Swiss Reformed Response

Swiss Reformed

Response

Walter J.

Hollenweger

This is an

interesting

faith and

practice”

issue of racism or

political

theologians. of

ongoing

revelation for

in

general

terms,

This is

probably

the most

and fruitful

report.

I am astonished at the broad consensus between Pentecostal and Reformed

The consensus includes the

“implications

(#9).

As

long

as this is expressed

it is easy to agree. But what if it becomes

concrete,

for instance on the

decisions?

tricky

issue within Reformed churches and within Pentecostalism. It

of an ecumenism

aporia

rather than on a common witness.

is also a

good example

So Much

Agreement!

Nicene-Constantinopolitian Pentecostal

theologizing!)

that centers on a common

(#15, something

new in in

accepting

the controversial

for instance in our

dealings sideration Christ’s clear

warnings?

The

dialogue partners

also

agreed

on their common basis in the

Creed

obviously

filioque.

Reformed and Pentecostals consider Jesus Christ to be the criterion for the work of the

Holy Spirit.

with

power

and

money, taking

into con-

But what does that

mean,

Here

again,

it seems to me that

both traditions are united in a common

aporia.

On the other hand it was stated that “the work of the

Spirit

is

broader than we think”

(#20).

accomplish

All

depends

here on the

phrase,

the salvation of

to receive the

proclaimed

“broader than we think.” What does it mean? Does it mean that the Holy Spirit

is also at work outside the realm of the

preached

Word of God,

as David du Plessis said

long ago?

There are some hints in this direction: “More

recently,

some Pentecostals have

begun

to reflect on the role of the

Spirit

in creation and culture to reveal God and to

God’s

just

and

holy will,

but not to the extent of believ- ing

that there is

saving grace

outside the

ministry

of the

Gospel (#21 1 and

73).

What does that mean for instance

regarding

the Jews? Are

they

lost because

they

do not believe in Jesus Christ?

However,

“both traditions

acknowledge

among

all

peoples, including peoples

of other faiths,

preparing

Word”

(#23).

That

is,

of

course,

orthodox

the

Holy Spirit

is a work

them

44

1

Reformed brand. Huldreich

say

that nonchristians

honestly

texts

the- When a Pentecostal

theology

of the Calvinistic

brand,

but not of the

Zwinglian

Zwingli expected

to meet

“pious pagans”

in heav- en, although they

never heard the

gospel.

Can Pentecostals

to

hell,

given

such clear and

challenging as Matthew 25:31-46? This issue is also discussed in Reformed ology,

but

usually only

on the theoretical level.

minister

gets

a Muslim son-in-law the tone of the dis-

change!

and Pentecostals

was clear for both sides that the

opposite party

had no chance of sal- vation and was

surely going

to hell. And now? There is

hardly

a

or Reformed

cussion and the

arguments polemics

between Catholics

It is clear that

our judgment

Or,

one

may

remember the

fifty years ago.

Then it

theologian

who would dare to make

on such matters does not convictions but

also,

and

perhaps

with the statement that the

gap

between

respected

Catholic or Pentecostal such statements.

only depend

on our

theological even more so, on our

experience.

I have some difficulties the Bible and the

contemporary Pentecostals,

instance

sons,

does not advocate

only spiritually (Letter

to

Philemon)?

is not historical but

spiritual (#27). when

Paul,

for understandable historical

the

emancipation

when John

depicts

Christ so

differently

using

exclusive and anti-Semitic

Furthermore,

world,

which is

emphasized among

Is it not

both,

for

and cultural rea-

of slaves in concreto but

Or is it not a historical

problem

from the other

evangelists, language,

thus

preparing

the

ground

–

sharply

make differentiate

‘

Reformed

theology.

Pentecostalism.

in the

report,

however.

Moreover,

for a

long

tradition of anti-Semitism in

Christianity?

I would

really

like to know what Pentecostals of the Reformed statement that “we cannot

‘supernatural gifts’

from ‘natural

gifts’ (#32).

This is

straightforward

But it is also a

position

I did not find a Pentecostal

found within reaction to this statement

of the in principle between the

consensus mean?

the

chapter

on “The Church as the

Community Spirit’s

Gifts” shows

very

little

disagreement

dialogue partners.

What does this broad

theological

Does it mean that the

really

controversial issues were left out? I do not believe this. Does it mean that Pentecostals

against joining

WARC,

since this would not strain their

ecclesiology

so much as, for

instance, membership option

that Pentecostals

might

take into consideration

are

not,

in

principle,

in the WCC?

Perhaps

that is an

sometime,

45

2

given

Pentecostal weak and inefficient.

the fact that their inner-Pentecostal alliances

Conference and

regional

Omissions

for

instance,

played

such an

important

conferences)

(World are

extremely

and

ecclesiology

(which dialogue),

that the dif-

the outcome ferences

I am also astonished at the

things

that were omitted. There

was,

no discussion on

baptism

role in the Vatican/Pentecostal

on

ministry,

or on the eucharist. If these

topics

had been

discussed,

might

have been the

astonishing discovery

among

the different Pentecostal traditions are far

greater than those between Reformed and Pentecostal

have been an

interesting discovery.

the Reformed

theology.

That would

That too is

signifi-

Reformed

population

ecclesiology

and the

ecclesiology However,

this is

again Pentecostal

theologians

majority

nificant

example

As far as I know, the

report

is not discussed in the heartland of

tradition,

namely,

in Switzerland.

cant. In Switzerland and in other

European

countries with a sizeable

the battle

rages

between a socalled free-church

of so-called established churches.

and

within

WARC,

for the

great

a sig-

Church in

Italy.

At the

not a discussion between Reformed

but a discussion

of the member churches of WARC are free

churches;

of this is the Waldensian

other

end,

certain Pentecostal churches in

Europe

receive state subsi- dies,

for instance the Finnish Pentecostal

college.

The Finnish

government trained Pentecostal

Church for their

theological is

obviously

interested in a well-

of the Pentecostal

College

in

clergy.

When I discussed this with Dr. Veli-Matti Karkkainen when he was

principal

Finland

pointing

out that none of the

early apostles

was

paid by

the

“True,

but

they

also did not

pay

such massive taxes as we do!” And what is

more,

the Finnish

government

state,

he answered:

only

one

thinking

about

subsidizing

is not the

Pentecostal institutions.

So,

what is the issue at stake? It seems to me that most of the dif- ferences between Reformed and Pentecostal

tural, political,

or

psychological make the discussion

theologians nature. Of

course,

are of a cul- that does not

theological

nature is

theological.

easier. But it would

perhaps

be

helpful

to real- ize that not all that we consider to be of a fundamental

To differentiate between cultural and

theologi-

46

3

cal issues

might

be a promising

topic

for further discussion.

Implications for

Witness

An

interesting the

understanding

therefore,

for

The

question

for us

is,

to

speak

in and

statement is made in

paragraph

52. It is said “that

of the

Spirit’s gifts

is broader than the classic list of spiritual

gifts

in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10.” That is a matter of

course, since there are other lists of

spiritual gifts

in the New Testament, instance in Romans 12:3-8. Since these lists are not identical, it seems that

they

are not exhaustive but

exemplary.

What new

gifts

do we discover to meet

contemporary needs

(see

the statement about how “God continues

through

the

church,” #35),

for instance in the realm of

science,

world trade and finance, where both Pentecostals

through

the activities of their members? For Pentecostals,

is even more

important

members in the Third World are on the

receiving

end of our collec-

involved this

question

tive

misdoings.

It

might

not be so

important other

theological

It will

surely

and Reformed are

deeply

because

the

majority

of their

to

agree

on the “initial

sign”

or

any

issues? Europeans so-called

detail. When

Bangladesh, Hamburg,

Los

Angeles, or the Pacific Islands are in

danger

of

being

flooded because of

glob- al

warming,

when millions are

dying

of

hunger

because of our trade system,

will it matter whether or not we

agree

on these

theological

matter, however,

can

agree

on a convention

even if that costs a lot of

money.

At

any rate, doing nothing against

our human-made

Kyoto Protocol),

more

costly.

I am

personally

whether Americans and reducing

carbon dioxide

(the

problems

will be much

in the

high Alps (again

the

the moun-

will

involved in this issue because I live in the mid- dle of the

Alps.

The

receding perma-frost

result of the

change

of the

global climate)

will destabilize

tains. The frozen water that has so far acted as a kind of cement in these rocks will melt and rocks and earth and whole mountains come down

destroying villages, roads,

and

railway

lines and

killing

Do we not have a responsibility

wonderful creation? And what has

“ongoing

revelation”

many people.

issue?

to take care of God’s

to

say

to this

What I feel is

badly missing

in the

report

are the

implications

of

47

4

commitment

of

Christians,

power

are

bringing

necessary

our common

theology

for our witness in a world that needs the clear

both Pentecostal and Reformed. We live among

men and women who in their race for

prestige, money

and

about a massive

ecological,

collapse.

If ever the concerted

spiritual

forces of Christians

to

bring

to a halt such

madness,

it is

today.

Conservative

Congregational

Christian

David F. Wells

The

dialogue

that

produced

financial and social

have been

Response

“Word and

Spirit,

Church and

Honest

theological

dis-

and distrust

World” were undertaken in a

worthy

cause.

agreements may always remain,

but

misunderstandings

should not. To the extent to which this document clears

away

these

mutual

trust,

offers new

insights,

it has served an honorable cause and we are

misunderstandings, promotes encourages cooperation,

all in debt to those who undertook

This document

tional Pentecostal

group” therefore a

self-appointed

and

this task.

that there “is no interna-

all Pentecostals and

to do this.

of the WARC.

This is a worldwide

candidly acknowledges

(#6)

that

represents

ad hoc

group

was established

On the other side of the table were

the

representatives

body

that does

represent

some Reformed bodies but,

it should be

said,

it is also

quite unrepresentative

define themselves

theologically

a little

problematic.

God, needing

to be

illumined,

of

many

who as Reformed but who are found in

as to who is

among

the

conversation

partners

for this

ible in this

document,

denominations not in that

body.

The

question, therefore,

actually being represented by

those who were in these discussions is

For

example,

the Barthian affirmation that “it is only by

the

Holy Spirit

that the

Scriptures

become the

living

Word of God for the Church”

(#33) speaks only

for the Barthians

Reformed. For most of the

others,

the Bible is

already

the Word of

for

sure,

but still the Word of God. Perhaps

the choice of these

particular

dialogue

was the best that could be done in the circumstances but the results will, for this reason, have their limitations.

three issues on which I believe further

thought

is

necessary.

First,

the links between Christ and the

Spirit

are well

nigh

invis-

whereas in the New Testament

Let me now raise

48

they

are

5

inescapably

and the

disposition gifts

for God’s

people. siderably. Important,

obvious. The Old Testament contains about one hundred references to the

Holy Spirit

in which he is seen to be at work in cre- ation,

the control of nature and

history,

the. revelation of God’s will

to

obey it,

and the

giving

of creative skills and

In the New Testament the focus narrows con-

of

course,

1:3-13, 2:18, 3:14-9, 4:4:6).

and

Spirit

are even coordinated

impossible

anchored to and

expressive

Reformation of justification

there is now

equivocation

and

Pentecostals,

are the triadic

passages

in which

coordi-

in such

expressions

as This means that it is

if it is not

We know

why

we

affirmations,

why

did the

Father, Son,

and

Holy Spirit

are seen to be joined in a common work of

grace (e.g.

John. 14:16 –

16:14;

1 Cor.

12:4-6;

2 Cor.

13:14; Eph.

New links between the Son and the Spirit,

however,

are also

forged,

for their work is

explicitly nated,

the

Spirit applying

what the Son achieved on the Cross. Son

linguistically

“Spirit

of Christ” and

“Spirit

of His Son.”

to consider the work of the

Spirit adequately

of the work of the Son.

Yet,

in this docu- ment one searches in vain for the historic affirmations from the

sola

gratia, sola fidei.

do not hear a ringing affirmation of in solo Christo. The reason is that

about how to view this

(#72).

If the Reformed would not utter the historic

Pentecostals not

help

them? And

why

do we not hear in this docu- ment

any

discussion about what in the

past

has divided the Reformed

such as the doctrines of

depravity

Second,

I believe the

way

in which the document

needs further consideration. The

language

incidental almost to what is

being

but it still stands out. The

language

of Father and Son is used but then the document becomes

some circumlocutions: “We

agree

that God has revealed God’s self’ (#19), “signs

that God is with God’s

people” (#51).

In both

cases,

the English language

calls for a

pronoun

self’ and “God is with his

people”.

But here is the rub. In these

cases, is God to be called he or she or some

hybrid

like s/he? The authors

small

part

of the

statement, attempted throughout,

will not

say.

and election?

speaks

of God used of God is

only

a

coy

and executes

as in “God has revealed him-

Mary Daly’s apho-

The best construction that can be

put

on this is that

they

are afraid to offend women since

they perhaps

remember

rism that if “God is male, then male is God.” And the

growing equal- ity

between men and women is elsewhere seen in the statement as one

49

6

fact the Bible does thousands work of the

Spirit’s

reconciliation.

of the

signs

of the

Spirit’s

work

today,

so that to call God “he,” as in

of times, would seem to

put

at

peril

this

language of

reconciling tieth

century? document

then

deliberately

certainly

But

why,

one

wonders,

would the

to the work

does,

and

and

are all simi- that there are

simply

some

Holy Spirit

have

inspired

the

language

used of God in the Bible if that

would later turn out to be such an

impediment

men and women that he wanted to do in the late twen-

Let us be frank. Would it not have been better for this

to

say

that the Bible embarrasses us at this

point today rather than to

profess great

love for

it,

as this document

not follow it in its

ways

of

speaking

of God?

How to

speak

about God is no small matter. The absence of

any female element in God is almost

unique among

world

religions

was in the biblical

period.

It is true that several

passages liken God to a mother or other female

images (Deut. 32:11;

Isa. 31:5, 42:14, 45:10, 49:15, 66:3;

Matt.

23:37).

These instances

not

metaphors, suggesting

but the resemblance is not even transferred to God as would be the case with the use of a metaphor. Nowhere is God ever

spoken

of as

mother, though

he is often

spoken

of as father, and no female

pronouns

are ever used of God but thousands of masculine

are used. It has become rather clear that when

theologians begin

to see God as

female,

in part or in whole, then the

images

of the

les, however, elements in

parallel,

pronouns

birth

canal,

God

breastfeeding

the

universe,

and the like

quickly

come to define the

ways

in which Christian faith is, as it were, con-

When that

happens,

we are but one

step away

from the

pan-

over

against

which the Bible delivered its

many

ceived. theistic

paganism pronouncements.

unambiguous,

concerns,

would it not

in a

The issue

really

is not how the Bible

speaks

of

God,

which is

but what we are to make of it. Rather than circum- venting

its

language

to accommodate women’s

be wiser to

explain

that God has revealed himself as

personal way

that is

uniquely opposed

to paganism because his self-revelation is

uniquely

true,

and that since in heaven there will be neither

giving

nor

taking

in

marriage,

the masculine

pronoun

means

something

a lit-

tle different in reference to God than it does in human life?

The third issue has to do with Christ and culture. In

my judgment the section “The Church is in the World but not of it”

(#59-62) far the weakest

part

of the document. The interface

is

by between Christ

50

7

about which the Reformed Pentecostals

acknowledge

language,

is

something

always analyzing

and culture, to use the familiar Niebuhrian

have

always

had a lot to

say. By contrast,

that when issues of human need

arise,

their instinct is to address that need

directly,

“without

the

systemic

issues that

produce

or

aggravate

the

pastoral

issue

being

(#62).

There

are, however,

addressed”

standing

on both sides here.

Reformed

some ironies in self-under-

grace,”

thought

has

always

made much of “common that

grace by

which God restrains evil in

society

and enables unbe-

lievers to

employ

their

God-given

sition

expresses

tion of

apartheid, mass destruction”

gifts

for the wider human

good,

thus here this

to see

This

dispo-

Liberalism

in

asserting

that

although

after Barth this

language

seemed

infelicitous;

kind of conviction is

placed

under the work of the

Holy Spirit (#20). This belief has

typically given

Reformed thinkers a disposition all truth as God’s

truth,

no matter what its

source,

and

that,

in

turn, has sometimes made it hard for them to see worldliness.

itself in a

startling way

here when the Reformed adopt

the old line of classical Protestant

“the

growing

concern for the

equality

of men and

women,

the aboli-

and the

struggle

for the abolition of

weapons

(#32)

are all “miracles.” Miracles?

miracles have been

thought

to involve the

suspension

nature as God in his

power

reveals himself and his

purposes ple.

But here what we have are “natural” miracles achieved through politics,

miracles that

require

no

suspension

nature. If these

really

are

miracles, quasi-pantheistic

blurred.

Furthermore,

of

Traditionally,

of the laws of

to

peo-

mostly

of the laws of they

have to be

predicated

on a

view of the relation between God and human life. The result is that the line between Christ and culture is

significantly

when the Reformed in this document about

corruption they

think

narrowly

in

society” (#61)

“social

systems” (#62)

“eco-

think in terms of social

structures,

destruction”

(#93),

and “structur-

“oppressive

situations

nomic

exploitation,

and

ecological al transformation of

society” of social ethics.

Evil,

of

course, is systemic, much more than

organizations

(#93). They

think

only

in the

language

but the social fabric is made

up

of

Culture,

and bureaucratic structures.

in

fact,

is the

public

environment in which we live and

which,

in the

by

the

omnipresence

dominance of cities, their

linkage by systems

of

manufacturing

West at

least,

is dominated

of

bureaucracy,

the that

51

8

capitalism

has

spawned,

the

whiz-bang confetti of countless radios and televisions,

ernment. It is the

daily experience to see life in certain

ways.

of

technology,

the audible

and

ever-expanding gov- of these realities that inclines us

It inclines us to sever our

public experi- ence from what is private, and to think that in public we are all

expe- riencing

the same facts and events, but in our

private sphere

we

legit- imately

understand these in accordance with our own

private

values that

may

well differ from those of

many

other

people.

God does not fit well into this

public sphere,

whether we are

thinking

of it in terms

of its

processes

of modernization gy,

television,

and

government) West, typically postmodern

should be

grappling

(urbanization, capitalism,

technolo- or its

attitudes,

which

are,

in the

dies and

as the intellectual soul of the Western world,

which had come from the

Enlightenment experiment, is followed

by

banal nihilism. This is the

reality

with which

theology

and not

simply

with the narrow and selective social issues evident in this document,

of a

political ideology

as a social ethic.

Toward the end the Pentecostals

others

speak

faith and demonic

powers. row an

understanding?

all of which are as much

part

speak

of their belief in worldli-

worldliness

is that

sys-

given

to

every society’s

truth and his Christ. It embraces,

ness

(#93), though they

do not

speak

with one mind. Some think in terms of the moral confrontation between Christian faith and

society,

in terms of the

power

confrontation between Christian

May

I suggest that

this,

as well, is too nar-

In the New

Testament,

tem of values, those

ways

of

looking

at life, which have the fallen sin- ner at the center and which

relegate

God to the

periphery.

rative sense in which it speaks of cosmos is the collective

expression

refusal to bow before God and receive his

The

pejo-

as Rudolf Bultmann

put it,

“the

sphere

of all men’s

thinking, planning

and

desiring,

in their cares and

their

pride

and

arrogance.”

It is

wishes,

their

pleasures

and

pursuits, everything

seem

strange.

This

understanding

in a society that makes sin look normal and

righteousness

how I described our

contemporary understanding

it works.

of “the world” runs

very

close to

of culture and how

need to broaden

their

understanding New Testament dangerous

In this document, then, the Pentecostals

of the biblical

language

of “the world,” because in the

as

being

so

profound

a reality that love of the world excludes the love of God,

it is

pictured

and

potentially

52

9

In the

apostolic

and falsehood,

“world” is no small or

peripheral precisely

will

help

in

constructing contemporary

culture.

and those who love the world are the enemies of God

(

John

2:15).

discussion of the “world” one encounters all of the great

choices in

life,

such as those between

light

and

darkness,

truth

freedom and

bondage,

Reformed

participants cultural situations are drawn most

naturally tion,

as the Reformed

and life and death. The matter and

understanding

it more a framework for

thinking

about

There are

many

culture”

posi- are,

need to

develop ways

of

And are the Lutherans

At the same

time,

there is a necessary “otherworldliness” that the

need to make more

explicit.

in

which,

as Niebuhr himself

argued,

those who

to the “Christ

transforming

in this document

asserting

a “Christ

against

culture”

position.

not also correct in

thinking,

at least with

respect

to the

gospel,

that “Christ is above culture,” for

nothing

in culture ever

actually

eases us

of God? The

kingdoms

Kingdom

of God are different

spiritual

realities. The

only way

we are “delivered from the dominion of darkness” and transferred

into the

Kingdom

of this world and the

“to the (Col 1 : 13) is by

the

supernatural,

Kingdom

of his beloved Son” regenerative

Christ and to this we contribute need to be redeemed.

work of the

Holy Spirit,

based on the finished work of

to be

sharpened, its

insights.

Reformed understands

nothing

but the sin from which we

needs

for some of

such as

testimonies but the

(!),

but

everyone too. Even more

signif-

themes of the

centrality in

evangelism

Seeing

these

multiple

relations of Christ to cul- ture would make this a far more felicitous document.

While I have had to focus on where I think the document

I also wish to

express my appreciation

Some of these are almost

marginal observations, the fact that Pentecostals like to

give personal

like to write creeds and confessions

that the

margins

are

important,

icant than

this, however,

are the

great

and

compelling

of God’s

Word,

the

necessity

of the

Holy Spirit’s ministry

life,

and the role and function of the church to which this document calls attention that will,

hopefully,

debate and cause the church of Christ to become more

and in Christian

invigorate

faithful in the

years

ahead.

53

10