Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com



Theological Dialogue on the “Full Gospel”: Trinitarian Contributions from Pope John Paul II and Thomas A. Smail
Ralph Del Colle
Pentecostal testimony often employs the term “Full Gospel” as a witness to the restoration of God’s salvific purposes in Jesus Christ. Spirit baptism is part of the pattern of Christ’s work, represented in either a fivefold or fourfold account. Jesus is acclaimed as Savior, Sanctifier, Spirit Baptizer, Healer, and Coming King. The non-Wesleyan or “finished work” side of the movement favors the fourfold account by dropping Sanctifier, consistent with its rejection of Wesleyan entire sanctification as a second work of grace. Despite this difference, Pentecostals agree that something is lacking in the gospel if Spirit baptism is not proclaimed and experienced.
In more formal theological language, Pentecostal faith intends to confess the full pneumatological dimensions of God’s christological work of redemption and grace. Interestingly enough, one of the marks of the contemporary theological scene for at least the last quarter century has been a renewed interest in Christology, trinitarian theology, and the theology of the Holy Spirit. The relationship among them is in many instances quite explicit. For example, thinking about the Holy Spirit raises the question of the Spirit’s relation to the Father and the Son. Also, considering that pneumatology has been somewhat neglected in the Western church, the renewed vitality of the experience of the Holy Spirit in Pentecostalism and the Charismatic Renewal has provoked interest in these Christian doctrines and underscored their relationship to each other.
Clearly, not all those in this genre have been influenced by the various waves of the Pentecostal/charismatic movement. This lack of explicit connection does not diminish their contribution to this renewal and in the area of Christian thought. I would argue that further insight can be gained as a consequence of fruitful dialogue between charismatic and non-charismatic theologians. With this in mind, I propose to articulate the trinitarian and pneumatological concerns of two different voices, one non-charismatic and one charismatic, with whom Pentecostals and charismatics may cultivate an invigorating dialogue. One is that of Pope John Paul II, as articulated in the exercise of his Petrine teaching office. The other is the charismatic, once Church of Scotland, now Anglican theologian Thomas Smail. Each in his own way since the 1970s has taken a trinitarian journey in theological reflection.
The Pope, in his capacity as universal teacher, respectively devoted a papal encyclical to each person of the Trinity: Redemptor Hominis (Redeemer of Man, 1979); Dives in Misericordia (On the Mercy of God, 1980); and Dominum et Vivificantem (On the Holy Spirit in the Life of the Church and the World, 1986). Initially, I will seek to establish the Pope as an interlocutor with classical Pentecostalism by utilizing the “Full Gospel” as a paradigm for Pentecostal faith and experience. I will then employ the work of Thomas Smail, whose three books—Reflected Glory: The Spirit in Christ and Christians (1975), The Forgotten Father (1980), and The Giving Gift: The Holy Spirit in Person (1988)—reflect the same trinitarian sequence: Son, Father, and Holy Spirit. They specifically attempt to provide mature theological direction for the Spirit-renewed in the life of the church. As former director of the British charismatic institute, Fountain Trust, and editor of Theological Renewal, Smail has been a long-time advocate of bringing theological reflection to bear on Pentecostal/charismatic experience.
The Full Gospel and the Persons of the Trinity
Pope John Paul II, in his 1994 apostolic letter Tertio Millenio Adveniente, exercised an ecclesial discernment of the upcoming Great Jubilee of the year 2000. At the turn of the millennium, he anticipates a “new springtime of Christian life … if Christians are docile to the action of the Holy Spirit”—an emphasis not that far removed from the Full Gospel of Pentecostal witness and testimony, permeated as the latter is by eschatological hope and the experience of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The Pope’s call for spiritual and theological preparation, already anticipated in his papal encyclicals, is designed to promote the intensification of relationship to each of the divine persons. When transferred to the realm of Christian piety, we are reminded of the experiential reality of Pentecostal life.
At first glance, the Pentecostal Full Gospel appears to be extremely Christocentric. Jesus Christ is Savior, Sanctifier, Spirit Baptizer, Healer, and Coming King. But this Christocentric interpretation would belie the pneumatological dimension that is constitutive of the Pentecostal transformation of the Holiness legacy. This observation is not to deny that the pneumatological dimension was already operative in different sectors of the Holiness movement prior to Azusa Street. However, the Pentecostal distinctive does rest on the transition from the Holiness fourfold gospel to the Holiness-Pentecostal fivefold gospel generated by the impact of Spirit baptism with signs following. Even outside the Wesleyan-Holiness stream within Pentecostalism, Spirit baptism retains the same defining role. The fourfold gospel of the “Finished Work” of Christ is a sufficient basis for the ongoing and progressive process of sanctification. To this extent, certain tensions exist between the christological and pneumatological emphases within Pentecostalism.
Redemptor Hominis and the Scope of Redemption
The Pentecostal witness to the “Full Gospel”—whether fivefold or fourfold—is proffered as the distinctive claim of the movement. With roots in the New Testament—Paul claimed that he did not hesitate to declare the whole purpose of God to the Ephesians (Acts 20:27)—it is a claim not surprisingly also made by Roman Catholics. Vatican II’s Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio) states that “it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained” (13). Clearly, the latter is focused more on the church, its teaching, and sacraments; but the parallel is obvious. If the transition from Holiness (Wesleyan or Keswick) to Pentecostal locates the theological innovation in the restoration of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with signs following, the Catholic sensibility has always rested in its stewardship of the fullness of truth committed by Christ to the apostles. While this has not excluded development in doctrine, the recognition of such development is not conceived as a restoration of what has been lost nor as the eschatological fulfillment of what has been promised for the last days.
Nevertheless, the fullness to which both ecclesial traditions lay claim concerns the salvific efficacy of the gospel, centered primarily in the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, the Savior and Coming King, also heals, sanctifies, and baptizes with the Holy Spirit. With this practical knowledge, the church is equipped to carry the gospel to the ends of the earth as it anticipates the parousia. Holiness and power are the two hallmarks of Pentecostal restoration, necessary if the purposes of God are to be fulfilled. True to the primitive apostolic faith and prophetically significant as an instance of the “latter rain,” the church has now entered into the fullness of God’s salvific plan.
The Spirit Christology of Thomas A. Smail
A long-time participant in the Charismatic Renewal, Thomas Smail has himself undergone theological and ecclesial changes. Most notable is his transfer from the Church of Scotland to the Church of England. However, he has kept a critical theological eye on the Pentecostal and charismatic movements and may now be described as one of those post-charismatics who is no longer as visible a participant in the renewal. Perhaps this change in his pilgrimage was due to his prior theological training (Reformed and Barthian) still retaining its hold, but this would not do justice to his published works. The Pentecostal/charismatic experience has motivated much of his theological reflection. We begin with his first book, Reflected Glory: The Spirit in Christ and Christians. Despite the title, the book has more to do with Christology than with pneumatology; the latter would follow two books later.
Although fairly critical of many elements in the charismatic movement and even more critical of classical Pentecostalism, Smail’s intent is constructive. He envisions Christology anew in light of the movement of the Holy Spirit. While a good deal of time is spent debunking the classical Pentecostal doctrine of subsequence in regard to Spirit baptism (excluding the Oneness stream, which he does not address), I choose not to focus on that argument but on the christological proposal itself. Smail’s critique of the theology of subsequence rests on one overall thesis: “The second blessing presentation obscures the centrality and sufficiency of the Lord Jesus Christ.” Although the sentiment may resonate with those of Oneness Pentecostals, Smail’s point has everything to do with his profound trinitarian sensibilities. Rather than glorify the Spirit in addition to Christ, we ought to follow the Spirit’s lead and seek to understand how new experiences of the Spirit, which the renewal offers, glorify Christ.
Dominum et Vivificantem: The Third Person and the Great Jubilee
Dominum et Vivificantem (On the Holy Spirit in the Life of the Church and the World) is not the first papal encyclical on the Holy Spirit. Leo XIII wrote Divinum Illud in 1897, which concentrated on “the indwelling and miraculous power of the Holy Ghost; and the extent and efficacy of His action, both in the whole Church and in the individual souls of its members, through the glorious abundance of His Divine graces” (2). That a letter should be written just prior to the Pentecostal revival may be considered a matter of divine providence. In any case, the sense of timeliness does pervade John Paul’s encyclical letter on the Holy Spirit, and, although written after Dives in Misericordia (on the Father), I refer to it now in correlation with his stated preparatory order for the Great Jubilee.
The increased prominence given to the Holy Spirit in the Catholic Church is especially evident since the Second Vatican Council. While many see the council itself as an act of the Holy Spirit—e.g., Pope John XXIII’s conciliar prayer for the church’s renewal “as by a New Pentecost”—the present Pope understands the teaching of the council to have been “essentially ‘pneumatological,’ the soul of the Church” (126). He even refers to the council as having made “the Spirit newly ‘present’ in our difficult age” and that its teaching “contains precisely all that ‘the Spirit says to the Churches’ with regard to the present phase of the history of salvation.” Such language is reminiscent of the eschatological intensity evident in the original Pentecostal pioneers.
Our concern is to identify the commonality wherein the newness of the Spirit’s work is recognized—a new phase in the history of salvation?—while negotiating the imminent expectation for the parousia as a matter of the eschatological dimension constituting all aspects of Christian faith. We will briefly consider the Pope’s reflections on the Holy Spirit under three titles he employs in the encyclical: Person-Love, Person-Gift, and Paraclete-Counselor. As these titles suggest, attention to the personhood of the Holy Spirit is foremost in the Pope’s mind, and considering the theological tradition common to traditional Catholic scholastic presentations of pneumatology, it is quite in character.
Dr. Eloise Merriweather
The exploration of the ‘Full Gospel’ within the context of Trinitarian theology raises significant questions regarding the integration of pneumatological and christological perspectives. The tension between the classical Pentecostal emphasis on Spirit baptism as a distinct second blessing and the more holistic understanding proposed by Pope John Paul II and Thomas Smail warrants deeper examination. It is imperative that we consider how these differing views might coexist without compromising the integrity of each theological stance.
Vernell Waterson
The article adeptly highlights the ongoing dialogue between Pentecostalism and Roman Catholicism, particularly in relation to trinitarian theology. However, I would argue that while Pope John Paul II’s encyclicals provide a robust foundation for understanding the Holy Spirit’s role, they may unintentionally overshadow the experiential aspects of Pentecostal faith that emphasize personal encounter with God through Spirit baptism. This raises an essential question: can a more experiential approach to theology coexist with doctrinal rigor without diminishing either?
Charles' Pager
While I appreciate the attempt to bridge gaps between charismatic and non-charismatic traditions, I contend that there is an inherent risk in attempting to reconcile divergent theological frameworks without adequately addressing foundational differences. The interpretation of salvation and sanctification within Pentecostalism distinctly diverges from Roman Catholic teachings, particularly regarding individual agency versus communal sacramental grace. A fruitful dialogue must critically engage these differences rather than gloss over them in pursuit of unity.
Jack Bowers
The article presents an intriguing synthesis of perspectives on the ‘Full Gospel,’ yet it seems to underemphasize the historical context that shaped these theological developments. The nuanced distinctions among various strands of Pentecostal thought—Wesleyan-Holiness, Finished Work, Oneness—illustrate a rich tapestry of beliefs deserving recognition rather than homogenization. Furthermore, I urge scholars to critically analyze how contemporary socio-cultural dynamics influence these theological discourses, which may lead to new insights about faith practices today.