Appreciate it. I feared this was going to be too long, I brutally edited it down from its original length. But I felt like I had to lay a foundation for where I want to go.
You are speaking my language. This is thoughtful and well written. The more historic/liturgical/sacramental traditions are in need of Charismatic renewal. Likewise, the Charismatic/Pentecostal traditions desperately need historical rootedness in doctrine, worship, and sacraments.
I started my own publication, The Prayerbook Pentecostal, both to describe myself and to paint a picture of I hope all of world Christianity looks like. Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Sacramental all wrapped up into one. Thank you for this!
I appreciate the feedback. I think rational Pentecostals are looking for coherent theologies that leave room for God's interruptions. There are more of us than most think but we dont' get the book deals or the big platforms but I am hoping that a movement is being birthed.
I think holding to an Orthodox interpretation of the text the most beneficial!. I'm seeking a pretty low bar. But that alone would rid us of so many false teachers and false prophets.
Man. You’re putting language to so much I’ve been chewing through the past few years. I’m working as a staff pastor in our stream in a fellowship I love; I’m truly grateful for it. However, I’m concerned with several of the issues you echoed in your essay. Especially stuff like:
“There are so many disaffected believers who have no theology of suffering because their pastors refuse to learn one. So when the inevitable suffering of this world comes, their only recourse is to deduce that this whole thing was a scam.”
I was reading an article about the depopulation of Italy. An Italian commenter said that all the politicians are wasting all the budget securing the positions and wealth of older generations at the cost of the young. I said this is a global phenomena.
These are my thoughts exactly Kaleb Amos. Thank you for writing this article Carl Thomas - I have seen many badly discipled people fall away shortly after suffering comes. 💔You have put to words the "check" in my spirit when I hear bad theology or an incomplete picture of Who God is. Thank you!
I really appreciate this article. I’m close to the fall out of one of the ministries you referred to, and what you’re saying here is so true. I have gotten to know much more about Catholicism and Orthodoxy in this process, and I’m thinking maybe we have a real problem with the lack of connection with church history and tradition. I’ve been troubled to realize how many charismatic movements were begun by done guy who disagreed with the group he was part of, left, and started his own thing, teaching his own stuff.
I think the Orthodox church appeals to so many Spirit-filled believers because of their embrace of the mystery. I know my local Orthodox priest and find him a great Christian. But they have their own issues and some are a non-starter for me. But there is a steady stream of Charismatics going to liturgical churches because they want something that wasn't made up just last week.
I agree. I’ve been listening to an Orthodox podcast called Lord of Spirits for the past several years, and there is so much theologically that is very compelling. I’ve even visited a local parish here in Kansas City. But like you said, there are several things that stop me from taking that step into it.
One thing I noticed about the Divine Liturgy at the Orthodox church that was so different, was the almost total absence of human personality in the service.
Well researched and well said.I believe God is bringing us back to the feet of Jesus humility and walking with Him. To His Kingdom. Kingdoms of our own making will crumble and fall
"Grounded in the Spirit, the Scripture, and the Tradition."
Thank you for this post, Carl! Appreciate it.
I was wondering if at some stage you wouldn't consider exploring this phrase more deeply.
I am busy writing a study for my church on the Holy Spirit, and in a section discussing sola scriptura, I defended it by saying it consists of these three aspects. However, I'm not sure if this would line up to a Reformed understanding of sola scriptura entirely. I have a sense a traditional doctrine of sola scriptura would only make space for Scripture and Tradition, and make the claim the Spirit is involved with those two - but would not venture into claiming any personal revelation has any type of authority.
I have a gut feeling that if we were to keep a charismatic theology, we have to alter sola scripture a little, to keep an emphasis on listening to the Spirit. It seems to me Reformed churches stick to Scripture, Catholic / EO to tradition, and charismatics to the Spirit, as some form of "normative principle". These three do need to be brought together, but when they are, is that still "sola scriptura"? Or is it "prima scriptura"? Or something else? What are your thoughts on that?
I have to be honest. The fact that Sola scriptura is not in the Bible always makes me laugh. It's literally an extra biblical revelation and that contradiction seems to be lost on the people who promote it the most.
I think these three, Word, Spirit, Tradition are probably best articulated within the Wesleyan quadrilateral even with its flaws. But the word should be examined through how it's always been used and understood, according to what a reasonable rendering of the Scripture is, but not leaving out the work of the spirit or our experience with God.
I mean, a true adaptation of sola scriptura would say we don't care what all of the ecumenical councils have decided and we are open to pelagianism, aryanism, try theism, and the likes. We would also reject the interpretations of Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli lest we say they also wrote scripture. Even though some approach their writings as if they did.
But my target audience are the charismatics who know nothing of the word or the tradition, just the experience.
Keith Warrington observes that what united the renewal movement in the beginning was a shared experience. Whereas denominations were united by a shared doctrine (confessions or the like) or shared authority, the charismatics were united by a shared experience.
This is an interesting observation and I think true. But we're generations down the line now, and so the initial experience the guys in the 60s and 70s were having has now become almost commonplace. Not just among charismatics, but in other types of churches too.
What may be the case is that in some instances people began to unite around shared leaders. I think this could give some insight into the problems you're highlighting. Also, if all that unites is a shared experience, then increasingly novel experiences may be required to keep that unity. This could shed some light on the trajectory you're highlighting as well.
I'm fortunate to be part of a charismatic group that does not largely really suffer from the problems you've highlighted, or here and there some churches go that way, but not all of them. One of the reasons for this is that sola scriptura is a value. However, I have noticed that the further down the line you go with 'sola' scriptura, the more it becomes exclusively scripture, to the point that the Spirit's leading becomes something people question, and you're right back to where you started - in need of renewal. ("Reformed" Charismatics tend to me to be more "reformed" than Charismatic).
We're not "Reformed" Charismatics as I think that creates a unity around a particular doctrine.
I think what seems to work for us is a focus on the value of relationship. Something like this: scripture is seen as the final authority, but interpretation of scripture primarily takes place within the context of a Spirit-led community. This means that we have to work *together* on doctrine and practice, and invite the Spirit to guide and lead us in this, and understand the role leaders play.
Working in such a community already implies an acknowledgement of church tradition, because the church has always been a spirit-led community and Scripture itself is Spirit-breathed doctrine / tradition. This would answer how "sola scriptura" probably arose - an extra-biblical revelation, as you helpfully point out, that the Reformers came up with in the context of their community and the Spirit's leading.
It also allows for a focus on the present rather than a focus on just repeating the past. I think this is how it becomes "spirit-led" rather than tradition-led.
So it seems to me scripture does have to be a final authority to ensure you stick to the true tradition (a fact that the reformationists highlighted), but doing interpretation solo is where the problems lie. Interpretation done in the context of community allows for Spirit-led revelation to be done under accountability. The issue may be the rampant individualism in charismatic circles - highlighted perhaps by a focus on personalities.
Your observations definitely resonate and are sadly true of many, but I suspect primarily reflect the nature of the charismatic church in the US. I'm thankful to be part of a UK based family of churches that would describe themselves as both charismatic and reformed. We love and value the Word and the Spirit, pursuing orthodoxy and encounter.
The reformed tradition has their own problems. It's not my tribe so I don't speak on them. But in America there's no more mean spirited Christians than the reformed. I don't know what it's like in Europe.
I rode the Third-wave charismatic movement as a new Christian in the early 1990’s and was deeply involved and influenced by Wimber et al and the Vineyard movement. For a good decade I was committed and sold out to anything Pentecostal and Charismatic.
Now? I feel repulsed and repulsed by much of what I see and hear in contemporary Pentecostalism. Your article is much needed, thank you.
Wimber set up a pretty good starting point but sadly I don't think the house built upon that foundation could stand. I am believing God for something better on the horizon.
Great article. Having been formed in a liturgical tradition (the "frozen chosen") we discovered the charismatic renewal movement and found energy, life, and lots of people living the life of following Jesus with joy and a sense of adventure and purpose. After a while, we also began to see the things you mentioned as well.
One very famous pastor of a world wide charismatic 'network' is known for his preaching and remarkable insights. I recognized one of his sermons as a reprise of St. Bonaventure, and another from Merton, both given (of course) without attribution. Still, I'm glad he has some volumes of the Classics of Western Spirituality series and is reading them. I wish more charismatic pastors would do the same.
You walk into a Charismatic pastor's meeting and rephrase a church father and you are seen as a prophet. If you quote the church father, you are a teacher.
Thank you for sharing what many of us are feeling. I am 4th generation Pentecostal (COG, Cleveland). My most recent experience with new leadership at our home church ended up forcing us out. I have been recovering, detoxing, and praying for a path forward. I wrote an open letter to the Pentecostal/charismatic church and many people feel the same. My heart is broken. I come from a long line of preachers, church planters and teachers. I am praying the Holy Spirit would show the way forward because I want to be part of the reformation within these circles. Thanks again for everything you've shared and for your call to reformation. God bless!
Oh, and yes and amen to the ‘Theology of suffering’. Dr James Wilder is doing really great work with Life Model Works, in an attempt to address this deficit in Christian formation. FYI
This is an exceptional article. I am not a charismatic Christian myself but many people I love are, this is such a good highlight of the pros and cons of dogma— a uniting force among believers — and individual experience — which is undeniably critical. Part of me really rebels against anyone trying to lay down dogma for me and I have made many decisions on that basis, but you make a strong point that ultimately it can be useful to be drawn into the core of tradition. That is why I am grateful for Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians — and refer to them frequently — even though I myself am a Protestant
I understand how the term dogma can be triggering because it is almost always used in the pejorative. But the bodily resurrection of Jesus is dogma for us. Those core beliefs are what I am referring to. And for many fringe groups, the only dogma is what the pastor preached.
Thanks for writing this! We must definitely find a way forward as we mature as a community and movement. For years there was a lack of scholarship and educated content coming from the charismatic movement. Partly, due to us being a relatively young movement compared to others.
Thankfully, a shift has happened in the last couple of decades where we see more of an emphasis to have grounded belief.
I do wonder if “the cult of personality” will always be a threat. Whoever is the next big or catchy speaker seems to always be elevated in influence in charismatics.
Wow!! Pastor I think you are about to blow some minds here. I pray that this word gets out there as fast as possible. I have had to Unfollow so many of these pastors. I thank God every day for you and my Church. 💜🙏
Man I have to say, almost every paragraph I found a quote I wanted to restack
Appreciate it. I feared this was going to be too long, I brutally edited it down from its original length. But I felt like I had to lay a foundation for where I want to go.
It shows, this was jam packed with quality thoughts.
You are speaking my language. This is thoughtful and well written. The more historic/liturgical/sacramental traditions are in need of Charismatic renewal. Likewise, the Charismatic/Pentecostal traditions desperately need historical rootedness in doctrine, worship, and sacraments.
I started my own publication, The Prayerbook Pentecostal, both to describe myself and to paint a picture of I hope all of world Christianity looks like. Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Sacramental all wrapped up into one. Thank you for this!
I appreciate the feedback. I think rational Pentecostals are looking for coherent theologies that leave room for God's interruptions. There are more of us than most think but we dont' get the book deals or the big platforms but I am hoping that a movement is being birthed.
Amen! What traditions do you find yourself drawing most from while seeking to strengthen charismatic theology?
I think holding to an Orthodox interpretation of the text the most beneficial!. I'm seeking a pretty low bar. But that alone would rid us of so many false teachers and false prophets.
Man. You’re putting language to so much I’ve been chewing through the past few years. I’m working as a staff pastor in our stream in a fellowship I love; I’m truly grateful for it. However, I’m concerned with several of the issues you echoed in your essay. Especially stuff like:
“There are so many disaffected believers who have no theology of suffering because their pastors refuse to learn one. So when the inevitable suffering of this world comes, their only recourse is to deduce that this whole thing was a scam.”
Come on! Thanks for this piece, friend.
I was reading an article about the depopulation of Italy. An Italian commenter said that all the politicians are wasting all the budget securing the positions and wealth of older generations at the cost of the young. I said this is a global phenomena.
These are my thoughts exactly Kaleb Amos. Thank you for writing this article Carl Thomas - I have seen many badly discipled people fall away shortly after suffering comes. 💔You have put to words the "check" in my spirit when I hear bad theology or an incomplete picture of Who God is. Thank you!
I wanted to write something along these lines only to find out someone has done it more concisely and more accurately than I would have! Well done.
I really appreciate this article. I’m close to the fall out of one of the ministries you referred to, and what you’re saying here is so true. I have gotten to know much more about Catholicism and Orthodoxy in this process, and I’m thinking maybe we have a real problem with the lack of connection with church history and tradition. I’ve been troubled to realize how many charismatic movements were begun by done guy who disagreed with the group he was part of, left, and started his own thing, teaching his own stuff.
I think the Orthodox church appeals to so many Spirit-filled believers because of their embrace of the mystery. I know my local Orthodox priest and find him a great Christian. But they have their own issues and some are a non-starter for me. But there is a steady stream of Charismatics going to liturgical churches because they want something that wasn't made up just last week.
I agree. I’ve been listening to an Orthodox podcast called Lord of Spirits for the past several years, and there is so much theologically that is very compelling. I’ve even visited a local parish here in Kansas City. But like you said, there are several things that stop me from taking that step into it.
One thing I noticed about the Divine Liturgy at the Orthodox church that was so different, was the almost total absence of human personality in the service.
God bless you sir.
This is really the heart of the issue in the charismatic/pentecostal churches
Well researched and well said.I believe God is bringing us back to the feet of Jesus humility and walking with Him. To His Kingdom. Kingdoms of our own making will crumble and fall
"Grounded in the Spirit, the Scripture, and the Tradition."
Thank you for this post, Carl! Appreciate it.
I was wondering if at some stage you wouldn't consider exploring this phrase more deeply.
I am busy writing a study for my church on the Holy Spirit, and in a section discussing sola scriptura, I defended it by saying it consists of these three aspects. However, I'm not sure if this would line up to a Reformed understanding of sola scriptura entirely. I have a sense a traditional doctrine of sola scriptura would only make space for Scripture and Tradition, and make the claim the Spirit is involved with those two - but would not venture into claiming any personal revelation has any type of authority.
I have a gut feeling that if we were to keep a charismatic theology, we have to alter sola scripture a little, to keep an emphasis on listening to the Spirit. It seems to me Reformed churches stick to Scripture, Catholic / EO to tradition, and charismatics to the Spirit, as some form of "normative principle". These three do need to be brought together, but when they are, is that still "sola scriptura"? Or is it "prima scriptura"? Or something else? What are your thoughts on that?
I have to be honest. The fact that Sola scriptura is not in the Bible always makes me laugh. It's literally an extra biblical revelation and that contradiction seems to be lost on the people who promote it the most.
I think these three, Word, Spirit, Tradition are probably best articulated within the Wesleyan quadrilateral even with its flaws. But the word should be examined through how it's always been used and understood, according to what a reasonable rendering of the Scripture is, but not leaving out the work of the spirit or our experience with God.
I mean, a true adaptation of sola scriptura would say we don't care what all of the ecumenical councils have decided and we are open to pelagianism, aryanism, try theism, and the likes. We would also reject the interpretations of Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli lest we say they also wrote scripture. Even though some approach their writings as if they did.
But my target audience are the charismatics who know nothing of the word or the tradition, just the experience.
Keith Warrington observes that what united the renewal movement in the beginning was a shared experience. Whereas denominations were united by a shared doctrine (confessions or the like) or shared authority, the charismatics were united by a shared experience.
This is an interesting observation and I think true. But we're generations down the line now, and so the initial experience the guys in the 60s and 70s were having has now become almost commonplace. Not just among charismatics, but in other types of churches too.
What may be the case is that in some instances people began to unite around shared leaders. I think this could give some insight into the problems you're highlighting. Also, if all that unites is a shared experience, then increasingly novel experiences may be required to keep that unity. This could shed some light on the trajectory you're highlighting as well.
I'm fortunate to be part of a charismatic group that does not largely really suffer from the problems you've highlighted, or here and there some churches go that way, but not all of them. One of the reasons for this is that sola scriptura is a value. However, I have noticed that the further down the line you go with 'sola' scriptura, the more it becomes exclusively scripture, to the point that the Spirit's leading becomes something people question, and you're right back to where you started - in need of renewal. ("Reformed" Charismatics tend to me to be more "reformed" than Charismatic).
We're not "Reformed" Charismatics as I think that creates a unity around a particular doctrine.
I think what seems to work for us is a focus on the value of relationship. Something like this: scripture is seen as the final authority, but interpretation of scripture primarily takes place within the context of a Spirit-led community. This means that we have to work *together* on doctrine and practice, and invite the Spirit to guide and lead us in this, and understand the role leaders play.
Working in such a community already implies an acknowledgement of church tradition, because the church has always been a spirit-led community and Scripture itself is Spirit-breathed doctrine / tradition. This would answer how "sola scriptura" probably arose - an extra-biblical revelation, as you helpfully point out, that the Reformers came up with in the context of their community and the Spirit's leading.
It also allows for a focus on the present rather than a focus on just repeating the past. I think this is how it becomes "spirit-led" rather than tradition-led.
So it seems to me scripture does have to be a final authority to ensure you stick to the true tradition (a fact that the reformationists highlighted), but doing interpretation solo is where the problems lie. Interpretation done in the context of community allows for Spirit-led revelation to be done under accountability. The issue may be the rampant individualism in charismatic circles - highlighted perhaps by a focus on personalities.
Your observations definitely resonate and are sadly true of many, but I suspect primarily reflect the nature of the charismatic church in the US. I'm thankful to be part of a UK based family of churches that would describe themselves as both charismatic and reformed. We love and value the Word and the Spirit, pursuing orthodoxy and encounter.
The reformed tradition has their own problems. It's not my tribe so I don't speak on them. But in America there's no more mean spirited Christians than the reformed. I don't know what it's like in Europe.
I rode the Third-wave charismatic movement as a new Christian in the early 1990’s and was deeply involved and influenced by Wimber et al and the Vineyard movement. For a good decade I was committed and sold out to anything Pentecostal and Charismatic.
Now? I feel repulsed and repulsed by much of what I see and hear in contemporary Pentecostalism. Your article is much needed, thank you.
Wimber set up a pretty good starting point but sadly I don't think the house built upon that foundation could stand. I am believing God for something better on the horizon.
Great article. Having been formed in a liturgical tradition (the "frozen chosen") we discovered the charismatic renewal movement and found energy, life, and lots of people living the life of following Jesus with joy and a sense of adventure and purpose. After a while, we also began to see the things you mentioned as well.
One very famous pastor of a world wide charismatic 'network' is known for his preaching and remarkable insights. I recognized one of his sermons as a reprise of St. Bonaventure, and another from Merton, both given (of course) without attribution. Still, I'm glad he has some volumes of the Classics of Western Spirituality series and is reading them. I wish more charismatic pastors would do the same.
You walk into a Charismatic pastor's meeting and rephrase a church father and you are seen as a prophet. If you quote the church father, you are a teacher.
Thank you for sharing what many of us are feeling. I am 4th generation Pentecostal (COG, Cleveland). My most recent experience with new leadership at our home church ended up forcing us out. I have been recovering, detoxing, and praying for a path forward. I wrote an open letter to the Pentecostal/charismatic church and many people feel the same. My heart is broken. I come from a long line of preachers, church planters and teachers. I am praying the Holy Spirit would show the way forward because I want to be part of the reformation within these circles. Thanks again for everything you've shared and for your call to reformation. God bless!
Oh, and yes and amen to the ‘Theology of suffering’. Dr James Wilder is doing really great work with Life Model Works, in an attempt to address this deficit in Christian formation. FYI
This is an exceptional article. I am not a charismatic Christian myself but many people I love are, this is such a good highlight of the pros and cons of dogma— a uniting force among believers — and individual experience — which is undeniably critical. Part of me really rebels against anyone trying to lay down dogma for me and I have made many decisions on that basis, but you make a strong point that ultimately it can be useful to be drawn into the core of tradition. That is why I am grateful for Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians — and refer to them frequently — even though I myself am a Protestant
Thank you for taking the time to write this!
I understand how the term dogma can be triggering because it is almost always used in the pejorative. But the bodily resurrection of Jesus is dogma for us. Those core beliefs are what I am referring to. And for many fringe groups, the only dogma is what the pastor preached.
Thanks for writing this! We must definitely find a way forward as we mature as a community and movement. For years there was a lack of scholarship and educated content coming from the charismatic movement. Partly, due to us being a relatively young movement compared to others.
Thankfully, a shift has happened in the last couple of decades where we see more of an emphasis to have grounded belief.
I do wonder if “the cult of personality” will always be a threat. Whoever is the next big or catchy speaker seems to always be elevated in influence in charismatics.
I'm gonna talk about this soon. But I think personalities fill the gap of bad discipleship. Just not in a good way.
Wow!! Pastor I think you are about to blow some minds here. I pray that this word gets out there as fast as possible. I have had to Unfollow so many of these pastors. I thank God every day for you and my Church. 💜🙏