Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Pneuma 41 (2019) 507–511
Global Considerations in Response to “Do Not Quench the Spirit”
Jacqueline Grey Alphacrucis College, Australia [email protected]
The Report of the Sixth Phase of the International Catholic-Pentecostal Dia- logue (2011–2015) is a celebratory document that affirms the rich tradition within both communities of seeking the life and gifts of the Spirit for the build- ing of the church and its mission. While there may be differences in how each community perceives the charisms to be received and worked out, both groups emphasize that the charisms are generally available to all believers. The lan- guage of gratitude, rejoicing, and celebration features prominently throughout the Report; indeed, the commonality it presents is cause for joy. It is also note- worthy that the participants in the dialogue from both the Catholic Church and Classical Pentecostal communities represent a variety of international con- texts and situations. With this in mind, I would like to offer a response to the report from my own perspective as one located in a non-Western commu- nity.1 There are three issues raised by the report that I would like to highlight for further discussion: evaluating historical prophetic traditions; charisms and suffering; and implications of a sacramental view of charisms for women’s ordi- nation.
1 Evaluation of Historical Prophetic Traditions
The report highlights many commonalities between the Catholic and Pente- costal communities, particularly their shared theological perspective that “the Holy Spirit has never ceased to bestow his charisms on Christians in every age” (§1). Both communities celebrate a rich history of traditions in which
1 While I am from Australia, my residence and location for ministry is in West Asia, where
Christianity (including Pentecostalism) is marginal.
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/15700747-04103032
1
508
ecumenical reflections
the presence of charisms were and are valued. The report details some of this history, yet also includes some more controversial histories such as “the ecclesial reaction to the excesses of charismatic movements such as Mon- tanism” (§22). This raises two concerns regarding the evaluation of historic prophetic traditions. First, it highlights the dearth in pentecostal scholarship of analyzing charismatic and prophetic traditions in post-apostolic history and the potential this task offers. While some pentecostal scholars have under- taken significant work in this area (particularly in the study of early Chris- tian movements),2 there is much scope for further exploration by pentecostal and Catholic scholars alike. While the report is carefully circumspect regard- ing the historic prophetic movement of Montanism, pentecostal scholars such as Deborah Gill have suggested that the New Prophecy movement of Mon- tanism was rejected by the orthodox church because of sociological rather than theological matters. The sociological factors included female leadership and the authority of inspiration rather than hierarchy.3Essentially, Montanism presented a threat to the existing ecclesial authorities. Yet, the democratiza- tion of the Spirit is a central value for the pentecostal community. Perhaps a re-evaluation and retrieval of this history of Montanism will benefit the gen- erational pentecostal community as it tackles issues of institutionalization. If Pentecostalism is to continue as a reforming movement of the church, then it must navigate the benefits and limitations of institutionalization. There- fore, there is potentially much to be learned from a historical re-evaluation of Montanism and an analysis of the rejection of this prophetic movement by the orthodox church—particularly if studied in dialogue with our Catholic sisters and brothers. Second, and connected to this, the report challenges the somewhat limited view of prophetic traditions valued by Pentecostals. Instead, Pentecostals are reminded of the rich traditions in history such as the monastic movements and medieval revivals that may also provide models of prophetic practice for consideration and examination by the pentecostal community also to learn from.
2 Arguably the most significant work completed in this area has been undertaken by Cecil
M. Robeck (such as Prophecy in Carthage: Perpetua, Tertullian, and Cyprian, Cleveland, Ohio:
Pilgrim Press, 1992). However, other pentecostal scholars have made a valuable contribu-
tion, including scholars such as Deborah M. Gill (“The Disappearance of the Female Prophet:
Twilight of Christian Prophecy,” in Wonsuk Ma and Robert P. Menzies, eds., The Spirit and
Spirituality: Essays in Honour of Russell P. Spittler (London: T & T Clark, 2004), 178–193). 3 Gill, “The Disappearance of the Female Prophet,” 186–191.
Pneuma 41 (2019) 507–511
2
ecumenical reflections
509
2 Charisms and Suffering
Another rich tradition raised by the report that is often ignored by the pente- costal community (particularly in Western contexts) is that of suffering. Yet, for the majority of the non-Western pentecostal communities, this is their reality. In my own location of West Asia, the Christian community (much of which would identify as pentecostal and charismatic) faces social ostracism, fear of persecution and internment, and martyrdom. Indeed, some from our com- munity are currently interned for their faith. Therefore I am grateful for the emphasis within the report that highlights the connection between charisms and suffering. And while Pentecostals inWestern contexts may not directly face persecution, as the report articulates: “Even the most powerful charisms do not exempt Christians from taking up the cross and embracing the cost of disci- pleship” (§13). This is a crucial step for the global church in identifying with those in contexts of suffering. It is also a challenge to the Western pentecostal community—that although we began historically in the margins of society in many contexts and have since, in many locations, adapted to express middle- class aspirations—not to get too comfortable in this habitation. Indeed, to fol- low Christ is to share in his sufferings. The report is rightly critical of “escapist or triumphalist tendencies in the Church” (§13).
Both historically and today, persecution is a reality for the Christian com- munity. In my own context of West Asia I see believers discussing and prepar- ing for the possible and probable reality of martyrdom. It is a reality far from the experience of many Western believers. Yet, this possibility of martyrdom causes believers to count the cost of their faith. It discourages a trivializa- tion of the gospel and ensures that the charisms of the Spirit are more than a novelty. This is not to pit Western communities against non-Western com- munities (as there are certainly experiences of suffering in all locations) but to reinforce the perspective of the report that connects persecution and suf- fering for the confession of Christ with prophetic proclamation. As the report states, “Catholics and Pentecostals affirm together that whenever Christians suffer discrimination, persecution, and martyrdom, through their confession of Christ in words and deeds they exercise the gift of prophecy” (§51). This represents the reality for much of the global church and reminds us that while the body of Christ was and continues to be wounded, these stripes are a prophetic proclamation to the world of the love, forgiveness, and hope of Christ.
Pneuma 41 (2019) 507–511
3
510
ecumenical reflections
3 Implications of a Sacramental View of Charisms for Women’s
Ordination
There is, however, one issue in the report that was not (in my opinion) ex- pressed as effectively. This was regarding the discussion on the sacramental view of charisms. The report presents clearly the perspective of the Catholic community that the Holy Spirit equips the church with both institutional and charismatic gifts. The institutional dimension is worked out through the lead- ership structures of the community: the threefold ministry of bishop, pres- byter, deacon. What is not made explicit in the report is the acknowledgement that women, by virtue of their gender, are excluded from this charism in the Catholic community. This is important because the description of the insti- tutional charisms for the pentecostal community mirrors the same language: “Pentecostals assert that in Classical Pentecostal denominations similar lead- ership structures are in place, though the exercise of oversight may at times be more diffuse. Both recognize that authority must always be exercised accord- ing to the leading of the Holy Spirit if they are to avoid the risk of its improper use” (§28). My concern is that this statement affirms similar structures without identifying a significant difference: that the said structures within the Catholic community prohibit women from ordination; however, in many pentecostal communities such restrictions are absent. In fact, as mentioned above, the democratization of the Spirit regardless of gender and race is a fundamental value of Pentecostalism that is understood in most communities to include the charism of institutional leadership. It is important for Pentecostals to affirm and uphold this value, even when other Christian communities with which we dialogue do not share the same values. While it is not the purview of the pente- costal community to engage in the internal debate of the Catholic community regarding women’s ordination, it is the purview of us to comment and reflect our own theology and values in such a report. By not making this distinction clear in the Report, it harms our pentecostal sisters as it undermines the theo- logical basis for their ordination in pentecostal communities. For pentecostal women, especially those in many missional contexts that are battling with cul- tural limitations such as strong patriarchal and honor-shame worldviews, the clear articulation not only of the prophethood of all believers but subsequent value of women’s (and men’s) ordination is vital.
In conclusion, overall there is much to celebrate and affirm in the report. It provides further connection between the two communities that have much in common in seeking the charisms of the Spirit, particularly prophecy, heal- ing, and discernment. The document also provides an opportunity to learn and
Pneuma 41 (2019) 507–511
4
ecumenical reflections
511
grow together, especially in furthering theological reflection and developing necessary processes for discernment as the task of the community. There are some aspects of the report (such as the implications of a sacramental view of charisms for women’s ordination) that I would like to have seen reflect more noticeably pentecostal values. However, the report does represent some concerns of the global pentecostal community in contexts of persecution by affirming the connection between charisms and suffering. The report provides yet another step toward unity and celebration of our communities serving together in the Spirit.
Pneuma 41 (2019) 507–511
5
