click here to tweet this post
click here to share with your friends
subscribe to this feed
Will the Real Charismatic Please Stand Up?
by C Michael PattonJanuary 24th, 2013
29 Comments
It is difficult to know who is and who is not a charismatic these days. In fact, it seems to be quite the theological novelty to call oneself charismatic. However, when one person says he is “charismatic,” it may not mean what you think it means.
When I associate the term “charismatic” with Christians, six primary things come to mind. Any or all of these could be present in my thinking when I use the word:
1. Unusual attention given to the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer
2. The tendency to seek and expect miraculous healings
3. The tendency to seek and expect God’s direct communication (dreams, visions, experiences, personal encounters, etc.)
4. Unusual attention given to the presence of demonic activity in the world
5. Very expressive worship
6. Belief in the continuation of all the gifts of the Holy Spirit
I am going to briefly explain each of these. Please pay special attention to the graphs (Yes, my mind works in graphs!) since I am going to attempt to show how, with all of these, the designation “charismatic” works on a sliding scale. Here is the model:
Please notice that the scale is not black and white (well, it is not red and white, but you know what I mean!). There is a gradation shown here, indicating that one can be more or less charismatic, depending on the issue in question. Better, I consider myself more or less charismatic, depending on the issue. The line in the middle represents that subjective place beyond which the designation “charismatic” is likely to be made. I don’t always know where it is, but I think it is safe to say that the line is there somewhere.
Below, I am going to briefly explain each of these options by speaking to the extremes. Please humor me. I think I know where I am going.
1. Unusual attention given to the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer
There are certain Christians who give unusual attention to the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit. Conversely, there are Christians who rarely, if ever, recognize the presence of the Holy Spirit at all. For those on the non-charismatic side of the scale, the Holy Trinity could best be described as the Father, Son, and Holy Bible! For the charismatic, the centrality of Christ’s person and work is replaced with the centrality of the person and work of the Holy Spirit.
2. The tendency to seek and expect miraculous healings
Many Christians believe that God’s benevolent healing power is available for all who have enough faith. That would be the far right extreme. Other Christians, on the far left, never hope in God’s miraculous intervention in any way (Unfortunately, I tend to lean toward the left).
3. The tendency to seek and expect God’s direct communication (dreams, visions, experiences, personal encounters, etc.)
Some people believe God communicates with them directly. They have little use for the Bible, since from their perspective God’s answers are available immediately upon request through direct means. Every dream, vision, or unexplained sound is God trying to tell them something. On the other hand, some believers do not seek God’s guidance in any way other than through the Bible. These often misunderstand the idea of sola Scriptura to mean that the Bible is our only authority and source for guidance, not (as it should be understood) as our final and only infallible authority in matters of faith.
4. Unusual attention given to the presence of demonic activity in the world
There are those who believe that demons are the cause of every problem we face. If someone is depressed, it is never due to a chemical imbalance, but demonic oppression. If someone is sick, medicine is not the answer, exorcism is. They have “deliverance ministries” in which all problems (including being overweight!) are solved by finding and breaking the demonic stronghold. On the other side of the fence are those who, while maybe giving lip service to spiritual warfare, don’t really engage in battle against the forces of darkness in any way. In fact, they are quite embarrassed to acknowledge the reality of Satan and his demons at all.
5. Expressive worship
And, yes, there are the “expressive worship” people. You know, the ones who not only raise and/or clap their hands during worship, but weep, scream, dance, and sometimes go into convulsions during their time of worship. And there are the others who lip-sync the songs, have their hands in their pockets, and . . . wait . . . let’s get real: There are those who “accidentally” show up twenty-five minutes late to the service every week, just in time to catch the sermon and (oops!) miss worship time. The latter is me.
6. Belief in the continuation of all the gifts of the Holy Spirit
In the New Testament, we are told that God has gifted the church and individuals with gifts (charisma) and offices that are for the mutual edification of the church. On the far charismatic end of the scale, there are those who not only believe that all gifts are still in operation, but whose life and ministry are centered around the practice of the more extravagant gifts. For them, the gift of tongues is a sign of maturity and the presence of the Spirit in their life. Every church service is chaos, as people are uncontrollably “led by the Spirit” to prophesy, speak in tongues, and/or pronounce a word of wisdom or knowledge. On the non-charismatic end of the scale, we have those who don’t believe in the gifts at all. Some believe that all gifts of the Spirit ceased in the first century. Don’t believe me? Check it out for yourself. I know of a very large network of churches which believes the gifts of teaching, giving, evangelism, tongues, healing, prophecy, and every other gift mentioned in the New Testament ceased in the first century. However, I don’t want to limit this category to just those who build extreme cessationism into their theology, because I would leave a lot of others out! While some would never openly affirm this theological stance, practically speaking, they might as well do so. In many churches, if you are not the pastor, an usher, or on the worship team, there is no need for you in the church other than to fill a seat Sunday morning and to pay your dues as the offering plate is passed around. For these, the mass majority of Christians are non-essential, non-contributing members of the body of Christ.
It should go without saying that both extremes are not only unhealthy, but potentially destructive to the body of Christ due to their imbalance. There is a healthy middle which represents an orthodox position in all of these areas. Take a look at this modified version of my chart.
In these types of discussions it is easy to create a caricature of one side by immediately associating them with the extremes of their positions. This is called a “straw man argument;” it is an unfair assertion which honors neither the issue nor the people involved, much less the Lord. Though I am not a charismatic, this does not mean that I am on the far left. At least, I try not to be. Similarly, I suspect most charismatics don’t want their perspectives to be caricatured with those on the far right.
Concerning these six options, I propose that a true charismatic in a theological sense is not necessarily one who holds their hands high during worship. Neither is it accurately characterized as someone who believes very strongly in the presence of demonic forces. In fact, I believe that a real charismatic is associated with the sixth option alone, believing that all (or at least most of) the gifts of the Spirit are still in operation today and is personally seeking them.
However, with all six issues, I would say that I am to the left of the charismatic line. On some, I am pretty far to the left. On others, I hug the midline. For example, as I alluded to just a moment ago, I am not expressive in my worship at all. Yet when it comes to the reality of the presence and activity of Satan and his demons, I find myself moving further and further to the right all the time. Because of this, and because the line between being charismatic and non-charismatic is somewhat subjective, I imagine in many people’s eyes I would be labeled charismatic with regard to the issue of demonic activity. While I recognize that these issues are somewhat connected, I am nevertheless persuaded that none of these, with the exception of number six, is the final determinant of whether or not one is truly a charismatic.
Gifts of the Spirit across the Spectrum
Having laid some basic groundwork, here are the four positions (generally speaking) that one can take with regard to the charismatic issue:
1. Hard Cessationist: The term “cessationist” is taken from the word “cease.” The hard cessationist believes that particular gifts, such as tongues, prophecy, miracles, healings, and the like, necessarily ceased in the first century due to an exhaustion of purpose. The hard cessationist would distinguish between what are called “sign gifts” and all other gifts. “Sign gifts” are the gifts that are evidently miraculous, and therefore provide a sign to the witnesses that the message of the one who performed these gifts was truly from God. According to the hard cessationist, once the New Testament was completed, there was no longer a need for these gifts to be given to the church, since the Gospel message had been firmly established. They would be considered “hard” cessationists, since they believe that both the Bible and biblical theology necessitates their cessation.
2. Soft Cessationist: The soft cessationist would agree with most of the arguments of the hard cessationist, except they would be open to God’s use of the sign gifts in areas that are unevangelized. Therefore, the “ceasing” of the gifts has less to do with the completion of the Bible and more to do with God’s missional purpose. For the soft cessationist, it may very well be that God continues to use these gifts to establish the Gospel message in areas of the world that have yet to be penetrated with the Gospel. Once the Gospel is established, the gifts would cease.
3. Continuationist: The term “continuationist” is taken from the word “continue.” Continuationists, simply put, believe that all the gifts of the Spirit have continued throughout the church age. For the continuationist, while many of these gifts would have indeed served as signs to the outside world, their primary function is not to evangelize the lost, but to ensure the health of the church. In other words, God gives them out of his benevolence. The continuationist sees no biblical evidence that these gifts would ever cease; on the contrary, he believes the Bible teaches that these gifts are normative for the church age.
4. Charismatic: Every charismatic is a continuationist, but not every continuationist is a charismatic. I think this is an important distinction to make. The charismatic would agree with all of the continuationist’s positions; the primary difference is in their pursuit of all the gifts for the church. I would like to propose this as a formal working definition of a charismatic for our purposes:
A charismatic is one who believes that all of the gifts of the Spirit have continued, are normative, and should be sought out by the church.
The last phrase “and should be sought out” is the key difference between a continuationist and a charismatic. In other words, the theology of the charismatic is not simply a passive academic argument, but one that should be practiced and affect the life of the church. If you believe that all of the gifts have continued, but neither practice them yourself nor belong to a church which seeks them, then you are not really charismatic.
Here is what my chart would look like now:
For the record, I think I would be best placed somewhere between a soft cessationist and a continuationist, most days leaning my back against the door of the soft cessationist. I don’t like the word “ceased” with regard to the gifts (too definite) but I don’t like the word “normative” either.
I hope that this helps a bit to clarify what the word “charismatic” means in theological context. I think with such a definition, it would be easier to tell who the real charismatics are and who are just more charismatic than others.
Similar Posts:
- Seeking a Miraculous Sign as Validation of the Prophetic
- My Back Has Been Healed – Am I Charismatic Now?
- The Day I Accused My Wife of Infidelity
- What is the Gift of Tongues?
- My Experience with a Prophetic Vision Today or “How to Test Prophecy”
29 Comments
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8
As a “die-hard” Pentecostal, I can embrace the term “continuationist” but eschew “charismatic” for a couple of reasons. In my experience, many in the charismatic camp soften the authority of the Bible in favor of something experiential; this is dangerous. The Bible must stand above all experience and be the judge of that experience. Charismatics also have a different view on the initial physical evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit than do most classical Pentecostals. My encounters with charismatics have at times been interesting in hearing some of the strange, unbiblical things they teach, such as angel feathers falling on the pulpit and gold dust swirling in the air during worship. Better to preach the Word and seek to bring in the harvest than to get weirded out about things the Bible simply does not support.
Like or Dislike:
2
Several years ago I read Billy Graham’s book, The Holy Spirit. He wrote that the term charismatic comes from the Greek charismata which means gifts. Every believer has gifts, thus every believer is a charismatic! Although I would agree with your definition of a charismatic.
If I can change the subject, most people would think the basis for the prosperity gospel comes from charismatic theology. It does not, although most prosperity gospel churches are charismatic. It comes from 1st century gnosticism, Christian Science, New Though in the 19th century, E.W. Kenyon and Kenneth Hagin. It has other names like word of faith. It is a heretical teaching that demotes God, elevates man to where he can have whatever he wants by speaking it. God is nothing more than a cosmic genie.
While not all charismatics practice prosperity theology, they love the Lord too and they are our brothers and sisters in Christ.
Like or Dislike:
1
That is a great post, I would say i am a charismatic, i do operate in the gifts during church prayer and worship and i do have and had dreams and visions but I’m not at the extreme where i neglect the word of God
Like or Dislike:
3
In your graphical illustration, I would like to ask the right most ‘continuationists’ and ‘charismatics’ to please answer whether any clinically four-days-dead person got resurrected like Lazarus by their gift of healing. My observation has been if a person is ‘healed’, the miracle healer claims God healed when the miracle preacher laid hands on the sick. If the sick is not ‘healed’ the preacher usually says that the person lacked faith in God. Jesus or the apostles never failed to heal any on account of their lack of faith. I used to wonder why mostly the balanced middle path is the right one, even on disputed doctrines.
Like or Dislike:
1
I’m not sure where I would place myself on that graph. I believe that the gifts are there for us today but I would balk at saying that they are normative. While prophecy and miraculous healing occur today it is not as common as practitioners of those sorts of things would have us believe. I just can’t find evidence that it was a day to day thing, which is how most of my charismatic friends tend to believe. I also don’t think that a person gifted in, say healings, can manifest that gift on their own volition. So, for the sake of the graph I’d have to say that I float around between soft-cessationist and continuationist. The gift manifest themselves today but not all that often and not whenever one so gifted wants them to manifest.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
Could you elaborate on the meaning of “normative” here? As a charismatic (who all too often operates as a non-pursuing continuationist), I would be uncomfortable with the idea that all (or a particular set of) gifts are *normative* in the sense of “Something is wrong/deficient if you don’t experience them.” However, I would hold that, on the corporate level, the presence of all the gifts is *normal* (i.e., to be expected), as the outflow of the Holy Spirit’s work among his people. Where I would part company with many of my Pentecostal brothers and sisters would be in treating particular gifts as normative (e.g., tongues), in the sense that *every particular believer* is expected to experience them. I think we can expect the church as a whole to express the broad diversity of gifts, but not necessarily on an individual basis (1 Cor. 12:30).
Like or Dislike:
0
I am amidst a church at the moment who are going through a transistion and the leadership is trending lightly down the road of charismatic services. Few waving of hands and swaying and greater emphasis on the presence of the Holy Spirit, ex: prayer directed at welcoming his presence and ministry alone. I lean to the soft cessationist side personally. This is new to this church and I see it as more of a distraction than a benefit. Interesting enough this direction of the church is fueled somewhat by persons who attend Pentecostal churches sort of on the side. It is not the traditional baptist background and it will be interesting to see where all this leads…..I really dislike annointing for healings which have been done on occasion, it places too much emphasis on the process than God’s will..IMHO
Like or Dislike:
0
Interesting post. This is definitely one of the hottest topics in Protestant life right now. I think the differences you outline between continuationists and charismatics is very helpful.
I would clarify one thing, though. Since this whole discussion usually revolves around tongues and prophecy, it’s helpful to point out that the real rub for most cessationists is how these “revelatory gifts” are to continue when we don’t expect new revelation. Instead of an established church, cessationists typically point to an established canon as the reason for those gifts ceasing.
You do a good job of pointing out that the discussion is much broader than that one theological point, though. I always enjoy reading the posts here at the Credo House blog.
Like or Dislike:
3
“For these, the gift of tongues is a sign of maturity and the presence of the Spirit in their life.”
This “accusation” is made often but I’ve NEVER heard it from a charismatic, NEVER seen it in print or video.
Please provide a citation or consider that it may be a “strawman.”
Tongues (look at its result when an unbeliever or “ungifted” person experiences it in 1 Cor 14) is a lesser gift. But it’s a “gateway gift” in that it was the usual sign accompanying baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts.
FRUIT is a sign of maturity, GIFTS are not. But the gifts CAN HELP a person in their Christian walk, which will bear fruit.
Like or Dislike:
0
Paulraj,
Yes, they have.
But it never works outs well for the “doubters” who try to reconvene a John 9 committee–they never truly and accurately look at the facts.
Like or Dislike:
0
As I have said before, I have lived thru something of the so-called Charismatic renewal, 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s etc., in both the Roman Catholic Church, and the Anglican Communion, mostly British. Yes the CR was happening even among the Brit’s, and of course well into the 80′s. But sadly, as has been expressed, the Health & Wealth Gospel went from the edges to the centre with many. Then the so-called Third Wave Movement too. But when we look at the Church in the last 40 years or so, we surely do not see a Church that is healthy wealthy and wise, but again that old Pilgrim Church, sinful very human.. but still engaged against ‘the world, the flesh, and the devil’. And the real Christian pilgrims are always here, down in the trenches, moving about and somehow.. living the life of Christ, but crucified, something that God In Christ will Himself always perform for/in His elect & chosen people, indeed here is the real “charismatia”!
“But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves.” (2 Cor. 4:7)
Like or Dislike:
1
Charismatic here who also quite frequently “misses” worship due to an “unforseen” circumstances. But the sermon was quite good. Ahem. But, I really understand the side of the soft cessationists. While I am very open to the idea that everyone experiences Christ’s kingdom in a different way, I do not think that signs and wonders are without cause. I only want to use gifts as God directs and use them to build His kingdom: to pray for my friend with back pain so she can continue in ministry; to give a word of prophecy to another friend so her faith may be restored; the (quietly) speaking of tongues in a youth prayer meeting to show the Holy Spirit to those young’uns. It’s the habitual seeking out of those gifts for experience’ sake, or a group becomes legalistic about it that can become a problem. Even Paul cautions that they be used wisely in meetings, so that they focus on the Lord. Because if the focus is not there, what is the point?
Also, Tim: agreed.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
It seems that “charismatic” may be as difficult to define as “evangelical!” From the comments above, some things are clear: there is a difference between mainline Pentecostals and charismatics; there should be a line between charismatics and the prosperity gospel even if the line is blurred; and, as much as you made a valiant effort to put parameters on the discussion, definitive parameters are hard to come by.
A few years ago I attended a seminar on global Pentecostalism and charismatics. It was put on at the University of Southern California and the list of presenters was very impressive, including some from the Pew Forum who conducted a nearly global survey of the subject. I was surprised at the number of Pentecostals and/or Charismatics that did not speak in tongues and the number of the same who opposed the prosperity gospel, relating that it was a major problem not only in the U.S. but also in many African countries. Another thing of note was that these theologians and researchers, who were thoroughly into the subject, could not clearly define either category!
Thanks for the post. It is thought-provoking.
The only bone I could pick with your post is the “unusual attention” given to the Spirit. I think your term needs more definition unless we should just consider it as something spoken by a true Calvinist!
Like or Dislike:
3
Use of “unusual” is of course a matter of perspective.
I’d say of a Cessationist: Unusual INattention given to the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer
Like or Dislike:
0
Minimus suggested glossolalia was a “lesser gift”. I do not see any valuation of the empowerments of the Holy Spirit anywhere in 1 Corinthians, and the fact that tongues and interpretation wind up at the end of the list is not an indication of value but that fact that in any list, some things appear sooner than others. 1 Corinthians 12:7 and 12:11 puts all manifestations of the Spirit’s power on equal footing; where and how a certain enablement manifests is strictly the prerogative of the Holy Spirit, for the sake of edifying the Body of Christ. I’ve heard the “tongues is a lesser gift” argument before, and I wonder how, on any reading of 1 Corinthians 14, tongues can be so classified. Paul’s argument in that chapter was not to valuation but to proper use; abused tongues diminished the manifestation by virtue of the abuse. Paul seeks to correct into right use so the full divine intention of speaking in tongues would bring benefit to the Body of Christ.
I would suggest that however the Spirit of God chooses, in divine wisdom, to manifest power, is without question a good thing; sometimes the power shown is glossolalia, other times it may be mercy-showing, or faith, or administrations. In every case, the manifestation was for the common good, as per 1 Corinthians 12:7.
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] Will the Real Charismatic Please Stand Up? [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] Read the entire article here. [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
Very helpful article in describing the landscape on this challenging topic. I know pastors/churches who find it difficult to describe their own position because of the unhealthy tendencies on both ends (I know I do). Thanks for the way you put it together (charts and all).
Like or Dislike:
1
It would be interesting to see a chart showing the two-dimensional nature of charismatic theology against reformed theology – I’m part of Newfrontiers, which is charismatic specifically because that’s what the Bible encourages; eagerly pursue the spiritual gifts. Some would run away from both reformed and charismatic theology: liberals?
Like or Dislike:
1
Would we not find ourselves more firmly placed in the shadow of “God’s wings” by keeping a log of our own individual progress along the Path of Sanctification rather than the wanting of others to stay in lockstep with us?
Look beyond the stops of others along the way as you “go and make disciples”. Then would that both of you share a cup of the Holy Spirit with the Lord Jesus Christ at journey’s end.
Like or Dislike:
0
Myself as a conservative Reformed Christian & theolog, and from my perspective also pastorally, I see lately, some real liberal mind-set in many charismatic pastors and people. Sadly this is the drift today in the culture and even church in postmodernity!
Like or Dislike:
0
As an accountant, I love the graph approach. Moreover as a Christian, I love the graph message. nicely done.
Like or Dislike:
0
Thoughtful article, Michael. Again, the root of the problem is the hyper-charismatic extremists whose bizarre experiential exploits taint the rest of the moderate, more doctrinal, Christ based charismatics. Somehow though we are all lumped in together with these crazy goings on, but it’s the whole church, that stands to lose respect, not just us that needs to stand up more and be speaking up against this extreme and distorted example of the gospel.
Like or Dislike:
0
I think the worship thing is a bit of a red herring, as you can get a full range of different styles and experiences across charismatic churches, and likewise across cessationist churches.
Like or Dislike:
0
The extreme charismatic profile that is so often presented as problematic is about as representative of charismatics/continuationists as Fred Phelps is of mainstream cessationist Christians. This fanatical characterization is about as generous as saying Westboro church represents Baptists.
Maybe all this strife is meant to keep the continuationist gifts from ever being used. Maybe all those gifts are vital and part of our best defense or offense in this battle we are all in.
Could this unending strife be a shrewd tactic of our common enemy? What does that imply about the nature of this particular battle then?
Imagine the letters between Wormwood and Screwtape on this one.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
I know you probably went with a single axis graph for the sake of simplicity. But I don’t think this topic can be properly treated in less than two dimensions (X and Y axes, like the cartesian coordinate graphs back in Algebra 1), and probably needs a Z axis as well (3-dimensional space). Of course, then getting everyone to agree on the axes to use becomes the issue.
Like or Dislike:
0
I wanted to ask this:
If a continuationist believes in and practices the sign gifts today, how does a cessationist view this?
Is it:
1. They are retarded Christians
2. They are heretics
3. They are demonically controlled
Like or Dislike:
0
They are both biblically and theologically wrong, is also a view!
Btw, I see “tongues” (glossolalia), as a form of a spiritual, angelic like prayer language still for today, but not the sign gifts, which have ceased, (1 Cor. 13: 8). Speaking thus is unknown to the recipient, but nontheless his/her blessing! (1 Cor. 14:2)
Like or Dislike:
0
Please don’t confuse Charismatics with traditional Pentecostals.
More Comments: