The Charisms of the Holy Spirit in the Life of Churches

The affirmation and exercise of charisms has varied over time and been shaped by the prevailing theological assumptions about formal church structure and leadership of a given tradition. Theological assumptions are, as a matter of course, profoundly colored by the perspectives of the people developing them in the context of the current hegemonic cultural presuppositions. This is especially true of ecclesiology and pneumatology. Indeed, the ways in which different Christian traditions have come to counterbalance these two categories of Christian theology speaks volumes about their fundamental views of God and human salvation. The different intellectual categories which systematic theologians attempt to describe are all intertwined in people’s actual thought and practice. 

In churches with a traditional emphasis on the Episcopal model of leadership and ministry the focus of thought has been on the position and work of formal leaders. The ministry of laypersons was not emphasized because they were not among the group of ordained persons commissioned to do the churches’ work. This kind of theoretical model tends to elevate certain persons into positions where they become the main conduits of the Spirit’s power and ministry and thus it relegates most members of the congregation to being merely receivers of that special classification of persons who serve the church.[1] 

In the historical experience of Christian history there have always been expressions of charisms by multiple people of various status’ and positions within Christian communities. Each unique historical variation of Episcopacy, for example, has come to terms with these manifestations in different ways while maintaining the integrity of their core convictions regarding formal church government. The main vehicles for dealing with these Spirit-manifestations has been to suppress them or accommodate them by carving out a special category or alternative type of approved ministry form which can be supervised by the formal leaders of the church.[2]

The same is also true of the Reformed tradition in which leaders responded by either repressing or carving out space for ministry gifts and activities that did not conform to the formally recognized categories. The Free churches history is generally characterized by openness to experimentation and much greater flexibility to reformulate formal organizational structure and ministry work in accordance with the perceived human needs of the time and the will of the Holy Spirit. This willingness to break with tradition has led to numerous splits and fractures of existing Christian churches and denominations.

The less weight a given Christian community gives to traditional understandings of how to order the congregation the more likely they are to be heavily dependent upon the perceived leading of the Holy Spirit and innovative means of organizing leaders and common worship and fellowship activities. The question is not whether a church (or association of churches) holds to some tradition about ordering community life—for they all certainly have core convictions regarding ecclesiology! Rather, the key theological issue is how willing they are to adapt or even abandon some aspect of that tradition in order to facilitate the charismatic expression of the life of the Church in its many manifestations.

This ongoing dynamic in the history of a given Christian tradition or congregation can be used as a kind of theological test to measure a groups willingness to let the Holy Spirit express God’s charisms and thus consciously participate in God’s missional Presence in the world as the Church. With few exceptions, the theological assumptions of a given Christian tradition tend to dictate the terms under which the operation of  charisms are approved or disapproved. The Reformed tradition is a prime example of this principle. The overwhelming emphasis on the preaching of the word of God has meant that the office of pastor-teacher has tended to take precedence over the many other charisms given to God’s people. The emphasis on rationality in Reformed theology (especially in classical Calvinist orthodoxy) has also tended to instill deep-seated suspicion and denigration of charisms as such.

More positive examples of openness to charisms can be found within the Methodist and Pentecostal traditions. Here the founding leaders were opened through their experience of God’s grace to the charisms and sought to shape the organizational structures of the Christian communities so as to foster the exercise of charisms by all believers. The advent of Vatican II is also a refreshing and extraordinary example of how a church so deeply rooted in ancient tradition can consciously reformulate and adapt the traditional structure of ordained ministry to broaden participation of all God’s people based on charisms. Enormous good has resulted from this dramatic paradigm shift in the theological perspectives and practices of millions of Christians due to these three examples alone.

The Church is essentially charismatic in its constitution and spiritual life because we owe our existence and participation in eternal life to the Presence and work of the Holy Spirit. We are not the Church (i.e. God’s people) without God the Spirit persistently brooding over us to protect us in our folly, illumine our hearts to hope in God alone and train us to walk in love by faith. God’s gift (charism) to his people is an essential aspect of the life he designed for us to live out in service on earth.[3]

The structure of leadership and ways that community life is ordered will naturally reflect the cultural in which a given church finds itself in. This fact, however, must never become the determining factor for how Christians conceive of their communal life and conduct the ministry of the Gospel. Rather, all God’s people must cultivate habits of life and thought that foster critical awareness of actual human needs, openness to how the Holy Spirit has gifted the members of the church(es) and to cultivate wisdom to be able to perceive when and how to change organizational structures to expand the ministry of the Church. The purpose of the Church is to participate, as the Body of Christ, in the missional Presence of the Triune God in the world. Structure either serves to enhance that ministry or to inhibit it (or even prohibit it). Thus, we must do whatever is necessary to not stand in the way of what the Holy Spirit is doing in our generation while not rejecting the wisdom of past tradition unnecessarily.[4]  

The Scriptures, when taken seriously as the primary rule for life and doctrine for Christians, will inevitably challenge the accumulated wisdom of all Christian traditions. A continual return to the well of Scripture to learn, assess and reevaluate how we think about the Church and do church is a necessity if we are to remain faithful to the Gospel. Matters of ecclesiology and pneumatology, like all categories developed in the discipline of Christian systematic theology, are interrelated with each other and to the Gospel. Thus, in order to develop a theological perspective of charisms in the Church which is biblically informed, doctrinally sound and authentic to Christian experience in the Holy Spirit we must be firmly rooted in Scripture.

Also needful is a reverent commitment to critically evaluate our traditional notions of charisms, church structure and the cultural assumptions of the ancients and of our own time. Our congregational traditions tend to take on a stratified life of their own which we blindly accept and follow without knowing why or even if it is wise to do so. Thus, spiritual openness to God the Spirit, flexibility of thought, and willingness to take risks to make concrete changes as a result of renewed understanding of biblical principles and examples are required from all God’s people. For in order for the churches to effectively witness as the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ they must first and foremost be open to the Holy Spirit’s guidance and illumination of Scripture.

The long history of Christian tradition—accumulated experience and wisdom—was hammered out over a long period of time and through profound experiences of trial and ministry over the generations. For this reason the voices of the past need to be heard and respected even as we critically assess the heritage they left. However, in order to grow into a fully mature understanding of being the Church contemporary Christians must be open to radically reevaluating the received theological views on charisms and church structure. For these are the most intensely practical and simultaneously theologically important expressions what it means to be the Church of God.

 

---

[1] These observations are based on my own reading of theological writings, church history and experiences in actual Christian communities.

[2] For example, the monastic movements beginning the third and fourth centuries; the long series of Christian mystics coming from the monastic tradition or beginning their own formally recognized orders within the Roman Church structure.

[3] This emphasis is especially prominent in the writings of Miroslav Volf. See An Introdution to Ecclesiology, Veli-Matti Karkkainen, p.139-141.

[4] See the argument sustained by Leslie Newbigin in The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, p.144-154.