Whilst idly wandering around the Internet, thinking vaguely about how I tie my 'Reformed' and 'Charismatic' Christian labels together, I found myself at the website of the 'Bible League Trust'. I'd vaguely heard of them before, largely through the fuss kicked up over WEST and others (about which I would recommend my friend Andrew Evan's post 'A Glimpse inside the Bizarre World of Hyper-Separatism'), and whilst I (think I) love and appreciate their passion for truth and love of Reformed Doctrine, I was pretty put out when reading through their views on Charismatics.
I'm not writing about ecumenical issues right now (though I dabble ecumenically across evangelicalism...) but I was stunned to read the italics after a very simple (and to my mind eminently sensible) Doctrinal Basis. You can find the document in question here.
What I want to do, very briefly, is simple. I want to share with you what the Bible League claims 'the Charismatic Movement' teaches, and observe as a self-identified Charismatic what I might say in response. I'm not for a minute claiming to be writing on behalf of Charismatic Christians in totality - and in fact in some cases, I wouldn't, because I do reject extremes and excess as bad religion - but I stand in the thought through Vineyard stream of Charismatic Evangelicalism, so I think I have some foundations to say things from.
"The Charismatic Movement advocates a post-conversion baptism in the Spirit..."
Terminology fail. That would be classic Pentecostalism. It is not a position I personally subscribe to, its not the position of the Vineyard (technically), and it isn't the only 'Charismatic position. Bearing in mind that the accompanying Doctrinal Basis talks of 'the work of the Holy Spirit as essential to new birth and santification", I would wonder whether that implies the Spirit continues to fill and work in Christians. Which is what I believe the Bible teaches, and echoes the constant, consistent and evangelical nature of the Vineyard Statement of Faith on the matter.
"evidenced in the miraculous gifts of tongues-speaking and prophecy..."
This is interesting. I will admit my frustration with some Charismatics regarding clarity over exactly what we think Tongues and Prophecy are, but in a general sense I am convinced that these and other gifts are active today, under the Sovereign will of God, by the power of the Holy Spirit. I don't think - and I've been in the Vineyard for around 3 years, and been reading Charismatic books before that - I've ever been challenged to 'evidence' my salvation or baptism by such things. I believe in the Gifts of the Spirit, but I believe too in the Fruits of the Spirit, these being (among other things) a very useful way for us to see what God is doing in the lives of individuals.
"it also lays claim to the extraordinary offices of Apostles and Prophets."
Another controversial topic, and whilst I'm quite clear in my own mind that there aren't (capital P) Prophets and (capital A) Apostles today, I also recognise that many faithful followers of Jesus who are Charismatic in their theology and ecclesiology do think so. I personally think they are wrong - and I'd love to explore that more in the future, perhaps on this blog. Regarding the history of my own movement/tribe, the Vineyard has a historically generous approach to prophecy, but also has healthy discernment, as you can read in the standard history of the Vineyard, Bill Jackson's "The Quest for the Radical Middle" - Wimber and the Vineyard Leadership eventually asked people to leave the movement over this kind of thing.
Inconsistency.
I've alluded to, above, the irony that the Doctrinal Basis of this group mentions the work of the Holy Spirit (and indeed the sovereignty of God, which tends to mean he is totally powerful and, I would think, can do what he likes) and then goes on to be so firm in their "absolute rejection of the Charismatic Movement". I've observed some basic errors in their judgement of what Charismaticism is, or at least is for many, but as the paragraph explaining the 'error' goes on to reveal, there is complete inconsistency in what exactly they are condemning. I'm a big fan of clarity, and of honesty, but my reading of this slightly hurtful and rigid document is one that leaves me confused.
Please hear me, this is neither an attempt to knock the Bible League, or to say anything particularly substantive about Charismatic Christianity, but I do think some clarity is needed. Over what the people who one rejects actually believe. I would be fascinated to engage in dialogue with people who disagree with me on this, and hope to write a little more concerning attempts to clarify what I actually mean, as a (hopefully!) 'Intelligently Supernatural' Charismatic, when I talk about things like 'Tongues', 'Prophecy', 'Miracles', 'Gifts' and 'Presence'. This should not, however, be taken as the announcement of a new series, as I don't have time for that.
____________________
I used to get the bus home from outside Met Tab, and - even tho I told them I was a convinced Calvinistic Christian - kind volunteers insisted on trying to evangelise me and give me books and literature from their pastor, and encouraging me into their church, whilst leaving the other 10 people at the bus stop alone!
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, good friends of mine were there the other week, and the sermon was merely a railing against modern worship music - with no Gospel content.
I don't know whether it is a cause or result, but there seems to be a strong link between hyper-separatism and directing focus excessively onto those who claim to be Christians, but are 'liberal' or whatever, and away from the wider culture, who have never heard the Gospel. JM
Evening Mr JM. Doesn't surprise me - its a bit awkward.
DeleteI do occasionally get tempted to go down similar lines - in a variety of ways - but the NT paints much more glorious picture of the Bride that Christ is coming back for...
thanks for the comment :)