Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
217
FEEDBACK:
THE CHARISMATIC RENEWAL
A Catholic
Response
to the
German
Report
Peter D. Hocken
The
Theological
Commission of the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church of
Germany
is to be commended for its detailed tackling
of an
important topic
that most Churches and denominations affected
by “extraordinary bodily phenomena”
are neither
studying
nor evaluating
in
any
serious
way.
As a fellow Catholic
theologian,
I wish to reflect on the
importance
of this document
“Concerning Extraordinary Bodily
Phenomena in the Context of
Spiritual Occurrences”
published
in the
previous
issue of PNEEWA1 and to begin by recognizing
its valuable contribution.
The Positive Contribution
of the Report
First,
the
Theological
Commission is to be commended for
practicing what it
preaches: approaching
such
phenomena
without
prejudice
or fixed
presuppositions.
This
approach
has both
philosophical-theological and ecclesial-denominational dimensions. While there is a clear recognition,
as we should
expect
from a Catholic
source,
of the
place of “natural” or created causes in all human
phenomena,”
the
report
is free of all
philosophical
or
theological
reductionism that would demythologize
and eliminate all forms of identifiable divine
activity
and intervention. It is clearly
recognized
that God acts in ways both familiar and unfamiliar: “To limit the actions of God to what is
expected
and ‘ordinary’
is contrary to a total surrender to God which has to leave the law of
acting up
to God.”3 Such clear statements are
necessary
if theological
assessments are to have
credibility
within the Pentecostal-Charismatic world.
The
report
is likewise free from narrow denominational or confessional bias. The extent of the Catholic shift from
pre-Vatican Two “Church self-centeredness” can be seen in the
remarkably open
‘ The Theological Commission of the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church of
Germany, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily
Phenomena in the Context of Spiritual Occurrences,”
PNEUMA: The Journal
of
the
Society for
Pentecostal Studies 18 (Spring 1996): 5-32.
2 Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 6-8. ‘ Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
17.
1
218
statement that “we must maintain an
openness
to new activities and works of
God,”
even if
they
should come to us “via the non-denominational churches.”‘ This
important
and bold word is addressed
primarily
to fellow Catholics for whom the “non-denominational”
provenance
of the “Toronto
phenomenon”
is an a
priori
reason for
rejecting
or
suspecting
its
authenticity.
Later the report
remarks on the associations between Toronto leaders and the “Prophetic
Movement” some of whose
teachings
were
rejected
in a previous
statement of this Commission. The Committee here shows a flexibility
in
recognizing
that the
Holy Spirit may
work in milieux and through people
whose
teachings
are not
wholly acceptable:
“it
may very
well be that
representatives
of this view
[i.e.
of the
Prophetic Movement]
are allowed to
pass
on an authentic
gift
of God, and we can receive that same
gift.”5
Secondly,
there is a clear
recognition
of the
bodily component
in all human and all
spiritual experience.
The
report recognizes
that
Baptism in the
Holy Spirit
has enabled Christians “to
experience
the holistic effect of God’s
grace
in a new
way.”6
It
asserts, very importantly,
that “There is a
way
from the inside to the
outside,
and a
way
from the outside to the inside.”‘ This holistic
recognition
is in contrast to most Evangelically-inspired teaching,
that denies the
latter,
and corrects an excessive Catholic sacramentalism that
ignores
the former.
Thirdly,
there is much
practical
wisdom in this
report
that
represents the
application
of criteria and methods of discernment from the traditions of Catholic
spirituality, particularly
from the
Spiritual Exercises of
Ignatius Loyola.
These include the identification of the “basic
spiritual impulse,”
the distinction between the moment of the initial consolation and the “second
period”
that follows
it,
the
leading into or
away
from inner
freedom,
the affirmation of the difference between the
spiritual
and the
psychological
and the
necessary
role of both.’ There is an
important
statement about what
happens
when the focus of the believer
changes
from the Lord to one’s own
experience: “For as soon as
they
are held onto or even ‘created
by
human
efforts,’ it is no
longer
the same source.
Unnoticed,
the
phenomena
themselves change
as a
consequence.”9
While these
principles
can be of real value to other
Christians, they
could also be of
significant help
to
Catholics, for the traditions of
spiritual
wisdom in the Roman Catholic Church are not
widely
known and
taught
in Catholic
colleges
and seminaries.
‘ Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 22. ‘ Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 31. 6 Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
6. ‘ Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
13. e Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 3, 13-17,22.
9 Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
15.
2
Discernment
of
a Spiritual
This
report
has
clearly
219
Current in the Churches
occasioned
by
the
spread
of
adopted
is
of the
spiritual
So the
report begins by
A)
and
spiritual
in Section C are the
that of
.
providing
authenticity
of individual
examining
unusual
phenomena
discernment
“Toronto-type phenomena”
Sections
phenomena
This
methodology the over-all
phenomenon. where
“Can
been
“Toronto-type” phenomena
to
Germany.
The
methodology
criteria for the discernment
phenomena.
in
general (Section
in
general (Section B); only
addressed in the
light
of the
principles
from
A and B.’° This
methodological approach
means that the “Toronto
blessing”
is
approached through
a consideration of individual
or occurrences.
“Toronto
about Spirit,
influenced
by
fails to address the social and
public
character of
It is true that in Section
C,
there are
places
the treatment moves from the individual to the
communal, e.g.
one
recognize,
at first in the individual
case,
but also in processes of the
community,
where the chief
point
of an event lies?”” and Section C. 3. on “Communities and Parishes.”‘2 While there are observations about some
practices
that are
commonly
found in circles affected
by the
blessing,”
there is
really
no discernment
concerning
the total current and its
significance. Indeed,
its focus on
phenomena (as
these are what are
regarded
as
pastorally problematic)
means that the
report does not address the
question
of the “content” of the
experience.
The first
question
to be addressed here is the element of
commonality
in the over-all
phenomenon,
and what
belongs
to this shared
element,
both at the level of
spiritual
content and of outward
expression.
To
recognize
that there is an overall
current, inspiration
and thrust
which it is possible to
say
that this is or is not a work of the
Holy
does not
negate
the need to
acknowledge
that there are
many forms of
immaturity,
foolishness and
self-promotion among
those
and
shaping
the over-all current. In other
words,
a discernment that the basic thrust of a current is from the
Holy Spirit,
at least in its
origins,
does not obviate the need for discernment in all its
manifestations and
subsequent developments.
mixed
development
is what has
happened
with both the Pentecostal and the Charismatic
movements,
both movements now
widely recognized to be works of the
Holy Spirit
in their basic
inspiration
and
gifting,
but also
containing
their fair share of human weakness and
folly.
Now it
may
be that the
Theological
Commission realized that a discernment of the Toronto
phenomenon
as a whole would
require
an extended visit to Toronto. Besides the
practical
difficulties inherent in such a proposal, Catholic sensitivities to matters of Church
jurisdiction
particular
Surely,
this
‘° Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 6.
Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 24.
Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 27-30.
“Theological “Theological
3
220
would make a German assessment of a Canadian church
inappropriate to
say
the least. A German commission thus examines the
phenomenon as it is
being
manifested within their own
sphere
of
responsibility
in Germany.
However,
another reason for the Commission’s
approach
and methodology may
lie in their dominant
concern,
which would seem in this instance to be more
pastoral
than
theological.
The
report
manifests an obvious concern for
people
harmed
by
insensitive and unwise presentations
and forms of
ministry relating
to “the
Blessing.”
This pastoral
concern is the
reason,
I
imagine,
for statements such as: “It is therefore
necessary
to avoid
speaking
of the ‘Toronto
Blessing’
as a single entity;
indeed one must discriminate
carefully
between its various dimensions and
expressions.”‘3
While it is obviously
necessary
to avoid endorsing
an entire
“package”
in an indiscriminate
way,
this is not an adequate
reason for not
addressing
the character and
significance
of the phenomenon
as a whole. The statement that “the
Toronto-type phenomena
divide
up
into 20%
spiritual,
70%
natural,
and 10% demonic” seems too
apodictic,
and
something
I have never heard stated there or
elsewhere, apart
from this
report.”
Another
important
issue involved in the claim to a grace common to a
spiritual
current with a social and
public
character is whether it is potentially given
to all or
only
to some. The German
report opts
for the latter, apparently
not
just
in relation to the “Toronto
blessing”
but also it would seem to
baptism
in the
Spirit.
Thus it states: “One of the greatest dangers
of PentecostaUCharismatic
‘teaching’
is the generalization
of concrete or individual
experiences
of
grace.””
The specific
attention and affection
given by
God and
experienced by
some individuals is declared to be “available” to all. The second sentence in this citation seems to be more
problematic
than the
first,
at least in its individualistic
implications.
There is an echo here
of theological
debates within Catholic circles in Germany, particularly
between Fr. Norbert
Baumert,
S.J. of Frankfurt and Fr. Heribert Mihlen of Paderborn.16 In his
understanding
and presentation
of the
gift
of the
Holy Spirit
in the Charismatic
Renewal, Fr. Baumert has
preferred
the model of
particular graces
and vocations as in the call to the monastic or the
religious life; i.e., baptism
in the Spirit
is a
grace given
to
many
but not to all.
By contrast,
Fr.
Muhlen, who dissociated himself from a world-wide Charismatic
Movement, insisted that the
renewing gift
of the
Holy Spirit
was for
all,
and
argued that its
proper setting
was therefore the
public liturgical
life of the local
‘
“Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 27. “Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,” 25. “Theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
12. ‘6Fr. Buamert’s
position
can be seen from numerous articles in Rundbrief für Charismatische
Erneuerung
in der Katholischen, and Fr. MühJen’s in articles in Erneuerung
in Kirche und Gesellschaft.
4
221
Church. The
former view allows for a distinctive Charismatic Movement,
but at the
price
of its
being
a gift for
all;
the latter
accepts the universal thrust
of the
grace,
but resists
any expression
of a distinctive movement.
The
present
author has
argued
both for an identifiable movement or current of Charismatic Renewal and for
baptism
in the
Spirit being
a
grace
offered to all.” I do not see
any affirmation of such a grace
being
“available to all” as
necessarily falling into the
trap
of erecting general doctrine on
particular experiences.
This mistake is made when no distinction is made between the
grace
or blessing being
offered to
all,
and the
particular
forms and manifestations of its
bestowal,
which
may
be varied. To
say
that another has not received this
grace
because
they
have not received it in an identical manner to oneself is to build doctrine on
experiences.
But to believe that the Lord desires to bless and enrich all believers with the heart of the
blessing
that I have received is right and
proper,
where this grace
forms
part
of the basic
patrimony
of all
Christians, e.g., knowing forgiveness
of
sins, knowing
the love of the Father and one’s inheritance as sons and
daughters
of the
Father, knowing
the
power
of the
indwelling Spirit.
These
graces
are not
comparable
to
gifts
and ministries
given
to
some,
but not to all.
The
Importance of the
Toronto Phenomenon
The
present
author’s sense is that the
importance
of the “Toronto blessing”
is
directly
linked to the increased level of visible manifestations. The Pentecostal and Charismatic movements have both been characterized
by
a
greater
element of
bodily expression
than was normal in the lives of
participants
before
baptism
in the
Spirit.
Thus Pentecostals and Charismatics
typically
raise their arms in praise, clap their
hands,
dance and move around in
worship, impose
hands in ministry,
and otherwise move and
gesticulate
in their service of the Lord and of one another. Some observers of the Pentecostal phenomenon,
in particular Professor Walter
Hollenweger,
have seen in its
physicality
and
orality
a
major
element in its
popular appeal
and impact among
the uneducated and the illiterate.18 But this
physicality has found little
recognition
in Pentecostal and Charismatic
theology, often
only finding
a
place
in
teachings
on
physical healing
and on speaking
in
tongues
as the initial evidence of
baptism
in the
Spirit.
In this
respect,
we
may say
that Pentecostal/Charismatic
practice
is richer than its theology.
“Peter D. Hocken, One Lord, One Spirit, One Body (Exeter, UK: Paternoster Press, 1987; Gaithersburg, Word Among Us Press, 1987), 33-56; and,
Peter D. Hocken,
The Glory and the Shame (Guildford, UK:
1994), 39-61. ‘8 Walter J.
Hollenweger,
-“Creator
Spiritus:
The Eagle, Challenge of Pentecostal Experience
to Pentecostal Theology,”
Theology 81 (January 1978): 32-40; and, Walter J.
Hollenweger,
“Pentecostalism and Academic From Confrontation to Cooperation,” EPTA Bulletin 10 ( 1992): 42-49.
Theology:
5
222
In this
context,
the Toronto intensification of the
physicality
renewing-reviving
appears
to
represent
an
phenomenon
characteristic of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements. For those who have sensed the
importance
of the
bodily
dimension in the wider
movements,
the
potential significance of Toronto
ought
to be obvious. Should we not
expect
that
currents of the
Holy Spirit
of God should manifest themselves in the
physical
realm that is also created
by
God and that is to be
fully
redeemed
by the saving
work of Jesus Christ?
a theology
grounded
in Evangelical categories finds it hard to come to terms with the human
body.
For
Evangelical theology
has been formulated in reaction
against religious formalism, stressing
the
in contrast to all outward
patterns
that are
easily
However,
religion
of the heart
dismissed as
empty
ritual. Much
of the attack on the “Toronto
and has often
literature is at
pains
blessing”
has come from the
Evangelical constituency,
asserted that too much attention is
given
in Toronto to the “manifestations.”
Thus,
much of the
“pro-Toronto”
to
deny
this
allegation,
and is inclined to
play
down the
significance
of the manifestations. So Mark Stibbe writes: “the
phenomena
are
up
downplaying
unity
of
insignificant. They are,
in a sense, the least
important
facet of what God is doing.
They
are the froth on the wave….
They
are the
physical
and cultural reactions to the
powerful presence
and work of the
Holy Spirit. To
say otherwise,
and
thereby give
them undue
importance,
will lead us
a very
dangerous path.”‘9
What is
undeniably dangerous
is the
seeking
of manifestations for their own sake. The German
report
is
strong
and clear on this
point. But that does not mean that the
physical
manifestations are
unimportant and
insignificant.
To
jump
to this conclusion is to fall into the
trap
of
the
bodily-physical
order in human life and
society.
The central doctrine of the Christian
faith,
the Incarnation in human flesh of the eternal Son of
God,
is an affirmation of the foundational the
spiritual
and the
physical
in God’s
plan
for creation. It is here that one
might
have
hoped
for a stronger and more
penetrating analysis
and reflection from a Catholic
theological
commission.
For
example,
there is a role of the
body
in
expressing
and
making visible that which is
happening
within the human
person;
in
particular our facial
expressions
are indicative of what is happening within. There is also the role of the
body
as the instrument for
communicating others. These
may
come often
together,
as in the intimacies of married love. These two
aspects
of bodily
expression
and communication would
to two vital roles of the
bodily
order: one that
may
be called the
reality principle
and the other that of community and
society.
the
reality
of
things:
as
long
as
something
is merely
interior and not
outwardly expressed,
it is not
fully grounded
in
It lacks an element of
reality.
seem to relate
The
bodily
order
grounds
the
person.
to
Paul
expresses
this
“Mark
Stibbe, Times of Refreshing (London: Marshall Pickering, 1995), 97.
6
believe are possible.
community
223
relationship
in Romans 10:10: “For it is with
your
heart that
you
and are justified, and it is with
your
mouth that
you
confess and
saved.” The
bodily
order is also what makes
community
and
society
The forms of human
sharing
and interaction that are made possible by
the human
body
and our senses form the bedrock of human
and
society.
A
totally
interior
religion
without outward expression
is far removed from the New Testament
faith. “The
body
is a unit,
though
it is made
up
of many parts;
all its
parts
are
many, they
form one
body.
So it is with
Christian
and
though
Christ”
(1 Cor. 12:12).
When we look at the Toronto
manifestations includes the
patterns
sustained
criticism,
conception
of
phenomenon
in this
light,
it is
dimension is wider than the
receiving ministry.
It also
the
experience:
teaching
even Pentecostal not know before.
important
to
recognize
that its
physical
occurring among
those
of
ministry,
and the forms of
communicating “blessing.”
Some of the
gestures
involved in the latter have come in for
such as
wafting, blowing, scooping,
etc. The whole area of
physical
manifestations needs to be seen as
part
of a
learning
there would seem to be an element of the
Holy Spirit
and Charismatic Christians
things they
did
Terry Virgo Spirit”
Charismatic
teacher,
of the
For
example,
a
prominent
British
independent
from
Brighton,
was
preaching
about
“impartation
at Toronto in June
1995;
he mentioned that he had never heard of such a concept when he was at Bible
college.
Now he was
going
to the
Scriptures,
and
discovering
much to learn about
impartation.
As a Catholic in the
congregation,
I sensed
immediately
that
impartation
is a
at home in a Catholic
theological framework,
in which
concept totally
sacramental actions are understood
to communicate the life of the
Spirit.
Here the German
report
makes an unfortunate statement: “But no human
person
can
‘pass
on’ the
Spirit,
one can
only personally
ask
obviously
true that
grace
Charismatic
that God
communicate
to
the Lord of the
Spirit
to send the
Spirit
each time anew.’,20 It is
no human
person simply
as human
person
can
pass on the
Spirit
of God. But does not God use believers to be instruments in passing on the
Spirit?
This human involvement in transmitting God’s
is the Catholic conviction
concerning
ordination and the
ministry of the Word and sacraments. But is it not
part
of the Pentecostal and
experience
uses human
ministers,
whom He endows with
gifts
and ministries
beyond merely
human
powers,
divine
life,
the
Spirit?
Of course this
theological position has its
dangers.
The humans can
begin
to think that these
powers
are due to
something
in them. But the
danger
is the risk that the Lord took in the Incarnation and in
choosing
to have
any
ministers of his
gospel and his salvation. Christian ministers can do more than ask the Lord of the
Spirit
to send the
Spirit
each time anew.
They
can
impart
the
grace
theological Commission, “Concerning Extraordinary Bodily Phenomena,”
12.
7
224
of the
Spirit,
when
they
are
empowered
to do
so,
and under the
leading and the
authority
of the
Spirit.
In
making
these
observations,
I am conscious of the limits of the report
of a Commission that has to
represent
the conclusions of all its members. I am also conscious that a more detailed reflection
requires both considerable
exposure
to the
phenomenon
and
plenty
of time for evaluation and reconsideration. This German Catholic
report
reflects an awareness of
contemporary developments
and a concern for
pastoral responsibility
that is to be
strongly
commended. I
hope
it is a
subject that the Commission will re-visit.
8
