07 Next Generation Essay: Experiencing the Supernatural

This new section of the journal is being dedicated to publishing student papers, with the goal of encouraging and promoting pentecostal scholars of the future. Our inaugural "next generation" essay is from a Master of Theology Student, Chris Baker.

The rise of Australian Pentecostalism, from obscurity into a large contemporary Christian movement,¹ constitutes a remarkable and gripping story. This rise, which is reflective of Pentecostalism globally, can be attributed to a dynamic spirituality, one which is framed by a distinctive understanding of spiritual gifts as God empowered supernatural phenomena. This paper seeks to outline the development of this understanding by considering the contribution of prominent figures in early Pentecostalism. It then contrasts this Pentecostal view of the gifts with some different perspectives from non-pentecostal theologians, with the purpose of, firstly, locating distinctive elements inherent in the Pentecostal position which might contribute to ecumenical discussion and, secondly, broadening the Pentecostal perspective.

It is Barry Chant’s contention that the development of Australian Pentecostalism was not purely the result of oversees imports but, rather, was a series of dependent and inter-dependent factors that created a unique social movement within Australia.² It is necessary to recognise the importance of this claim and to note the factors that contributed to the transference of theological ideas concerning spiritual gifts from both local (internal) and international (external) influences.

Prior to the emergence of pentecostalism in Australia, an important influential historical antecedent can be found in the ministry of John Alexander Dowie (1847-1907). Though he is considered an international figure, well known for the establishment of Zion City in Illinois, USA, his first ministry experiences occurred in Australia. During the course of an epidemic in Sydney, 1875, Dowie was challenged by the records of healing in the book of Acts, and sought to repeat the same phenomena in his own context.³ From this experience, Dowie began a successful healing ministry and developed his emphasis on divine healing and spiritual gifts, which together were to become prominent themes of his international ministry.⁴ His restorationalist eschatology, which understood the renewal of spiritual gifts as being the supernatural sign of the "end of days," as well as his belief that the nine gifts set out in 1 Cor 12 constituted an exhaustive list of the spiritual gifts, which were thereby contrasted with natural gifts,⁵ were perspectives that came to predominate in Australian pentecostalism, not only due to his own prominence and reputation, but because many in Dowie’s Zion movement became pastors with the Assemblies of God in Australia.⁶

The second influential figure in the Australian context is Sarah Jane Lancaster who had similar personsal experiences as Dowie in respect to healing. She too was confronted with divine healing when challenged by an elderly man who had been sick for 20 years, and upon studying the Biblical accounts, accepted that such miraculous phenomena were normative experiences for the modern church. Her conclusion was confirmed to her as correct when she too experienced the healing of her disfigured arm.⁷ It is important to note that, like Dowie, Lancaster’s acceptance of healing was prior to further understandings of the gifts, and thus divine healing functioned as the experiential entry point to further spiritual phenomena. From her foundational experiences of healing, Lancaster then sought the Baptism of the Spirit with speaking in tongues, the specific spiritual gift that was distinctive to Pentecostals.⁸ Armed with these supernatural experiences, Lancaster began Australia’s first Pentecostal fellowship, Good News Hall, in Melbourne, 1908,⁹ and it is through her influence, both directly and indirectly, that a multitude of Pentecostal churches were started around the country.¹⁰ Lancaster’s monthly publication, Good News, which was distributed to Pentecostal churches around Australia, contained countless accounts of healings,¹¹ and this is indicative of this important emphasis for early pentecostalism. But for Lancaster, healing functioned as just one supernatural gift among many. Spontaneous prophecy, speaking and interpretation of tongues, words of knowledge and wisdom were understood supernaturally and were frequent occurrences in their services.

A similar expectation for the experience of supernatural gifts was seen in the services of what was to become known as the Pentecostal Church of Australia (PCA), which also began in Melbourne, in the suburb of Sunshine. These services were characterised by believers being "baptized in the Spirit and healed," ¹² and the frequent occurrences of the gifts of the Spirit, ¹³ which together became the hallmark of further Pentecostal revivals. C.L Greenwood, under the leadership of international figures A.C Valdez and Kelso Glover, solidified the development of what was originally known as the Pentecostal Church of Australia, which merged with various churches in Queensland to become the Assemblies of God. Also in Melbourne was the newly established Southern Evangelical Mission, governed by the leadership of Robert Horne. Valdez had originally come to Australia from America to preach at Good News Hall but prematurely ended his relationship with them on account of doctrinal issues (Lancaster did not believe in the Trinity, and was an annihilationist).¹⁴ He briefly preached for Robert Horne but soon joined Greenwood at Sunshine.¹⁵ The obvious links between the first three major Pentecostal fellowships, though hindered by doctrinal and organisational differences, reflects a unity based around a common understanding of healing and the baptism of the Spirit. Even in Good News Hall (the first to claim such experiences) Valdez was praying for the baptism in the Spirit before he discovered Lancaster’s theological views.¹⁶ The thing in common between these Pentecostal fellowships centred on the experience of the work of the Spirit evidenced through spiritual gifts.

While it is important to note the role played by local individuals in the Australian context, it is necessary to briefly discuss the influence of two key international figures that had direct contact with the Pentecostal churches in Australia.¹⁷ The first is Smith Wigglesworth who, like Dowie and Lancaster, focused his ministry around the affirmation that divine healing is available through Christ (as part of the atonement).¹⁸ Again, like Lancaster, Wigglesworth was a firm adherent of speaking in tongues. In Wigglesworth’s mind, there seems to appear a clear distinction between the Baptism of the Spirit and spiritual gifts.¹⁹ The baptism in the Spirit was understood as a supernatural experience that empowered the believer to achieve great and spectacular things for God.²⁰ This experience is evidenced by speaking in tongues, the typical Pentecostal understanding.²¹ Wigglesworth, referencing his early experiences, argues that when a person is baptised in the Spirit they speak in tongues but do not do so again. When the person receives the gift of tongues (at a later stage), they then can continually speak in tongues:

This is not to suggest a tension between the two but, rather, that they are to be understood as a necessary experiential processes in the spiritual life of the believer.²³ Receiving the baptism in the Spirit initiates a supernatural process where the individual is then enabled to function in the gifts through the power of the Spirit.²⁴ The baptism precedes the gifts.

Where Wigglesworth was known as an evangelist, Donald Gee was known as a Bible teacher.²⁵ Involved with the AOG in Britain, Gee had a substantial influence around the world and particularly in Australia, where he preached a series of sermons on spiritual gifts, and published a number of articles in the Australian Evangel on the topic.²⁶ Gee holds "orthodox" Pentecostal views of gifts.²⁷ In a sermon at Richmond Temple in 1928, he outlines the commonly held Pentecostal understanding:

Similarly, in respect to the purpose of the gifts, Gee notes that:

This supernatural understanding of gifts is the central underpinning of not only Gee’s understanding, but also all early Pentecostals. Gee’s chapters on the individual gifts themselves always refers to the contrast between "natural" and "supernatural" and this is reflective of a high view of the nature of gifts. Gee interpreted gifts as "manifesting the power of God" and thus "manifesting the presence of God"³⁰, clear indications of the effectiveness of being baptised in the Spirit.³¹

Through our discussion of the various experiences and teachings of both local and international figures we have identified similar patterns in how early Australian Pentecostalism understood spiritual gifts. We have seen that these early Pentecostals experienced not only miraculous acts of healing but also the Baptism of the Spirit with speaking in tongues, and these two experiences paved the way for interpreting the remainder of the gifts as paranormal phenomena. In order to understand this position, it is necessary to note four inter-related perspectives that stem from the key word "spiritual", which explains the worldview in which the gifts were interpreted.

Firstly, early Pentecostal perspectives were grounded in a dualistic view of the world that made a distinction between the "spiritual" and the material world. This dualism creates a view of a cosmological world that is distinct from, and in tension with, the physical world, therefore generating a dichotomous understanding of creation. Such a view consequently distinguished between the "natural" and the "supernatural" and it is in this context that "spiritual gifts", categorised as "supernatural", are understood. The "spiritual" realm provided the origins of the gifts and penetrated the material world, therefore "spiritual" was a theologically loaded word that reflected the divine origins of the gifts themselves.³² Gee’s comment can be considered reflective of the dominant Pentecostal understanding:

Conversely, to rationalise gifts as purely "natural" human actions was seen to be anti-supernatural and consequently opposed to the divine activities of God.³⁴ Since the gifts were of divine origin, to categorise them as "natural" was to degrade their status as divine experiences.

Secondly, there exists an anthropological distinction between the spirit/soul and the body, which aligns each part of the human make-up with this dualistic outlook. A quote from a sermon in Melbourne in November 1923 by Dr Felix Meyer illustrates this well:

This reference exemplifies the common Pentecostal understanding of the existence of a "spiritual" realm that can be apprehended through the spirit faculty within the believer. This realm is the point of connection with God by the believer and in this sense the gifts serve as a means of experiencing God. The gifts can be seen as playing an important functional role in the spiritual life of the believer since the legitimating experiences of divine healing, speaking in tongues, prophecy and hearing a word of knowledge or wisdom all affirmed the faith that they possessed.³⁶

Thirdly, the term "spiritual" refers to a higher form of living in contrast to "the world", that is, the sinful society that is antithetical to the Christian. To be "spiritual" is to be concerned with activities that separate "spiritual" Christians from secularist individuals, thus creating a distinct understanding of Christian living. ³⁷ To read the Bible, pray, attend church services and to exercise the gifts were all seen as "spiritual" activities as opposed to more secular and everyday activities such as work, hobbies or entertainment. This conception of what is spiritual also framed their understanding of holiness, so that activities considered worldly (such as attending the cinema), where thereby unholy, unspiritual. It is in this context that the gifts were integrated into the major Pentecostal theme of the end times and were fitted into the framework of signs pointing to the return of Christ.³⁸ They saw the Spirit and the gifts as being restored to the contemporary church, just as recorded in Acts 2, and therefore underpinned the urgency of missions in light of the end of the world.³⁹

Fourthly, since there existed a conceptual dualism between the spiritual and material worlds, "spiritual" entities - such as God, angels and demons – belonged to the spiritual realm and had access to the physical world. The demonic was a cosmological reality that impressed itself upon the lives of those committed to the gospel, such that life entailed spiritual struggle, and the believer engaged in spiritual warfare through prayer and the preaching of the good news.⁴⁰ Spiritual gifts enabled the church to function in the spiritual realm, and healing and the discernment of spirits were thus spiritual tools for combating the forces of evil.⁴¹ By understanding the gift of healing as a supernatural gift, praying for the sick was a cosmological activity that transcended the natural realm, and natural transformation (i.e. physical healing) was thereby understood as primarily a spiritual victory.

The present paper has been seeking to understand the traditional Australian Pentecostal conception of spiritual gifts. The above analysis surveyed the beginnings of the Pentecostal movement in the early 20^th Century, and the foundations upon which later Pentecostal theology was developed. The question that naturally arises is, to what extent is this traditional supernatural view of the gifts part of modern Pentecostal theology. My working assumption for the remainder of this paper is that the above analysis is typical of the predominant global perspective that is adhered to by both early and contemporary Pentecostals in Australia and around the world. The early Australian context serves to exemplify the normative understanding of spiritual gifts as supernatural activities by the hand of God. While affirming that this is the case in the contemporary context, it is important to note that while many Pentecostals affirm that "natural" gifts, i.e. talents and abilities, are still classified as spiritual gifts, the predominate emphasis still remains on viewing the gifts, particularly Paul’s list in 1 Cor 12, as supernatural. What remains is the cosmological distinction between the natural and supernatural that still serves as the interpretive framework for understanding the gifts. With this cosmology largely unchanged, the Pentecostal understanding of the gifts therefore remains essentially unchanged.⁴²

The significant rise of the Pentecostal movement in the last half of the 20^th Century and its shift from the fringe to the mainstream of Christian ecumenism has brought many Pentecostal theological dimensions into contact with the wider Christian community. The Charismatic movement has established an important bridge between Pentecostalism and the more traditional church, a link that has been established through a common acceptance of spiritual gifts. The increase in ecumenical dialogue with the Pentecostal movement has prompted other denominations to engage with this topic and to think through the relationship between the gifts and Ecclesiology. The aim of the following discussion is to survey contemporary non-Pentecostal perspectives on gifts and their points of contact with and departure from that of Pentecostalism. There will be three stages developed with each successive point diverging further from a common consensus: 1) a definition of the gifts, 2) an exploration of the nature of the gifts, and 3) an analysis of the expression of the gifts within Ecclesiology.

If one carries out a survey of the conceptual definitions of spiritual gifts among scholars, it is remarkable how similar they are.⁴⁴ Such widespread agreement no doubt is dependent upon Paul’s explicit statements in 1 Cor 12:7 and Eph 4:12⁴⁵ that refer to the gifts as special endowments given by the Spirit for the edification and building up of the body of Christ.⁴⁶ It seems clear, for both Pentecostals and non-Pentecostals, that there is a heavy emphasis on an action by God, through the Spirit, that gives particular endowments for ministry with the explicit aim of building up the church. To speak of "spiritual" gifts is to reference the Spirit as the source and giver of the gifts and, therefore, their primary characteristic is that they are given by the Spirit who sovereignly organises the church in accordance with His will. For Pentecostals and others alike, a sense of the personal call of God is an important dimension of the Christian life, and motivates an individual for active service in the church. The gifts provide the means for this call to be realised in concrete ministry. This link between the call of God and the gifts is noted by both Kung⁴⁷ and Moltmann,⁴⁸ who emphasise their inter-relatedness. Every person has a call and therefore the "charisms are not limited to a particular set of persons but are given to each and every Christian."⁴⁹ "This means that every Christian is a charismatic."⁵⁰ Anthony Palma, similarly, states that "every believer possesses at least one gift…there can be no passive membership in the body of Christ, for every believer has been equipped and prepared for service."⁵¹ Such a link between the call of God and the gifts given to every believer provides an opportunity for a personal appropriation of a unique task (or tasks) to fulfil that which has been divinely given by God. The relationship between a personal call and gifts for ministry, that is, God calls each person to fulfil a role within the church which is realised through gifts given by the Spirit, serves as a point of agreement held by many when discussing spiritual gifts.

While the previous investigation revealed a uniformity in understanding of the function of the gifts, a study of the wide ranging opinions on the gifts themselves and their classification indicates a wide divergence in views concerning their nature. For Pentecostalism, the gifts are located within a broader cosmological framework that views the nature of the gifts as predominately supernatural manifestations of God.⁵² Barry Chant best sums up this position: "Spiritual gifts are not natural gifts. They are more than outstanding expressions of natural talent. They are gifts in which the Spirit of the Lord is active to do supernatural and miraculous things."⁵³ This emphasis on the gifts as supernatural by Pentecostals has been the subject of criticism from the wider ecumenical community. Just as Chant best sums up the Pentecostal position, so too does Matthius Wenk sum up the critique of this position when he states, "Pentecostals have not yet tackled the issue of the ‘supernatural’ and the more ‘natural’ gifts mentioned by Paul, and still tend to emphasise the more spectacular gifts as a mark ‘of the Spirit’s presence’ in a church service or a persons life."⁵⁴ The primary reaction has been against Pentecostalism’s overemphasis on the supernatural, "spectacular" or "extraordinary" gifts.⁵⁵ An example is Rene Laurentin, a French Catholic, who explicitly states that the gifts "are not extraordinary" and that they belong to the "ordinary way in which the gift of God works in the life of the church."⁵⁶ For Moltmann, a person’s whole experience of the gift of life is a charisma.⁵⁷ Who they are as an individual and what they possess in the way of unique talents can be categorised as a gift (since life itself is sustained by the Spirit), and therefore there should be no distinction between "supernatural" and "natural" since in the point is that gifts are for the benefit of the congregation.⁵⁸ The gifts are given in order to equip charismatic believers for everyday life and can be expressed through the "whole of life", that is, not merely restricted to "religious phenomena."

Yves Congar views "charisms" as "gifts or talents which Christians owe to the grace of God."⁵⁹ Congar, drawing from his experience of the charismatic revival and his Catholic heritage, accepts the more spectacular gifts but cautiously recognises that there "is a risk of reducing the charisms to the level of extraordinary and even exceptional manifestations."⁶⁰ Hans Kung, similarly, posits that "it is a misconception to think of charisms as principally exceptional, miraculous or sensational phenomena."⁶¹ For Kung, "Charisms are by no means only exceptional things, they are everyday phenomena in the life of the Church."⁶² Kung includes natural talents which can be an expression of the gifts, but he views the charism in the vocation to fulfil a function within the community.⁶³ Underlying the work of Congar and Kung is an attempt to broaden the scope of the gifts from the emphasis of the Renewal movement (influenced by Pentecostalism) on the spectacular gifts of tongues, prophecy and healing. The underlying logic of this position is that the Spirit builds the church, and is behind all activity directed to this purpose.

Donald Bloesch, writing from a reformed perspective, accepts supernatural gifts but broadens their understanding to also include the natural faculties.⁶⁴ Bloesch is remarkably accepting of the "so called extraordinary gifts" and seeks to be ecumenically sensitive in his approach by finding the middle ground.⁶⁵ Yet, while accepting the supernatural (such as tongues), he relegates them to a lesser position below other gifts. Thus, for example, he states, "I believe that tongues should be related to the childhood of faith or to new beginnings in faith"⁶⁶ and that "in spiritual maturation it becomes subordinated to other gifts."⁶⁷ He thus implies that the spectatular and supernatural are for the immature and, presumably, mature Christians should look less to the spectacular gifts. From a similar perspective, David Lim describes the gifts as incarnational. He uses this term in contrast to a natural or supernatural understanding of the gifts, noting that through the incarnation of the gifts, God works in the community through the individual: "The Spirit supernaturally enables them to minister beyond their abilities, at the same time expressing each gift through their life experience, char­acter, personality, and vocabulary."⁶⁸ Just as Jesus was both divine and human, and just as scripture is also both divine and human, so too is the church, comprising of Spirit inspired people. The gifts function as the means for God’s activity within His people and therefore natural and supernatural phenomena that occur through the believer are expressions of God’s presence.⁶⁹

The question is now raised as to the direct relationship between the gifts themselves and their ecclesiological expression. While most have a commonly held understanding of the definition of spiritual gifts, and while there is a divergence in understanding their nature, the greatest controversy arises over how the gifts are worked out practically in the life of the church. The debate centres on the tensions created by the freedom of the charisma and the structures of institution; i.e.the tension between the claim that all members are charismatic and how these charismatic members function within an institutionalised structure.⁷⁰ According to Karkkainen, Pentecostals tend to emphasise charisma over and against structure, and traditional churches focus on structure at the expense of the charismatic.⁷¹ The former arises due to an emphasis on the spectacular gifts in 1 Cor 12, and the latter due to the priority given to tradition and preset liturgical formulas. In recent years, Catholic thought has attempted to make room for the emerging Renewal Movement, which emphasises the more spontaneous gifts, by broadening the concept of charisma to include the laity.⁷² While affirming the charismatic laity, Catholic theology states that ordained office itself is also considered a gift that is given for the benefit of the church. This raises questions as to the nature of authority. Who has precedence, "pope or people, structural or spiritual?"⁷³ Article 12 of the Lumen Gentium makes it clear that the institutional office still holds power and authority over the charismatic expressions of the laity⁷⁴, and yet Kung diverges from this view and states that "all Church offices can be subsumed under the charism."⁷⁵ Clearly even within Catholic circles there are diverging views on the relationship between office and charisma.⁷⁶

Essentially, the tension seems to lie in an emphasis on Christology over Pneumatology or Pneumatology over Christology. For the Catholic, institutional structures are dependent upon Jesus’ establishment of the Apostle Peter (Matt 16:17-19) as head of the Catholic Church and in this sense the subsequent structures of leadership are divinely instituted by Christ and continued through the ordained clergy. In the structure of the services, the clergy themselves mediate between Christ and the laity, thus they function as the primary subject in the church.⁷⁷ Balthasar sees the institutional form of the church as the "objective" expression of the Spirit. Just as the Spirit has been sent by both the Father and the Son, so too does He express Himself in a duality of forms, that is, objectively in the concrete structures of institution, and subjectively as "inspiration".⁷⁸ For Balthasar, both the institution (objective expression) and the charismata (subjective inspiration) are the work of the same Spirit even though the tensions between institution and charisma still remain. Yet this perspective clashes with a Pneumatological approach since, in Balthasar’s thought, the Spirit seems to be subordinate to Christ. Clearly, a Pentecostal ecclesiology is more pneumatic in orientation.⁷⁹ Whereas Catholicism has traditionally viewed the gifts as tied inseparably to the institution, that is, being expressed through the established forms, traditions, teachings and systems of the Church, Pentecostalism on the other hand has tended to view the gifts as entities of their own, distinct from the structure of the church.⁸⁰

This discussion has thus far centred on the expression of the gifts within the context of the church, yet many theologians have broadened the function of the gifts beyond the boundaries of the gathered community. Volf speaks for many when he states,

Such an approach broadens the concept of gifts to include the realm of everyday life that is distinct from and yet related to the church service, and at the same time allows for the realisation that both institution and charisma are necessary elements in the life of the church.⁸² Some are called and gifted to service inside the church, while others are called and gifted for service outside the church.⁸³

Secondly, this broadened understanding of the gifts enables us to view their expression as being beyond the confines of the church. If we also broaden our understanding of "church" to refer not to the building, or the event, but to the people of God, then all believers are charismatically gifted and can express this giftedness in any context. The gifts are therefore expressed both inside and outside the church through believers who themselves are the temple of the Holy Spirit. This admission also does not negate the necessity of ordained ministry within the church, which itself is understood as a gift, yet acknowledging the exterior expression of the gifts allows us to view them in a missiological sense. A believer’s interaction with the lost allows for the opportunity of God’s grace to be extended beyond the four walls of the church and to be expressed in within the context of an unbelieving world. As Pentecostals, we emphasise that we are empowered by the Spirit to continue the earthly ministry of Jesus through supernatural signs and wonders. Ruthvin is right when he states, "The Bible sees the outpouring of the Spirit and his gifts upon the church as characteristic of the age of the messiah and his reign in the kingdom of God."⁸⁵ Therefore, the same Spirit that empowers us for witness is the same Spirit who enables us through our gifts and abilities to expand the influence of the church. Every believer has unique abilities sustained by the Spirit that are means of His presence being concretely expressed in this present evil age.

The course of this paper has covered many and varied perspectives on the purpose, nature and expression of spiritual gifts. From the "supernatural" to the "natural", this topic creates its own unique discussions and has many standing on different sides of the debate. By engaging in dialogue with other perspectives on the gifts, Pentecostalism can have the opportunity to develop and expand its understanding from an emphasis on the supernatural towards a more holistic view that recognises the full scope of the Spirit’s work. Conversely, those who downplay the role of the supernatural in the context of the gifts have much to learn from the Pentecostal movement who have been responsible for the resurgence of an important Pauline concept and who have re-introduced the vital connection between the miraculous ministry of Jesus and the role of every believer that continues His ministry in the present context. A balance is necessary in the present debate and it is hoped that this paper points in that direction.

See also Donald Gee: "Whenever you touch reality in the spiritual realm you touch things which are so vital that any normal, healthy person cannot fail to be moved…" (Australian Evangel, July 1928, A sermon preached in Richmond Temple, Melbourne May 6, 1928, italics mine).