Christians, be wary of the green lobby.

Our series ends with a final look at the future of the charismatic movement.

This article is part of a series. Please see the base of the page for more details.

Looking Ahead

If the charismatic movement is to fulfil the purposes of God there has to be, first of all, a recognition that things have gone radically wrong and of the reasons why this has happened. There has to be not merely a superficial repentance but a radical turning away from the world and returning to God.

The Bible has to be restored to its central place in the Church with serious study of the word of God given great importance - not only among leaders and preachers of the word, but in the lives of all believers. If this does not take place, there will be serious consequences for the whole Church in the Western nations. The likely consequences may be summarised under four headings.

Disintegration

The charismatic movement is likely to disintegrate and fragment into numerous small groups with different beliefs and emphases. As the movement becomes largely discredited, many people will leave charismatic churches and revert to traditional evangelicalism or other traditions or even leave the Church altogether.

Experientialism

If the present obsession with experience continues, the charismatic movement will produce a new wave of excitement every few years just has it did through the 1980s and 1990s. With the abandonment of the Bible as the sole criterion of truth, each new wave takes the charismatic movement farther away from New Testament Christianity.

The danger becomes increased of a drift into the New Age Movement or to becoming cults. Both of these aberrations are basically experiential.

Timing

The fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the 20^th Century that has resulted first in the Pentecostal movement and secondly in the charismatic movement has been part of the deliberate plan and purpose of God for these times; empowering his Church for the demands of the coming days. God has not left us without an understanding of his plans.

If the charismatic movement is to fulfil the purposes of God there has to be a radical turning away from the world and returning to him.

For a number of years, he has been speaking to us about shaking the nations but we have not listened with understanding, neither have we been content to allow him to work out his purposes and to await his timing. Instead of waiting for God to do the work of revival in the nation, we have rushed ahead. Like the Children of Israel in the wilderness when Moses was up the mountain, we have made our own golden calf which we have worshipped in the charismatic churches.

By the beginning of 1995 the shaking of the nations had reached the point where the conditions for revival were falling into place. This was certainly true in Britain where a combination of deep social malaise, economic problems and political uncertainty combined to shake the confidence of the nation. Even the monarchy, heart of the British establishment, appeared deeply wounded by its 'annus horribilis'.

The charismatic movement had been raised by God for just such a time as this. Instead of witnessing to the nation, however, the charismatic churches turned in upon themselves, enjoying their golden calf, but thereby rendering themselves incapable of bringing the word of God to the nation with power and authority.

These social conditions in the nation which are favourable to the Gospel are unlikely to last long and the window of opportunity will close. Days of darkness are likely to follow with the enemies of the Gospel multiplying and the Church growing weaker. The visitation of God will have been missed, as it was in New Testament times. It was this that caused Jesus to weep over the city of Jerusalem saying,

If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace but now it is hidden from your eyes...your enemies will build an embankment against you...They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognise the time of God's coming to you. (Luke 19:41-44)

A Stumbling Block

Missing the timing of God does not necessarily mean that his purposes will be blocked. The sovereignty of God ensures that he will carry out his purposes even if his people are unfaithful. He will work out his plans another way. In the time of Jeremiah, he had to abandon Judah, allowing Jerusalem and the Temple to be destroyed because of the wickedness and unresponsiveness of his people despite all the warnings that he sent to them.

The purposes of God, however, cannot be thwarted. The sovereignty of God ensures that he can fulfil his plans by other means. As John the Baptist declared, “I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Luke 3:8).

The social conditions in the nation which are favourable to the Gospel are unlikely to last long and the window of opportunity will close.

If there is no repentance among charismatics and no radical renewing of the Western Church, God is able to fulfil his purposes by other means. It may be that he will bypass the Church and bring salvation to the nation some other way. Indeed, it may well happen that God will allow the Western Church to disintegrate. As the Church in the West dies so he will raise up the Church in the East and in the poorer nations to be his servants and to bring the message of salvation to the world. This would be completely in line with the ways of God in Scripture and a fulfilment of the vision Mary saw after her visit to Elizabeth when she looked forward to the birth of the Saviour singing,

My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour, for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant...He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty. (Luke 1:46-53)

Conclusion

It would not be right to end on a negative note, although I would not wish to lessen the impact of the solemn warnings given in these last articles. But our God is merciful and loving, very ready to forgive and to restore those who turn to him in penitence.

It is the earnest hope of the writers of Blessing the Church? that our brothers and sisters in Christ, especially those with leadership responsibilities within the churches, will respond to the things we have written by examining their teaching and practices in the light of Scripture. We appeal to the whole Church, and especially those in the charismatic sector, to make a fresh commitment to the study of the word of God.

We believe there is a pressing need for the study of biblical eschatology to counter the many false teachings which abound today. It is essential that Christians should know what the Bible says about the Second Coming of Christ and the conditions leading up to the Parousia.

We therefore appeal to all preachers to undertake systematic expository preaching of the word of God. We believe that expounding the scriptures will undoubtedly lay a good foundation for spiritual revival in the nation, but it will also guard the Church against error in days where there is a great onslaught on the truth. If believers are well-grounded in the word, they will not be deceived by false teachers and prophets however attractively their message is packaged and presented.

We appeal also to all believers to turn again to the Bible and study the word. When we do so we find our love for God grows and so too does our commitment to the Lord Jesus and to the work of the Kingdom.

To those who, having read this series, are concerned about their own spiritual life if they have been exposed to non-biblical teaching and practices, we would counsel against anxiety. Our God is a loving Father who sees the heart rather than the outward appearance (1 Sam 16:7). He knows the secrets of our hearts and he guards those who sincerely love him and who truly seek him. His solemn promise is "‘You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you’, declares the Lord” (Jer 29:13-14).

We appeal to all believers to turn again to the Bible and study the word.

Those who have been saved by the precious blood of the Lord Jesus are part of his flock whom he, as the Good Shepherd, guards and constantly watches over for good. Even when we foolishly or inadvertently go astray he is not quick to condemn, but rather he is quick to reach out to redeem, and lovingly to restore to a right relationship with himself and with the Father.

Making mistakes, repenting and returning to experiencing the loving forgiveness of our Father are all part of growing in maturity for the believer. There is no-one who never makes mistakes. We all go astray from time to time, but our God remains faithful, even when we are unfaithful. He has called us his children, sons of the living God, and the Father has fulfilled his promise to send 'the Counsellor' to be with us forever - 'the Spirit of truth' (John 14:16-17). Jesus promised that “the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit...will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you…Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid” (John 14:26-27).

Jesus' own testimony was that he only did those things which he heard from the Father (John 5:19). He said, “By myself I can do nothing” (John 5:30). It is this attitude of total dependence upon the Father that the whole Church urgently needs to learn, so that we neither lag behind nor run ahead of his purposes. If we turn to the left or to the right we hear his voice saying “This is the way, walk in it” (Isa 30:21).

When we study the word of God we learn his ways. He sometimes has to bring a loving rebuke to us, “I am the Lord your God, who teaches you what is best for you, who directs you in the way you should go. If only you had paid attention to my commands, your peace would have been like a river” (Isa 48:17-18).

Yet he also promises full restoration to those who humbly return to him. "’Though the mountains be shaken and the hills be removed, yet my unfailing love for you will not be shaken nor my covenant of peace be removed’, says the Lord who has compassion on you” (Isa 54:10).

Series Information

This article is part of a series, re-publishing the 1995 book ‘Blessing the Church?’, an analysis of the ‘Toronto Blessing’ and a wider critique of the charismatic movement in the late 20^th Century. Click here for previous instalments and to read the editorial background to the series.

Peter Fenwick looks at the roots of the Toronto blessing.

It is the Church's task to proclaim God's will and intentions to the world: a world which over the past 50 years has progressively abandoned God's laws and standards.

The condition of society is now so serious that many Christians, myself included, believe that only a full-scale revival can reverse this moral decline.

Since January 1994 the Toronto Blessing has been hailed as either a great revival or its precursor. Because of the earnest desire for revival in the hearts of many it is understandable that these claims have been widely accepted, but we must recognise that their hopes and expectations have led many people to embrace the movement without fully considering all the implications.

Can we be sure that the Toronto Blessing was a genuine move of God? There were many features of the Toronto Blessing which have given me grave cause for concern; features which, if unchecked, will seriously impair the church's ability to perform its God-given task.

My greatest fear springs from the fact that the Bible no longer occupies the place which once it did in the evangelical community. Indeed, the whole controversy surrounding the Toronto Blessing is in fact a major battle for the Bible. Traditionally, evangelicals have sought a firm biblical foundation for all matters relating to doctrine and conduct. It is my contention that the Toronto Blessing represented, in its day, the most recent stage in a process whereby this tradition is being gradually eroded. Am I right to fear that it will soon be abandoned altogether?
In this article I will set out the stages which preceded the Toronto Blessing in the process of erosion to which I have referred. It will, I hope, become clear that the Toronto Blessing is no sudden or unexpected phenomenon; but that in fact the ground has been well prepared by the acceptance of previous unbiblical practices.

Over the next two weeks I will also offer an explanation as to why the Church has become vulnerable to such errors and indicate the features of the Toronto Blessing which are unbiblical.

Because of earnest desire for revival, many have embraced the Toronto movement without fully considering all the implications.

Unbiblical Practices

During the 1980s and early 1990s a number of practices were introduced, mostly in the charismatic churches, which had either no biblical foundation or only a very dubious one. These practices were accepted without question and are now a normal part of much charismatic theology. Here are some examples.

End of meetings ministry times

This is now a normal part of many charismatic meetings, both in churches and in joint celebrations. People are called forward for prayer and usually laying on of hands, with a view to deliverance from rejections, hurts, abuses, fears, inadequacies and such-like; the hope is that they will go on in a more positive way of living. Sometimes people are prayed for in order to receive particular gifts. Usually the subjects of prayer have little, if anything, to do with the content of the sermon.

All of this has been a common part of charismatic meetings for a long time, despite the fact that there is neither precedent nor teaching anywhere in the New Testament for this practice.
It has to be said that it has not created any significant opposition, since it has seemed harmless enough and has surely been practised out of good motives; what can possibly be wrong with seeking to bless someone? The fact that in many cases the same people come forward time after time has also not raised too many questions.

'Word of Knowledge' healing meetings

This again is a very common charismatic practice. Someone, usually from the front of the church, but not exclusively so, makes a succession of statements to the effect that, 'There is someone here with...' and there follows the recital of a number of ailments. People are expected to stand, declaring themselves to be the person referred to. Prayer is made and the whole procedure moves on. There is often little or no checking out as to whether a healing has taken place.

However, the real point at issue is that this technique was never practised by Jesus nor by any of the apostles at any point in the whole of the New Testament. This has not been considered important by those concerned, since the assumption is that from time to time some people do actually get healed, and therefore the feeling is that if it works, albeit occasionally, it is acceptable.

During the 1980s and early 1990s a number of practices were introduced, mostly in the charismatic churches, which had either no biblical foundation or only a very dubious one.

Demons as the cause of sin

Over the last 40 years or so, there has been an ever-increasing tendency to identify demons as a primary cause of sin in Christians. It goes without saying that if a demon is causing certain sinful human behaviour, then repentance for sins is not appropriate and is rarely called for; the matter will be dealt with by exorcism. The blame for sin can be laid fully at the door of the demon.

Once again this is profoundly contrary to New Testament practice and teaching.

The doctrine of territorial spirits

It has for a number of years been sweepingly assumed that hamlets, towns, cities or nations are dominated by specific spirits whose size and power is appropriate to the population mass over which they are said to rule.

It is consequently assumed that effective evangelisation of such a location will not happen until these territorial spirits have been engaged in spiritual warfare and decisively expelled. This is not the same as praying for the conversion of one's friends and family. It is praying for the extermination of these evil spirits and very often actually addressing them.

There is not a shred of New Testament teaching or practice to support this kind of activity. The theology of it is based on a passage in Daniel (10:13) where the Prince of the kingdom of Persia is said to have withstood an angelic helper sent by God to Daniel. This Prince of the kingdom of Persia hindered the angel for 21 days.

It is pure speculation to assert that this Prince was a demon. Since Daniel was not waging spiritual warfare in the modern sense of the word; since there is not another single example in the whole of the Bible of this sort of activity; and since we are given no theological explanation of it all, it is therefore astonishing that a definitive theology has been built up from this brief incident and has introduced into the charismatic church what is now a very dominant practice.

As I have already said, this practice is deemed to be vitally necessary before proper evangelisation of a particular territory can be expected to succeed. For almost 2,000 years the Church has not known this dogma and consequently has been unable to engage in this activity. It is amazing that it has nevertheless achieved such astounding success at different times and in different places.

These practices were accepted without question and became a normal part of much charismatic theology.

Christians Vulnerable to Error

The whole point of presenting these examples (and there are others) is to demonstrate that the charismatic movement has been taking on board teaching and practices that have either no, or at best flimsy, biblical foundation and turning them into dogma.

It is almost certainly true that many members of charismatic churches do believe that there actually is a biblical foundation, and this fact will raise a different concern in subsequent articles.
But the ground for accepting such practices has been well and truly prepared and into this situation there has come an even more unbiblical teaching, namely the Toronto Blessing.

Next week: Two factors which have made the charismatic church vulnerable to departures from biblical truth and practice: the rise of restorationism and a decline in biblical knowledge.

First published in 1995. Revised and updated (including all references to time frames) November 2017. Previous articles in this series can be found here.

Dr Clifford Hill concludes his comparison of the charismatic movement with the characteristics of the society in which it grew.

Sensuousness

The charismatic movement has encouraged the physical expression of emotion. The new songs, new forms of worship and freedom of expression have been a wonderfully liberating experience for millions of believers who felt repressed and oppressed within the institutionalised traditions of the mainline churches. The renewal movement came like a breath of fresh air in a stale room.

It brought new life and vitality not only to worship, but also to evangelism and outreach into the community in many churches. The experience of being filled with the Spirit is a transforming and life-giving event which no-one who has entered into it would ever wish to deny.

Yet this same liberating experience has had dangerous side-effects. The new liberty and freedom enjoyed by charismatics in their worship has extended into personal relationships where Spirit-filled believers are regarded as a specially-favoured group, honoured by God and thereby standing in a special relationship not only to him but to each other. The emphasis upon freedom and informality is accompanied by biblical teaching giving an emphasis upon 'grace' rather than 'law' which has tended to create an atmosphere of permissiveness in personal relationships.

There have been many casualties of this charismatic freedom, such as the church in South Wales in the early 1980s where a 'prophecy' was received that everyone should have a spiritual partner. They set about fulfilling this 'prophecy' regardless of sex or marriage relationships. Close partnerships often excluded a spouse and spiritual intimacy soon included physical intimacy. Even the pastor was caught up in this and had to come to repentance and renounce the policy before the whole church moved into disaster.

Other problems have occurred through practices associated with deliverance from demonic possession. In places, this included a teaching that demons need to be exorcised from their point of entry into the body. Those who have been victims of sexual abuse have been ministered to by the laying on of hands and anointing with oil in their private parts. There are indications that these practices have been much more widespread than the few highly-publicised reports.

The charismatic emphasis upon freedom and informality has often led to permissiveness in personal relationships.

The very widespread publicity given to the 'Nine-O'Clock Service', a Sheffield-based charismatic rave-type worship led by the Reverend Chris Brain shocked the nation in August 1995. The NOS was originally based at St Thomas' Crookes Parish Church under Robert Warren but complaints from neighbours about the noise led to its breakaway and independent operation under the unsupervised leadership of Chris Brain.

He used hard rock music, strobe lights and wild dancing by scantily-clad girls in his rave-type trendy services aimed to attract young people raised in the pop culture. The NOS aimed to make them feel at home and comfortable with the Gospel presentation.

Stephen Lowe, Archdeacon of Sheffield was reported in the press to have said that about 20 women had allegedly been sexually abused by Brain who practised intimate laying on of hands for healing and deliverance. Press reports linked Chris Brain with John Wimber, from whom he was said to have learned his healing practices. Wimber was reported in the press as saying, “We encouraged Chris's church and gave a gift to enable the Nine-O'Clock Service to get started."¹

Brain not only had links with Wimber but was also strongly attracted to Matthew Fox's New Age teachings. The lurid press reports indicated that the NOS was moving dangerously close to the inclusion of sexual practices as part of worship.

A major weakness of the charismatic movement is that its teaching has not had a strong emphasis upon moral values. Its anti-legalism has in fact left the door open for worldly standards of sexual freedom to become commonplace. Charismatic churches throughout Britain have suffered from adulterous relationships and marriage breakdown. This has been common, not only in house church streams, but also in the mainline charismatic churches.

There are no comparative figures available, but from personal knowledge of the church scene across the denominations I would estimate that the incidence of adultery and marriage breakdown among leaders and church members in the charismatic churches is considerably greater than in non-charismatic churches. This is further evidence of the influence of the world and especially of pop culture.

The anti-legalism of the charismatic movement has left the door open for worldly standards of sexual freedom to become commonplace.

Lawlessness

Untrained leadership in the new independent churches gave itself great freedom to develop along lines untrammelled by the kind of ministerial and clergy professionalism of leaders in the mainline churches.

From the earliest days there was difficulty over accountability. House churches were often led by a single leader who assumed autonomous control. Other fellowships developed team leaderships or elderships with shared authority. Even these could be highly authoritarian and were not accountable to church members' meetings, as in the mainline churches.

Over time there has been a coming together of most independent fellowships into 'streams' or sects, each with their own form of hierarchical authority. In some of these the top leader is recognised as an 'apostle' and the apostles of the different streams sometimes recognise a form of accountability to each other on a network basis.

Authority within the charismatic movement is a problem. The Pentecostal movement at the beginning of the century rapidly developed structures of organisation and accountability but the charismatic movement has produced no such equivalent. This is, no doubt, partly because the renewal has run right across denominational lines, from Roman Catholic to Brethren.

This lack of authority structure within the movement is also partly accounted for by the social environment in which it was born. The 1960s and 1970s were years of radical social change when all established mores and past traditions were being challenged. It was essentially a period of social anarchy which was birthed into the charismatic movement. It was a spirit that resisted traditional authority, yet its leaders often insisted upon a greater obedience to them by their church members than is accorded to ministers in the mainline churches, from which they broke away to seek a new freedom!

The Pentecostal movement rapidly developed structures of organisation and accountability but the charismatic movement has produced no such equivalent.

Attitudes to authority within the charismatic movement have tended to adulate leaders, especially those with high-profile ministries. This has had a serious detrimental effect upon the exercise of discernment by individual church members. The teaching of the leader is regarded as sacrosanct. Individual members are not encouraged to challenge their teaching or practices, which leaves the people wide open to deception if the leaders themselves go astray.

This teaching prepared the way for the rapid spread of the Toronto phenomenon initiated by Rodney Howard-Browne, who spent some years prior to Toronto working on his method of transmitting what he called his 'ministry of laughter'.

Speaking to a meeting in Birmingham in June 1994, he exhorted people to submit their wills to him and not to weigh what was happening. “Don't try to work it out with your natural mind,” he said, “for the things of the Spirit of God are foolishness to the natural mind.” His hypnotic technique soon had the whole audience under his control falling about in uncontrollable laughter and physical jerks. Clearly none of them realised they were being duped with false teaching.

The mind of the believer is renewed by the Spirit of God (Rom 12:2) which also enables us to know the truth and to resist deception - provided we do not submit ourselves to charlatans and deceivers!

Power

John Wimber came to Britain in the 1980s to a nation steeped in a sense of powerlessness from loss of empire and world prestige. The Church was suffering from 40 years of steep decline which leaders were powerless to stem. Wimber came with a promise of power, divine power, Holy Spirit power, available to all Spirit-filled believers if they would allow themselves to be released from the shackles of tradition and let the Holy Spirit flow through them.

This message could not have been more apt. Power to the powerless. It was exactly what British Christians wanted. Leaders and people lapped it up. No more doom and gloom. No more struggling against uneven odds. Here was real power to give victory to triumph over the powers of darkness. The devil had had the Church on the run for far too long; here at last was the power to overcome the enemy.

John Wimber came to Britain in the 1980s with a promise of power, divine power.

Wimber taught that all adversity, including ill health, could be due to demonic activity. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, sickness could be overcome and even cancer healed. An even more popular promise was that ordinary believers could exercise the gift of healing provided they learned the techniques and had the faith. They could drive out demons and scatter the enemies of the Gospel.

Wimber also brought a new concept of evangelism, coining the term 'power evangelism'. This was just what charismatics wanted to hear. They were able to discard the old-fashioned Gospel presentations of Billy Graham and crusade evangelism with its calls for repentance. Here was something new and exciting. They only had to believe and the Holy Spirit would do it through signs and wonders which would astonish the unbelievers and bring them flocking into the Kingdom. It was a 'Kingdom Now' theology that appealed strongly to a generation raised on instant results, instant food, instant credit, instant news.

In 1990 Wimber came back with the Kansas City 'prophets', having embraced their Latter Rain teachings of a great end-time harvest to be reaped by an irresistible 'Joel's army' of overcomers, which fitted neatly into Wimber's concept of power evangelism. They even promised power to overcome the final enemy, death, and enable the elite company of the elect to be part of the final generation, the immortal Bride of Christ.

Four years later, just as the backlash of unfulfilled promises and false prophecy was plunging charismatic churches into gloom and the new churches had plateaued, the Toronto Blessing burst upon the scene with its new wave of promises of power - power in the most attractive form of all - power for self.

This came at a time of great vulnerability for British charismatics. Many leaders confessed to being spiritually dry, discouraged and disappointed. The great wave of prophecy had come to nothing. Promises to leaders that they would be preaching to multitudes in sports stadia and arenas and witnessing before princes and powerful leaders, all now had a hollow ring. Their leadership was on the line.

They threw themselves into some highly-publicised outreaches with expansive promises. The JIM campaign, which was supposed to produce 5 million converts, went off like a damp squib. So too did the Revival Fire campaign. Reinhardt Bonnke's much publicised and highly expensive £7 million campaign raised even higher expectations but proved to be the most spectacular failure of them all, with a mere 16,000 responses from a mail drop to 24 million households.

British charismatic and Pentecostal leaders were at an all-time low at the very moment when they heard that something new was happening across the Atlantic. A new fountain of spiritual life was flowing in Toronto promising a new filling of divine power. It was wonderful news to know that God was giving revival somewhere in the Western world where for 20 years we had only heard of news of great awakenings among the poor non-industrial nations, where church congregations were numbered in their thousands or tens of thousands.

British charismatic and Pentecostal leaders were at an all-time low at the very moment when they heard that something new was happening across the Atlantic.

But the most exciting news was that the blessing was transportable! Eleanor Mumford (wife of the leader of the South London Vineyard Fellowship) had been and got it, and brought it back, and passed it on to others. If she could do it, surely others could do the same. Here was real hope for hard-pressed pastors struggling to maintain their local church witness; they rushed to book their flights to Toronto.

Very few went to test the spirits in obedience to New Testament teaching. They were more interested in the simple pragmatic test: Does it work? Will it work for me? They reached out eager hands to any from the hastily-enlisted local leadership team who had got 'it' and would pass 'it' on to them. They fell about laughing, twitching and roaring, then hurried back to pass 'it' onto others.

The latest power trip had arrived! The child of the age - the age of powerlessness - had reached adolescence. As John Arnott, pastor of the Toronto Vineyard Church, put it “It's party time! We are like little children coming to their father to play.”

Conclusion

After decades of the charismatic renewal movement, all we have to show for it in Britain is a nation infinitely worse in its moral, spiritual and social behaviour, a nation facing economic collapse and social disaster, while many of those to whom God has entrusted the precious gifts of his Holy Spirit fall about in uncontrollable laughter.

There are many indications that we are near to the point when the world's economy will crumble and a period of unprecedented lawlessness will sweep across the nations.

If ever the Church was needed to take up the mantle of the prophet to declare the word of the Living God and the way of salvation as the only hope for mankind, it is surely today! The charismatic/evangelical sector of the Church believes the Bible to be the word of God and also acknowledges the presence and power of the Holy Spirit among his people. But today these very churches are being torn asunder by division, resulting from the excitement of fleshly manifestations which are a massive diversion and distraction, preventing the Church from fulfilling the real purposes of God.

The Holy Spirit has indeed been poured out in abundance throughout this century. The Spirit of God does indeed give us supernatural power - but it is not power for self-aggrandisement or power for self-fulfilment, or power to exercise power over other sinners, but power to declare the word of the Living God with power and authority.

When will we stop playing the world's games? When will we come to our senses like the prodigal son and return to the Father? Will the charismatic movement have to come to total disaster before we realise how grossly we have been deceived and how we have prostituted the precious gifts of the Holy Spirit and sold our birthright for a mess of pottage?

What is the answer to the question, 'Was the charismatic movement initiated by God?' We shall delay attempting to answer this, until we have considered other aspects of the history and development of the movement.

Next week: Peter Fenwick unpacks the roots of the Toronto Blessing.

References

1 Quoted in Today magazine, 24 August 1995.

First published 1995. Revised and serialised November 2017. You can find previous instalments in this series here.

How the charismatic movement took on the characteristics of its social surroundings.

Last week we looked at the social and cultural characteristics of pop culture as it developed through the 20^th Century. This week we move on to see how this shaped the Church.

Youth-Dominated

Many of the founding fathers of the charismatic movement in Britain were men of deep spirituality, personal commitment to the Lord Jesus and with a passion to share Christ with others. Many of them, such as Denis Clark, Arthur Wallis, David Lillie, Campbell McAlpine, Michael Harper and Tom Smail - to mention just a few - were steeped in the Word of God and utterly committed to the promotion of New Testament Christianity. This, indeed, was their major objective, namely the restoration of authentic New Testament principles to the life of the Church.

There were many other men from conservative evangelical or Brethren backgrounds whose study of the Word of God led them to believe that the 20^th Century Church had strayed woefully from the New Testament pattern. They longed to see the restoration of the five-fold ministries, of the recognition of baptism in the Holy Spirit and of the exercise of spiritual gifts within the Church. Their witness within their denominational institutions often stirred heated opposition and many were ejected from their fellowships.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s a few house church groups began to be formed, although this was never the intention of those who longed to see the restoration of New Testament teaching and practice in the Church. In the early days there were men in leadership of these new fellowships who were of sound biblical scholarship and considerable spiritual maturity. But, as so often happens in a new movement, it is not the thinkers who prevail but those who are the most convincing 'charismatic' personalities, popular speakers and natural leaders.

Young men rapidly took the initiative, both in forming new fellowships and in taking leadership. This was fully in line with the prevailing mood in Western society. These young men owed no allegiance to traditional Church or denominational institutions. They were untrained for leadership and most of them had no theological education. They rapidly developed new styles of worship using guitars, which were ideal for home groups, and new styles of meetings and leadership.

As so often happens in a new movement, it is not the thinkers who prevail, but those who are the most convincing ‘charismatic’ personalities. 

Anti-Tradition

The new house fellowships soon attracted those who were discontented with their traditional denominational churches. This, of course, is inevitable with any new movement. When David was outlawed by King Saul and took refuge in the hills, it is recorded that, “All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered round him, and he became their leader” (1 Sam 22:2).

Something like this happened in the early days of the house church movement. Many who were dissatisfied with the lifelessness of the denominational churches were attracted by the informality and freshness of the house church fellowships. The early days saw many groups split away from a parent group and form new fellowships. These splits often occurred on the grounds of teaching or practice, but in reality new young leaders were arising to challenge an established leader and form their own fellowships.

The emphasis was upon all things new in response to the new experience of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. This was a new day. God was doing a new thing. Old established practices in the denominational churches were considered stumbling-blocks to what God wanted to do among his people. The Holy Spirit was sweeping away the dead wood in the Church and there were many calls for people to come out of the mainline churches because God had finished with the denominations.

These calls did not come from mature Bible teachers such as Denis Clark and Campbell McAlpine, who never formed new fellowships and whose ministries were trans-denominational. They came from the young men who eagerly seized the opportunities for leadership presented by new teaching and the impatience of many within the traditional churches to move faster than their pastors deemed to be wise.

In Brighton, for example, when Terry Virgo founded the Clarendon Fellowship he was joined by a large proportion of the congregation from St Luke's, Brighton and Hangelton Baptist as well as individual members from churches in the surrounding area.

Young leaders eagerly seized opportunities for leadership presented by new teaching and the impatience of many within traditional churches. 

Similar things happened in many other parts of the country, where house fellowships sprang up and rapidly attracted members of the mainline churches. These congregants were longing to experience new life in the Spirit and felt constricted by the traditions which bound them in the churches they had attended for many years.

It was a time of splits, of fission and fusion, as house fellowships multiplied, outgrew their drawing-room bases and began worshipping in scout huts and school halls. There were many cries of sheep-stealing and counter-charges of being blocks to the Holy Spirit. There were many hurts, but it is now a long time ago and most wounds have healed. The new fellowships are an established part of the Church scene. Their leaders are prominent in the charismatic movement alongside those in the mainline churches.

Most of the new fellowships planted in the 1970s or early 1980s have now aligned themselves with one or other of half a dozen streams such as Pioneer, New Frontiers, New Covenant or Ichthus, each of which is now an independent sect or a mini-denomination.

At the time these new fellowships were being formed, a significant renewal movement was taking place within the mainline churches themselves. Many ordained ministers quite independently experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit and began to lead their congregations into renewal in the Holy Spirit. Many suffered considerably in doing so while others saw quite spectacular results. Colin Urquhart in Luton, Trevor Dearing in Hainault, David Watson in York, David Pawson in Guildford and many others each attracted large congregations and saw the renewing of the spiritual life in the churches they led and the exercise of spiritual gifts among the people.

It is questionable in hindsight whether it was ever right to fragment the Church by the formation of numerous new fellowships, or whether it was God's intention to renew the existing structures. The new eager young leaders reflected the spirit of the age, both in their impatience to get on with the new thing, and with their anti-traditionalism which regarded all things of the past as only being fit for ridicule and rejection.

Certainly the Church was in need of a radical shake-up and spiritual renewal, but was it really necessary to tear apart the Body of Christ so wantonly and create such division? Would a little more love and patience have enabled renewal and a new unity to run right across the denominations? Was this God's intention for his Church?

It is questionable in hindsight whether it was ever right to fragment the Church by the formation of numerous new fellowships, or whether it was God's intention to renew the existing structures. 

We shall never know the answers to these questions, but it is a fact that the decade of the 1970s which saw the greatest fragmentation of the Church was also the decade of the greatest social unrest, the height of the social revolution.

A spirit of rebellion was running right through the nation with numerous strikes in industry and a vast increase in marriage breakdown and sexual promiscuity, with all the accompanying evidence of the rejection of tradition and the eager pursuit of new social and moral values.

It is perhaps a strange quirk that the young rebel leaders who caused great division in the 1970s and who became the leading 'apostles' of the charismatic movement are now the very ones condemning as 'divisive' those who question the biblical validity of their teaching and practices.

Individualism

20^th Century evangelicalism has tended towards individualism due to its emphasis upon the personal nature of salvation. The seeds of individualism have been there since the Reformation, but 20^th Century Western culture has greatly encouraged this. By the time the charismatic movement was born, individualism in Western society was rampant and the new renewal movement embraced it wholeheartedly.

Unlike the corporate experience of the disciples on the Day of Pentecost, the renewal movement was entirely personal. Its emphasis was upon the personal relationship of each believer with the Father. This, of course, is perfectly biblical and in line with the promise of the Lord, but the Hebraic background to Jesus' teaching has been lost over the centuries and with it the understanding of the place of each believer within the corporate community the Body of Christ.

Charismatic renewal is highly 'me-centred'. Each individual is encouraged to discover their spiritual gifting. Indeed, the gifts are regarded as personal possessions rather than together making up the spiritual attributes of the community of believers.

This individualistic concept of the gifts has led to some erroneous teaching, highly dangerous for the health of the Church, such as the 'positive confession' or 'faith movement' which has emphasised physical and materialistic values such as health and wealth. Its proponents have taught that God wants all his people to prosper, to be healthy and wealthy and that through faith or 'positive confession' these things can be obtained.

This teaching is fully in line with the desires and ambitions of Western acquisitive materialistic society which no doubt accounts for its popularity among charismatics, despite it being the very opposite of the teaching of Jesus!

Much of the preoccupation of charismatics with the exercise of spiritual gifts has been me-centred: me and my health, my wealth, my family and my personal relationship with God. The exercise of spiritual gifts thereby tends to meet the personal needs within the fellowship. The servant nature of discipleship - saved to serve - tends to become lost.

Much of the charismatic renewal movement has been me-centred: me and my health, my wealth, my family and my personal relationship with God.

Charismatic worship has both reflected this me-centredness and helped to reinforce it. A very large number of worship songs and choruses use the first person singular rather than plural. One of the great benefits of the renewal movement has been to heighten each believer's awareness of the presence of God and thereby to heighten each individual's active participation in worship and deepen their spiritual apprehension of God. This is wholly good, but the danger of an overemphasis on individualism is a loss of the corporate and thereby a loss of the essential nature of the New Testament Church as the Body of Christ.

Personal Involvement

If you walk into a strange church, you can usually know instantly whether it is charismatic or traditional. If it is traditional, the congregation will fill up the back pews first; if it is charismatic they will fill up from the front. In the traditional church the congregation is passive, the people are there to be ministered to by choir, readers and preacher; in the charismatic church the people are there for active participation. They want to be fully involved in worship with the freedom to wave their arms, clap, dance and give physical expression to their emotions.

This DIY worship is very much in line with the spirit of pop culture. Amateur musicians, worship leaders and singers give a performance at the front which is enthusiastically supplemented by the active participation of the congregation.

In the new sects which arose out of the house church fellowships, the preachers and pastors were also untrained. Hardly any of them had any formal theological training in a theological college or university theology faculty. A few had been to a Bible school although many of the younger leaders had received some sort of training from schools set up within their own sects. These were non-academic and simply pass on the limited teaching of the leadership.

This represents one of the greatest dangers of the charismatic movement, where the emphasis has been increasingly on experience-centred or revelationary-centred leadership with increasingly less emphasis upon biblical scholarship.

One of the greatest dangers of the charismatic movement is its emphasis on experience-centred leadership over and above biblical scholarship.

As the charismatic movement has tended to become increasingly driven by the leaders of new sects in concert with a handful of leaders from the mainline churches, few of whom are men of outstanding scholarship, the gap between biblical truth and current charismatic practice has widened.

The anti-professionalism of pop culture has been present in the charismatic movement from the beginning although leaders have been quick to assert their own authority. The excesses of heavy shepherding, which scarred many people's lives during the 1980s, have largely disappeared, although the authoritarianism of sectarian leadership has left its mark. Individual believers are encouraged to be fully involved in worship and the exercise of spiritual gifts, with the exception of the gift of prophecy, which is permitted as long as it is supportive of the leadership.

Next week: The final three characteristics of pop culture are compared to the Church: sensuousness, lawlessness and power.

First published 1995. Revised and serialised November 2017. You can find previous instalments in this series here.

Post-war pop culture and the Church.

We continue our serialisation of ‘Blessing the Church?’, previous instalments of which can now be found here. After last week’s outline of the dramatic social and cultural changes in the West that followed the end of World War II, Dr Clifford Hill now looks at key characteristics of these changes and the impact these had on the Church.

CHARACTERISTICS OF POP CULTURE

Youth-Dominated

Pop culture was essentially a youth culture which rejected the old, the outworn and the outdated. The emphasis was upon a search for new things and the discarding of the old. It was a culture from which, in the early days, the elderly felt shut out and devalued. Even in such things as clothing, the elderly felt disadvantaged as the consumer-driven market sought to satisfy the demands of the young.

The development of new technology in the brave new world emerging after the devastation of World War II reinforced the adulation of new things and led to the development of what was seen as 'the throwaway society'.

On the positive side, the period of reconstruction after the war needed the vitality and creativity of youth. It needed fresh energy, new ideas, unhindered by the failed policies of the past which had dragged the world into two devastating wars in the first half of the century. But the adoption of new ideas needed to be guided by firmly-rooted principles, if confusion and chaos were to be avoided.

Anti-Tradition

Any new movement contains an element of protest and rejection of the past. Pop culture was seeking to develop its own ideology and was therefore challenging traditional values. Inevitably the collected wisdom of the past was questioned as a whole new set of social mores applicable to the present day was sought.

Young people were quick to embrace new ideas and to say that the policies pursued by their fathers had only led the world into the horrors of war, culminating in the nuclear bomb devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The anti-nuclear campaigns of CND linked with the more positive campaigns of the peace movement which produced the 'flower people' and slogans such as 'Make love not war'.

The period of post-war reconstruction needed the vitality and creativity of youth, but this also needed to be guided by firmly-rooted principles if chaos was to be avoided.

On the negative side, it increased awareness of racial differences and stirred passions. The campaign for racial justice had both a negative and a positive side. Positively it affirmed the equality of all peoples regardless of race or colour while at the same time protesting against those traditions and institutions which debarred people on grounds of race, religion or ethnic origin.

The anti-traditionalism of pop culture led to a despising of traditional institutions and even, in extreme cases, to the rejection of professionalism and scholarship. An extreme example was the Cultural Revolution in Communist China which persecuted and degraded teachers, university lecturers and scholars, often parading them through the streets as an act of public humiliation.

In Britain there were not these extremes, but public attitudes towards the professions changed radically. Teachers were no longer held in high esteem, neither were the clergy or any of those who served the public.

Individualism

The worldwide liberation movement of the post-war era spilled over into pop culture, not only in politically-orientated protest movements but also in positive campaigns to alleviate suffering and to serve the world's poor and hungry.

The 'Freedom from Hunger' campaign of the 1960s, the Oxford Campaign for Famine Relief (which became Oxfam) and numerous others all reflected the growing concern of the new generation for freedom, equality and justice. These social values were part of the growing recognition of the worth of each individual and the sanctity of human life. In emphasising these values, pop culture reacted against the wanton sacrifice of life in two world wars. It was also a reaction against what was seen as the oppression the ruling classes exercised over the world's poor and powerless peoples.

This recognition of the worth of each individual had its down side. What began as the pursuit of justice rapidly became a demand for rights. It was rights, not privileges, that changed attitudes towards the Welfare State in Britain. Instead of enjoying the privilege of living in a society where the needs of each individual were cared for by the whole community, these benefits were soon taken for granted.

The younger generation knew nothing of the privations endured by former generations. Instead of thankfulness for the peace and security now enjoyed, the prevailing mood became a determination to obtain the maximum benefits available to each individual. Inner-city areas saw the rise of campaigns for community rights. 'Claimants Unions' sprang up in the 1970s to ensure that individuals were able to claim all their rights and entitlements from the State.

The anti-traditionalism of pop culture led to a despising of traditional values, social mores and institutions.

The campaigns for racial justice and justice for women soon produced minority group rights: feminist campaigns, the gay rights movement and the pro-abortion lobby with the campaign slogan 'A woman's right to choose'. These movements were fundamentally anti-social, in that they contributed towards the breakdown of traditional family life and the downgrading of marriage. They were driven by a destructive spirit in which the only thing that mattered was the philosophy of individualism, in which personal morality and personal relationships are largely determined by the rights, desires and demands of the individual.

The same determinants have played a creative role in the social values emerging from pop culture. They are essentially anti-social and dysfunctional rather than creative of a healthy society. Their end product is the dissolution of society. The underlying lesson is that ethical nihilism leads to social nihilism. Moral anarchy leads to social anarchy.

Personal Involvement

The post-war era of reconstruction that gave rise to pop culture was an age of activity. Pop culture reflected this with all the dynamism of youth. They wanted to get involved personally in the radical changes that were already beginning to move from theory to practical reality by the beginning of the 1960s. Pop culture encouraged young people to get involved in their community, to take to the streets and demonstrate, to take their protests to the town hall or to turn the student union debate into days of action for better grants and living conditions.

The negative anti-professionalism of pop culture also included a strong positive element of personal involvement in every kind of activity. It was the age of DIY. Do-it-yourself in home improvement resulted in an enormous industry of tools and provision for the amateur builder. DIY extended to every kind of activity, from making your own music to arranging your own house conveyancing. DIY in education gave rise to the Open University, while DIY in sport and entertainment resulted in a boom in a wide variety of sporting activity, from athletics and field sports to aerobics and keep fit, to climbing and hang-gliding.

Pop culture initiated what was essentially the day of the amateur. Personal involvement plus lots of help from commercial products enabled the amateur to produce results every bit as good as the professional.

Sensuousness

Pop culture rapidly swept away the old Victorian taboos on sex and the expression of emotions. It became a new age of freedom where the emphasis upon individual rights and personal involvement encouraged the exhibition rather than the suppression of the emotions. This was considered psychologically healthy.

The ‘Dr Spock’ generation of demand-fed babies and undisciplined children became the pop culture teenagers: the teeny-boppers who screamed wildly at their pop idols and lost themselves in waves of emotion at rock concerts and gigs. These activities paved the way for the drug-related rave parties of the 1990s.

Pop culture gave rise to a new age of sexual freedom aided by birth control and abortion. Sex education in schools followed the repeal of censorship in the entertainments industry, allowing explicit sexual scenes on TV, film and video, as well as in books and magazines.

As the moral mores of the nations fell apart, so the media's reporting of scandals, details of violence and explicit sex became more lurid, both stimulating and feeding the appetite for the sensuous. Inevitably, intimate media accounts of the lifestyles of pop stars encouraged young people to follow the activities of their idols and imitate their behaviour.

The lesson of post-war pop culture is that ethical nihilism leads to social nihilism. Moral anarchy leads to social anarchy.

Lawlessness

The radical change in the philosophy of education in the post-war era taught children not only to discover things for themselves, but also to question traditional values, leading to the questioning of authority, social norms and religious beliefs. The latter was aided and abetted by the popularisation of liberal theology through books such as Honest to God by John Robinson, the bishop who had defended the publication of Lady Chatterley's Lover, which broke new ground in explicitly sexual literature.

The old norms, moral precepts and social values, together with their foundational religious beliefs rooted in the Judeo-Christian faith, were rapidly crumbling. By the middle of the 1960s pop culture had become an unstoppable band-waggon rolling the nation into a social revolution, the end product of which only the exceptionally far-sighted could see.

The breakdown of moral absolutes left the field wide open for 'situation ethics' in which the rights and wrongs of every action for each individual would have to be sought within the prevailing situation and circumstances. This paved the way for increasing lawlessness, for the lowering of standards of professional conduct, and for radical changes in business ethics and the practices of corporate institutions. Thus the way was open for corruption in politics, industry and commerce leading inevitably to the increase of crime, drugs, family breakdown, child abuse, street violence and terrorism.

Pop culture was a child of revolt. It was born out of a spirit of rebellion, essentially a destructive rather than a creative spirit. Its anti-traditionalism was essentially the rejection of morality, of fundamental belief and of law. It was DIY in the rules of behaviour with a self-centred individualism that was essentially destructive of community. It was social anarchy and the inevitable result of anarchy is the destruction of society.

Power

The 20^th Century ushered in an age of powerlessness. Two world wars in the first half of the century swept millions of men and women from many nations into the horror of modern armed conflict. They had no option but to fight and even those who remained at home were mercilessly bombed in cities throughout Europe, powerless to defend themselves.

The post-war period of reconstruction saw thousands of inner-city communities destroyed as their homes were bulldozed and replaced by tower blocks. Others saw their homes destroyed to make way for motorways which they were powerless to resist.

As radical social changes were enforced by law, foundational social values began to crumble, moral principles were neglected, marriage breakdown increased, the stability of family life was undermined, crime rates soared and a general sense of powerlessness to withstand the onslaught of the forces of social change became widespread. The genie was out of the bottle and no-one had the power to put it back.

Pop culture was a child of revolt. It was born out of a spirit of rebellion, essentially a destructive rather than a creative spirit.

The economic boom years gave way to recession. Powerful commercial enterprises collapsed, bankruptcies increased, mortgage lenders foreclosed on the homes of defaulting house owners. The Englishman's castle was built on sand. People were powerless even to defend their homes.

The sense of powerlessness was increased by Europeanisation. Europe was swallowing up the little island which had fiercely maintained its freedom and independence against all invaders for a thousand years. Norman Tebbit summed it up when he said that the day would come when the 'Chancellor's budget speech would be faxed from Frankfurt'. The politicians, the Government, the Cabinet and the Prime Minister all began to share the sense of powerlessness to withstand the forces of change which were sweeping across the nation. Even the Queen had her 'annus horribilis', being powerless to defend her family from the adulterous and rebellious spirits of the age.

The Charismatic Movement

In the midst of these traumatic social changes and upheaval, a new phenomenon appeared within the Church: the charismatic movement. It did not arise in the immediate post-World War II period - in fact, it had no clear beginnings. There was no mighty outpouring of the Spirit of God as on the Day of Pentecost, no fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit as at the beginning of the Pentecostal movement at Azusa Street in 1906; there was no great revival, no clear move of God resulting in the conversion of multitudes of unbelievers.

Most charismatic leaders today trace the beginnings of the movement to the middle or late 1960s. But the first really recognisable signs of a movement did not occur until the early 1970s, when home-based fellowships or 'house churches' began to proliferate.

Whatever date we assign to the beginnings of the charismatic movement, it has to be acknowledged that pop culture was already a firmly established part of the social scene. The destructive effects of the spirit of rebellion could clearly be seen, biblical belief was under attack, traditional morality was in rapid decline, so too was church attendance. The Church, especially in inner-city areas, was in the full flight of retreat with a high closure rate of redundant church buildings, especially in areas of immigrant settlement.

It was against the background of spiritual atrophy and moribund institutionalism in the mainline churches that the charismatic movement emerged. It was born out of the womb of frustration with the status quo, rather than through a notable move of the Spirit of God.

A Genuine Move of God?

The charismatic movement came to birth at a time when the spirit of moral and social rebellion was triumphing in the battle with traditionalism in the secular world. This was the time when the most socially destructive Acts of Parliament were put on the Statute Book. It was a time when it seemed as though the whole nation was intent upon overturning past tradition and rejecting the social values and moral precepts of their forefathers. This was the spirit of the age in which the charismatic movement emerged and there is good evidence for the contention that many of the social characteristics of that period were birthed into it, the significance of which we are only now beginning to see.

We may go farther and ask the question, 'Was the charismatic movement a move of God? Was it actually initiated by the Lord Jesus, the Head of the Church?' It is not easy to give an unequivocal affirmative to that question due to its lack of a clear beginning and the fact that it was not rooted in the conviction of sin, repentance and revival.

The charismatic movement was born out of the womb of frustration with the status quo, rather than through a notable move of the Spirit of God.

There was not even a great wave of renewal sweeping through the Church or a 'holiness' movement characterised by self-denial, humility and self-sacrificial suffering with the major emphasis upon the cross. These are the characteristics of the present-day Church in China which has arisen out of the flames of persecution and martyrdom of the saints. In China there was no spectacular outpouring of the Spirit in any one place to mark the beginning of the period of great spiritual awakening now sweeping through that nation, but there were all the marks of authentic New Testament spirituality, including a willingness to die for the faith.

The charismatic movement, by contrast, had none of these marks and it is for this reason that we may fairly ask whether it was the creation of God or man. In fact, it bore many of the social characteristics of the Western nations in which it arose. It developed in an environment of easy affluence and it offered a form of spirituality which appealed strongly to the rising new middle classes seeking quick self-advancement and status in the new post-war social order.

Before offering an answer to the question of origins, we will look at the characteristics of the charismatic movement under the same headings as we used when looking at pop culture.

Next week: The charismatic movement as a child of pop culture.

First published in 1995, as part of chapter 2 of ‘Blessing the Church?’ (Eagle Publishing, pp10-39). Revised November 2017.