be understood only when interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Charismatics that have adopted this understanding of “other tongues” believe that it is best to harmonize the Biblical witness that retains the spirituality of tongues, and that accords with empirical fact that there is no concrete data (for example, from the study of recording of tongues) of an unkown language being spoken.

The essential charismatic claim about glossolalia is that it is the vehicle of communication par excellence between man and God. It is a language of transcendent prayer and praise. In tongues, there is speech to God which goes beyond the mental into the spiritual. Charismatics frequently state that in tongues there is fulfillment of the intense desire to offer total praise to God not only with the mind, but also with the heart and spirit. Therein one goes beyond the most elevated of earthly utterance – even “hosannas” and “hallelujahs” – into spiritual utterance: the praise of God in language given by the Holy Spirit. In the regular life of prayer, tongues are said to occupy a primary place. Such prayer is identified with praying in the spirit or with the spirit, which, since is not mental, can be done at all times. This spiritual prayer does not intend to take the place of mental prayer, i.e. prayer with the understanding, but to afford continuous support and background of all mental prayer. The ideal prayer is that with the spirit and with the mind (in that order). Where prayer passes into praise, it may likewise be singing with the spirit and singing with the mind. For the charismatic movement at large, singing in the spirit – singing in tongues – occupies an important place, particularly in community worship. Therein both words and melody are free expressions that are believed to be given spontaneously by the Holy Spirit. This, often combined with more usual singing, is seen to be the apex of worship; it is the worship of God in psalms and with human and (climactically) spiritual songs.

THE GIFTS OF THE SPIRIT

By definition the charismatic movement is concerned with charismata, the Greek term for “gifts of grace.” Everywhere throughout the charismatic movement there is the claim that all the charismata, or charisms, mentioned in Scriptures, are, or should be, operational in the Christian community. Although in large sectors of Christendom many of the gifts of the Spirit are considered as belonging only to the first century Christianity, the charismatic movement stresses their continuing existence and importance. Many charismatics prefer the name “charismatic renewal” instead of “charismatic movement” to lay emphasis on a renewal of the gifts in our time.

Charismatics hold that all the gifts listed in Rom. 12:6-8 and I Cor. 12-14 should be functional in body of Christ. They suggest a number of reasons for this:

a. These charismata alone are described as “manifestation of the Spirit,” hence have a unique importance as the direct expression and action of the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, the spiritual gifts make for a dynamic, vital community life.

b. The spiritual gifts are “power tools” for the upbuilding of the community. Each one functioning properly is essential to the full life of the body of Christ.

c. The exercise of the spiritual gifts by all makes for the total ministry. It is not just a few (that is, pastors, elders, deacons) who are channels for the Spirit’s manifestation, but each person in the community.

d. A body of Christians in which the spiritual gifts, along with other gifts and ministries, operating, is a community of spontaneity in worship, dynamism in ministry, and rich fellowship with one another.

e. It is through the exercise of these spiritual gifts that the church comes alive with an extraordinary sense of the presense of exalted Lord with the Spirit moving powerfully among His people.

In charismatic movement, all the gifts of Spirit are viewed as extraordinary, supernatural, and permanent. The spiritual charismata as described in I Cor. 12:8-10 are not arranged in a hierarchy so that “word of wisdom” is the highest and “interpretation of tongues” the least. The greatest gift at a given time is that which edifies most. All the gifts, especially prophecy (a direct utterance of God to his people in their own language) are earnestly desired (I Cor. 14:1); thus an attitude of “seek not” about any gift is a violation of God’s intention for his people. The gifts of the Spirit, because of their high potency and possible abuse, need to be properly ordered. But abuse does not call for their disuse but proper use. The spiritual gifts will not cease until we see Him “face to face”; then they will no longer be needed for edification of the community. Love is the “way” of the gifts (without love they profit nothing) and love will endure forever.

A word should be added about the relationship of baptism with Holy Spirit to the gifts of the Spirit. Charismatics often state that the baptism in the Spirit is the initiation into the dynamic dimension of the Spirit; the gifts of the Spirit are dynamic manifestation of the Spirit. Hence the baptism with the Spirit is for living in power and glory of Christ; the spiritual charismata are works of power and glory. Many charismatics affirm that whenever the Spirit baptism occurs, the gifts, which are already resident in the Christian community, become all the more freely and fully exercised.

Finally, charismatics generally recognize that spiritual gifts cannot be a substitute for spiritual fruit. The fruit of the Spirit – love, joy, peace, etc. (Gal. 5:22) – represent the maturation of the believer in Christ. The most mature believer, if he is open to the Spirit, may be Spirit-filled and exercising extraordinary gifts, and yet have experienced little of the Spirit’s sanctifying grace. Such persons need all the more to grow up in Christ. There seems to be no recognition among most charismatics of legalism (being under law, Rom. 6:14) as the cause of much of this spiritual immaturity.

EVALUATION

There are various evalutations of the charismatic movement ranging from outright rejection to mixed acceptance. In the more than hundred offical documents referred to previously show on the whole an increasing openness, but with reservations, to many of its features. The critics of the theology of charismatic movement have expressed disagreements variously:

a. Baptism with the Holy Spirit: some hold that it is improper, biblically and theologically, to refer to this as an experience possibly subsequent to conversion; others claim that whereas Spirit baptism may be a second experience, the primary purpose is not empowering but sanctification.

b. Speaking in tongues: some do not recognize glossolalia as having any longer connection with Spirit baptism (the book of Acts being viewed as transitional) but consider it as only a lesser gift of the Holy Spirit available to some, or no longer available to all.

c. Spiritual gifts: some divide the spiritual gifts into “temporary” and “permanent,” claiming that the former have been withdrawn whereas the latter continue; tongues and prophecy in particular have ceased with the completion of the canon of Scripture.

It is apparent from such criticism that much more theological work needs to be done among these critics.