Word and Power: Is the Theology of John Wimber Compatible with Presbyterian Theology and Practice?

Word and Power

Is the Theology of John Wimber Compatible with Presbyterian Theology and Practice?

Gareth William David Stewart

Word and Power

Is the Theology of John Wimber Compatible with Presbyterian Theology and Practice?

Copyright © 2015 Gareth William David Stewart. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.

Wipf & Stock

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

isbn 13: 978-1-62564-590-6

eisbn 13: 978-1-63087-876-4

Manufactured in the U.S.A.

Preface

This book discusses the contribution made by John Wimber to the theology of evangelism, discipleship, and ministry. These contributions are contextually placed within a Reformed congregation that is part of a Confessional Presbyterian Denomination. While it does not address specifics with one congregation, the principles aim to be applicable to all such congregations. It seeks to challenge the accepted attitudes toward evangelism, the integration of new converts into the Church through discipleship, and the release of these converts into some form of ministry. This thesis argues for a re-evaluation of the power of the Holy Spirit in confirming the gospel with signs accompanying, in filling each believer with his fullness and the giving of spiritual gifts, and a release of these gifts through every member ministry as a possible methodology to be implemented in Presbyterian congregations.

This book aims to offer a middle way between Pentecostalism and Cessationist theology through the ministry philosophy of John Wimber, himself an ordained minister of the Quaker denomination. It seeks to respect the theological and historical traditions of Presbyterianism, while not being uncritical of some of its current methodologies. It also seeks to suggest that the theology of the Reformed faith is best suited to a Charismatic methodology with the emphasis on God’s sovereignty, omnipotence and sacramental theology. It seeks to place the practice of evangelism, discipleship, and ministry within the context of a local congregation as that which is best suited to minister to the needs of that local community in which it is planted, and to evangelize, disciple, and train those members to meet the spiritual needs of that community. This book argues for an integration of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in the context of a Bible and preaching-based congregation.

Acknowledgments

I want to thank my wife and best friend, Cherrie, for all her support and encouragement throughout our marriage and in the ministry to which Christ has called me. For Sebastian, my best friend, who has never spoken a word but has given me nothing but love and acceptance and who died just before the completion of this work. I also want to thank my Mum for the stable home and Christian upbringing that she and Dad provided.

I want to thank Robin Routledge for supervising me throughout this period of study, and for his encouraging and challenging comments.

Lastly, but by no means least, I want to thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who saved me, called me, anointed me and, to my own amazement, continues to bless the work I do for him.

Soli Deo Gloria!

Abbreviations

ESV The Holy Bible, English Standard Version.

PCI The Presbyterian Church in Ireland.

MPC Maghera Presbyterian Church.

MTS Ministry Training Strategy

NIV Holy Bible: New International Version.

NLT Holy Bible, New Living Translation, Second Edition.

NKJV Holy Bible, New King James Version.

WARC World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

WCF Westminster Confession of Faith.

WSC Westminster Shorter Catechism.

The Theoretical Foundation

1

Setting the Scene

Introduction

Adrian Plass tells the story of an alien visiting St. Wilfred’s Anglican Church.¹ If that same alien were to land a spacecraft in Ulster and travel along the roads of our cities, towns, villages, and hamlets, it would no doubt be surprised at the number of very odd and strange-looking buildings that seem, in some instances, very grand indeed, but are closed for the vast majority of the week. These buildings are Churches and, in Ulster, many of these buildings are Presbyterian. Not only are there a vast number of individual Churches, but there are also a significant number of Presbyterian denominations: The Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI), the Reformed Presbyterian Synod of Ireland (Covenanters), the Non-Subscribing Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Unitarians), the Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Ireland, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, and even the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland!² Practices in these churches may include credobaptism and exclusive psalmody.

PCI is the largest Protestant denomination in Northern Ireland. John Dickinson notes that in 2008, PCI lost 1,994 people claiming connection, 1,223 fewer contributions to the funds of the denomination, 979 fewer people attending Communion, and 731 fewer on the rolls of our Sunday Schools and Bible classes.³ How these trends are addressed may lead the Church, according to John McIntyre, to reconsider the work of the Holy Spirit.⁴ These statistics suggest that there may be a need for a fresh approach to the way in which Church is practiced in Ulster. I want to suggest that one option may be to consider the theology of John Wimber. I chose to compare Reformed theology with an example of Charismatic theology because, as Greg Odgen notes, the Christian Church has been affected through the renewal of the Holy Spirit in recent years.⁵ This effect has happened through worship music and events, such as Spring Harvest,⁶ that have brought Charismatic theology and practice into connection with mainstream historical denominations.

Much of the writing on Pentecostalism and Charismatic theology has emphasized the Arminian, Holiness, Methodist, Revivalist and Premillennial influences, such as Cox,⁷ Dayton⁸ and Synan.⁹ Keith Warrington does not suggest any Reformed influences on Pentecostalism.¹⁰ Regarding the Charismatic Movement there have been some historical studies, such as those of Andrew Walker¹¹ and Peter Hocken¹², and some have touched on it in writing Pentecostal histories.¹³ Hocken, however, does not mention Reformed/Presbyterian influences on the Charismatic Movement or vice versa. There have been some polemical writings concerning the inaccuracy of contemporary Charismatic phenomena from a Reformed perspective,¹⁴ and even some attempts at harmonizing the differing views on the Holy Spirit.¹⁵ There has been, however, a paucity of reflection from a Reformed position that positively considers Charismatic issues.¹⁶ Considering this, I believe there is a need to re-evaluate the Pentecostal/Charismatic influence on the Reformed Churches and the Reformed influence upon the Charismatic/Pentecostal Churches. This has already been done regarding the Christian and Missionary Alliance and may benefit from being applied to a Reformed context.¹⁷

This would benefit, not only Reformed scholars and congregations, but also open up a new avenue of study within the Pentecostal/Charismatic world. This will improve scholarship by highlighting a gap in theological discussion, by demonstrating that being Reformed does not necessarily mean cessationist, and that the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement may share the same Reformation source as Reformed Churches.¹⁸ It will improve practice by allowing for a wider degree of freedom in the expression of worship in Reformed Churches by anchoring the supernatural in Word-centered Churches, and challenging the Arminian basis of much Pentecostal/Charismatic evangelism. Regarding ecclesiastical policy, this study will increase the ecumenical reach of the Pentecostal/Charismatic Movement and theology. It will aid understanding amongst Pentecostal/Charismatics and Reformed believers about why each Church has different and unique features, allowing both streams to draw on their theological resources and traditions. This will show the complementary nature of the two streams and, while their theological differences may not be resolved, something of each may be added to the other that would be absent otherwise.¹⁹

Dickinson’s statistics may also suggest a change in people’s attitude toward Church. Timothy Keller notes that many people today consider themselves non- or anti-religious, being wary of any institution that exercises authority over individuals, particularly on confusing moral issues.²⁰ Objective truth may also be rejected, leading to narcissism and signals the death of a culture based on objective truth and civic virtue, as Philip Graham Ryken points out.²¹ With numbers leaving the Church, a desire to redress this is the focus of much thinking.²² This desire is for the Church to be a sign of the true kingdom, not just accepting of the way things are.²³ The Church is not simply to reflect Ulster culture, but to be a sign of the kingdom of God, and to show the spiritual reason for the Church. I want to suggest that a charismatic understanding may aid this role.

Definition of Terms

In dealing with the theological and practical identity of Churches, defining the terms being used is important. Practically, it may be difficult to distinguish between Pentecostals and Charismatics in terms of worship; however, some delineation is necessary to provide parameters for this study. I have followed the definition of Andrew Lord, who uses the term pentecostal to denote those Churches that trace their origin to the Pentecostal experience at the beginning of the twentieth century, and charismatic to denote the newer Churches that have developed since the Charismatic Renewal of the 1960s. This includes the Third Wave, and the Vineyard, but practically these distinctions may become blurred.²⁴ This is more general definition than may be helpful because, as shall be seen, Wimber himself may not have been happy with the designation charismatic. It does, however, allow for a degree of flexibility, specifically because the influence of Wimber went beyond the bounds of the Charismatic Renewal itself, as well as influencing many Charismatic and Pentecostal leaders and Churches.

Fyall notes that: The words ‘Charismatic’ and ‘Reformed’ come loaded with so many associations and indeed misunderstandings, that to understand what is meant, can be difficult.²⁵ For the purposes of this work I will use the definitions Fyall gives as a working outline of what is meant by Charismatic and Reformed. He defines Charismatic as Church characterized by four things: body ministry, practicing the gifts of the Spirit, spontaneity in services and home groups.²⁶ I have chosen Fyall because he stands in the Reformed camp and offers a positive appreciation of charismatic spirituality.²⁷ Regarding Charismatic theology, he notes their biblical method—drawing theology from narrative New Testament texts, which does not consider either reason or tradition to have any formative role.²⁸ Fyall defines Reformed as characterized by four things: expository preaching, congregational responsiveness to the preaching, corporate prayer, and a strong sense of the whole congregation as the fundamental unit.²⁹ It is important to understand that there is diversity within the Reformed Churches. Yet, underlying their theology is the conviction that the Bible gives authoritative and final direction for the church concerning doctrine, discipline and worship.³⁰ Tradition, in the form of adherence to confessions of faith, also contributes to Reformed theology along with reason, but not experience.³¹ There are elements within each that are used by the other, so they are not mutually exclusive. What is common to both systems of doctrine is a high view of biblical teaching that informs their theological reflection.

The aspects that I have chosen to consider are those highlighted in the writings of John Wimber; namely, the practice of evangelism, discipleship and ministry, and applying his suggestions to a Reformed context.³² I propose to consider how two different streams, which seem the antithesis of each other, may complement each other in terms of missional activity.³³

The Position of the Confessional Reformed Churches

In considering the views of PCI, it is impossible to produce one monolithic typology that defines everyone. As a study in Practical Theology, this book acknowledges such diversity of opinion and makes its home in the complex web of relationships and experiences.³⁴ PCI appears to have remained a conservative denomination, theologically and practically, partly due to adherence to the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF).³⁵ This theological tradition has shaped the identity of PCI as much as the culture of Northern Ireland.³⁶ At their ordination, all Presbyterian elders, ruling and teaching, must sign a document confirming that they agree with the doctrines put forward in the WCF. They are asked: Do you accept the Westminster Confession of Faith . . . to be founded on and agreeable to the Word of God; as such do you acknowledge it as the confession of your faith?³⁷ Unlike many Presbyterian denominations, most notably the Presbyterian Church of the USA (PCUSA), PCI has retained subscription to one confession.³⁸ Sean Michael Lucas reminds us that Presbyterians are confessional, meaning they adhere to the WCF.³⁹ This confessional understanding may be unique because it presents a system of theology against which all beliefs and practice are to be compared.

The question then arises over whether the WCF allows for any understanding of contemporary charismata. It states that the ways in which God had spoken to the Church previously are now ceased.⁴⁰ This would seem to suggest that the WCF does not allow for any revelation, apart from that contained in the Bible. Charismata, therefore, would seem inconsistent with the WCF. Not everyone agrees with this assumption. O. Palmer Robertson suggests that, as the Church is always reforming, it has come to a new and richer comprehension of the person and work of the Holy Spirit.⁴¹ Robertson believes that the WCF is deficient on this matter, although this does not make him a Charismatic.⁴² The reason that there is nothing specifically stated concerning spiritual gifts is one of context. The Westminster Divines were primarily interested in reforming Church government and the doctrine of salvation, not pneumatology. It cannot, therefore, with any degree of confidence be claimed, that the WCF would be against charismatic theology.

There has also been a distance from ecumenism denominationally, with the withdrawal of PCI from the World Council of Churches in 1980.⁴³ There have been some notable exceptions to this rule, such as Rev. David Armstrong of First Limavady and Magilligan congregations, whose ecumenism in the 1980s caused ripples in the local community and wider afield.⁴⁴ There has been the ecumenical partnership between Clonard Monastery (Fr. Gerry Reynolds) and Fitzroy Presbyterian Church (Very Rev. Dr. Ken Newell).⁴⁵ In the main, however, a pattern of wariness on issues such as ecumenism continues. The Campaign for Concerned Witness to the Reformed Faith (CCW) exercises a lobbying function within the church against ecumenical matters. There has been a desire to provide a methodology for evangelism within PCI by the Board of Mission in Ireland.⁴⁶ To provide a Reformed and Charismatic methodology for Irish Presbyterianism, drawing on resources beyond their own tradition, namely Wimber, is a hurdle which must be overcome, if a Reformed and Charismatic ministry model is to work, practically.

PCI dealt with the issue of Charismatic Renewal from 1983–85, through the Doctrine Committee of the General Assembly. First, concerning divine healing (1983), then the Ad Hoc Committee on Special Fellowships (1983–85). The Doctrine Committee report outlines the widespread practice of divine healing within Presbyterian congregations and emphasized the tension between God’s will to heal and people remaining sick, while underlining their support for the medical profession.⁴⁷ Although this does not deal with the Charismatic Renewal specifically, it does indicate the widespread practice of divine healing in PCI, a practice that is one of the emphases of Wimber. The reports of the Ad Hoc Committee on Special Fellowships began as an investigation by the Presbytery of East Belfast into a Christian Fellowship that developed out of the Gilnahirk congregation and their practice of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.⁴⁸ The committee evaluated what was happening in other para-church organizations and concluded, there is much within the Renewal movement for which we are thankful to God. There was a desire to look at Presbyterian structure and assess its suitability to contain Renewal. The conclusion was that the domineering leadership and other practices, such as speaking in tongues and healing, appear to be incompatible with Presbyterian practice per se.⁴⁹ This is significant because it is not suggesting the Renewal is incompatible with Presbyterian theology, as outlined in the WCF, but its practice may be an issue of concern.

The following year another report was received which expanded the consideration of special fellowships. The issue of music, to which younger members could relate, was raised. Theological consideration was given to the issue of subsequence in receiving the Spirit evidenced by speaking in tongues. The conclusion was that if it was a valid interpretation, then most PCI congregations would be devoid of the Spirit.⁵⁰ This is significant because if the theology of initial evidence is factual, then the conclusion stands. While not commenting directly on Wimber’s position, there does seem to be an argument of reductio ad absurdum. Wimber did not teach tongues as an evidence of receiving the Spirit. There may be confusion with the teaching of classical Pentecostalism. They do conclude that tongues may be a problem for some but not all within the Presbyterian family.⁵¹ This does not state that every Presbyterian would have problems with speaking in tongues. It could be inferred that there may be some who would not have any problems with the practice. It may also suggest that other spiritual gifts may also be accepted by Presbyterians.

A number of problems were raised: the nature of prophecy apart from the Bible, contemporary apostles and prophets, preoccupation with the sensational and specifically satanic issues, the health and wealth gospel, the subordination of women and the removal of baptismal discipline outside the remit of Kirk Sessions, which often led to re-baptism.⁵² These issues remain for any who embrace Renewal yet choose to remain within PCI. Many of these issues cover a wide variety of the Renewal spectrum, and not all would be held by every Charismatic. The last report was received in 1985 and dealt with the issue of those who embrace Renewal remaining within Presbyterianism. It was stated that it is difficult to keep Renewal groups within the institutional church, but leaving for new fellowships was the soft option.⁵³ Seeking to redress a drift into new expressions of Church is always high on the agenda of those ruling denominations. One of the arguments of this book is that staying may be a valid and important principle.

In Britain, the Church of Scotland has no position statement on Charismatic Renewal. There was a debate in 1997 surrounding the Toronto Blessing, but nothing was put forward as the Church’s position.⁵⁴ Why the Church of Scotland has never addressed this issue is unclear, when there has been significant consideration given to rejuvenating the denomination.⁵⁵ It may be that the Charismatic Renewal has not had an impact on the Church of Scotland.⁵⁶ The United Reformed Church experienced some Charismatic impact, through Bob Gordon, and the establishment of the Group for Evangelism and Renewal (GEAR).⁵⁷

Commenting on North America, John Dart outlines the history of the interaction between American Presbyterianism and the Charismatic Renewal. This came in 1963, through Louis Evans Jr. who was pastor of Bel Air Presbyterian Church in California, and gave birth to the 1966 charismatic communion in Oklahoma. In 1984 the Presbyterian Reformed Ministries International (PRMI) was founded by Zeb Brad Long. This was identified with the Third Wave of John Wimber and sought to give a Reformed theological rationale to the experience of Renewal.⁵⁸ Vinson Synan comments that the 1970 General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church, which neither condemned nor supported the growing Charismatic Movement, but emphasized that glossolalia ought not to be seen as normative.⁵⁹

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), Timothy H. Gregson tells us, established the Machen Retreat and Conference Center in McDowell, VA, because Paul Cunningham perceived an apparent spiritual vacuum in his local area for a Reformed witness.⁶⁰ What is significant is the concession that some believers are going to Charismatic churches to hear Bible teaching. While this does not make any comment on the authenticity of Charismatic theology, it does offer a practical ecumenism where a respect is given to their spirituality.⁶¹ James A. Zozzaro, writing for the OPC, argues that because of the widespread influence of neo-pentecostalism, which he defines as charismatic, the OPC has had to restate its opposition to any form of contemporary charismatic experience. In doing this, Zozzaro believes that some have become unbiblical in their emphasis, and so he seeks to draw out the two positions of the Holy Spirit as the gift, or the Holy Spirit as the giver of gifts. The first position means that, as all believers have received the gift of the Spirit at conversion, they are, by definition, charismatic. The second position needs to be explained. The OPC does not see the sign of gifts, tongues, prophecy and healing, as the main thrust of the Spirit’s work in believers. It believes that it is a mistake to identify the gifts exclusively in terms of what the New Testament outlines because this would define believers as charismatic or non-charismatic. Any gift used to build up the Church is, therefore, a charismatic gift.⁶² This argument becomes one of semantics in which the OPC means one thing, by the term Charismatic, and neo-pentecostals mean another. Yet, the final argument is one that appears to state a biblical principle from a non- biblical foundation. The New Testament does mention certain gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:8–10; Rom 12:6–8), yet he is not prepared to limit his argument to the validity of these gifts in the contemporary Church. In this sense, his argument appears to be self-defeating because the validity of the Charismatic claims to the biblical gifts of the Spirit has not been addressed. It may have been better to deal with the claims of the Charismatic rather than redefine the nature of spiritual gifts.

The Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) states that they take their pneumatology from the WCF directly.⁶³ They do not take a uniformly cessationist position, believing that the gifts of the Spirit are given as He sees fit, not as an evidence of a spiritual event.⁶⁴ The position statement addresses two specific questions of how the EPC views the gifts of the Spirit. They see them as being biblically valid for today, but exercised under the authority of the Kirk Session. Whether the EPC is Charismatic is also answered. They state that they are not Pentecostal, but do not seem to like to be labeled Charismatic.⁶⁵ The reticence to be defined as specifically Charismatic may be motivated by a desire not to exclude those who share the same evangelical beliefs but are cessationist in theology.⁶⁶ This could be seen as a wise position that does not allow charismatic issues to become an area of division; yet, allowing those who want to express their faith in a charismatic manner the freedom to do so, without any denominational interference.

The Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) formulated a position paper on the Holy Spirit at their General Assembly in 1975. This paper states that the denomination rejoices in all evidences of new life in Christ’s body, yet raises some concerns about developing an experience-centered theology. They reaffirm that Christians receive the Spirit at conversion. The ongoing experience of the Spirit, in assuring believers of their salvation, means there is to be an ongoing experience of being filled with the Spirit. Specific attention is given to the gifts of the Spirit—which must not be used as a divisive issue amongst Christians by either denoting those who may have received a baptism in the Spirit, or by directing believers—and to miracles which they understand in a general sense to describe the work of God in all areas of creation.⁶⁷ These positions, essentially, restate the classic Reformed position but do so in an unspecific manner, allowing members of the PCA to have a Charismatic emphasis without compromising their traditions. The focus, therefore, appears to move away from the issues of spiritual gifts and miracles to holiness and eternal security, but may benefit more from stating definitely whether they are to be pursued at all.

Reasons for Choosing John Wimber

At this stage it is important to explain why I have chosen to reflect upon Wimber and his theological views as the focus for this book. There are several places to look in the search for a model for the work of the Holy Spirit in the Presbyterian Church; however, I want to suggest that Wimber offers a unique perspective for a number of reasons.⁶⁸

Wimber himself visited Ireland in 1985 and conducted a conference in University College Dublin. While this was almost thirty years ago, it places him within the living memory of those involved in the Church in contemporary Ireland. This event marked the beginning of the first Vineyard Church in Ireland.⁶⁹ This connection with the island, along with the relatively short time in which Vineyard has been functioning on the island, may mean that people still understand him primarily as a writer rather than a denominational founder.⁷⁰ There are also a relatively few number of Vineyards in Ireland in comparison to Reformed Churches.⁷¹ This may mean that Reformed Churches understand Wimber as someone with a theological point to make, and not as someone who instituted a new ecclesiastical system that draws members away from their own. He may, therefore, be viewed as offering principles to apply to existing denominations.

It may be asked why I have not chosen to reflect upon Pentecostal teaching and its implications for Reformed doctrine and practice? There may be an argument that Pentecostalism does not fall into the definition of conventional Protestantism.⁷² Pentecostalism may represent a fourth stream of the Christian Church: Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and Pentecostal.⁷³ It may also be worth noting that the Charismatic stream could also be viewed as distinct from Pentecostalism.⁷⁴ While Pentecostal teaching began the consideration of spiritual gifts, miracles, signs and wonders, Cartledge believes that Wimber’s teaching superseded the importance of earlier Pentecostal teaching’ regarding its wider ecclesiastical impact.⁷⁵ Warrington also suggests that Wimber’s theology influenced Pentecostalism as much as Evangelicalism.⁷⁶ For this reason, I have chosen to consider Wimber and not Pentecostalism. The implications of applying Pentecostal doctrine and practice to a Reformed context may be seen as akin to asking a Reformed congregation to join the Roman Catholic or Orthodox tradition.⁷⁷ It may mean completely changing its doctrinal and historical position; whereas, applying the principles outlined by Wimber may enable a denominational congregation to maintain its traditional position, but move in the gifts of the Spirit. I want to suggest that any doctrinal approach that has become associated with a denominational emphasis becomes less useful and less likely to be adopted by other denominations and streams.

Another group that might be considered here is New Frontiers International. This grouping, led by Terry Virgo, defines itself specifically as Reformed and Charismatic.⁷⁸ It might thus appear that New Frontiers is exactly where this book is arguing that the Presbyterians Churches ought to be heading. Yet, there is one issue that may make Presbyterians in Ireland specifically reject suggestions leading toward New Frontiers International; namely, their stance on women in leadership. Their statement reads: Elders are men. It is further laid out that there is no biblical warrant for women in the eldership and such a practice would seem incompatible with the texts.⁷⁹ This was one of the issues of concern raised by PCI about the Renewal movement.⁸⁰ It also clearly contradicts the law of the PCI.⁸¹ This may cause an issue of rejection from some Presbyterians who accept the egalitarian position, before the issues of the Holy Spirit are even raised. Wimber’s view on this matter appears to be more in line with that of Irish Presbyterianism. Carol Wimber⁸² notes that because of their evangelical Quaker background, Wimber held a view that there was only one ministry to which everyone was ordained, the ministry of Jesus. This included both genders.⁸³ There has been some debate around Wimber’s views on women, some claiming he believed in male eldership. Rich Nathan writes: But when John saw that gifts of teaching and what he called elding were pored out upon women, he got out of the way of the Holy Spirit.⁸⁴ Wherever a Presbyterian may stand on this issue, it could become something that clouds the wider principle of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit being available for today. If the debate is to focus on pneumatology then the ordination issue may subvert that focus.

Historically, it may also have been possible to reflect upon the views of Edward Irving, who was a Presbyterian minister. Irving was the minister of the National Kirk, Regent Square, London from 1822.⁸⁵ Thomas A. Smail, in commenting on the Church of Scotland’s 1974 Panel on Doctrine Report on the Charismatic Renewal, notes that Irving presents the experience of the Holy Spirit in a Reformed-Calvinist way, rather than in a Methodist-Holiness way. He affirms, however, that any experience of the Holy Spirit may affirm subsequence of reception. His conclusion is to keep the experience, but reject the theology.⁸⁶ While this may be a pragmatic option, it does not deal with whether Reformed and Charismatic theologies are complementary or not. Gordon Strachan states that Irving’s views were very close, if not identical, to what the Assemblies of God, Elim Pentecostal Churches and other independent Pentecostal Churches teach. He further believes that the similarity is such that it could be assumed to be a direct connection, labeling Irving the first Reformed-Pentecostal theologian.⁸⁷ This connection with Pentecostal beliefs meant that Irving may have been too great a leap for Presbyterians to embrace as a voice to challenge their views on the Holy Spirit, as it was noted before that Pentecostalism may represent a distinct stream of the Christian Church. To implement the views of someone whose beliefs are so closely associated with Pentecostalism may preclude acceptance. Graham McFarlane notes that there is also a theological issue. It appears Irving’s views sprang from his understanding of the incarnation rather than experiencing the gifts of the Holy Spirit. In this sense his theology sought experience rather than his experience seeking theology.⁸⁸ This book does not begin from a position of Christological reflection but ecclesiological, and seeks to consider how the Church may experience the Holy Spirit’s power in evangelism, discipleship and ministry. It is a discussion of the praxis of the Church. While Irving’s theology may lend itself to this, it is not the result of direct reflection upon it. There is also the practical issue that Irving was expelled from the Church of Scotland because of what were deemed to be heretical views.⁸⁹ In chapter 3, I have outlined the research questions, one of which is remaining true to my own denominational, theological and historic views while implementing a charismatic praxis. Adopting a method that considers the theology of one who was expelled from the mother church for heresy may contradict ordination vows.⁹⁰ Smail’s comment on setting aside the theology, but holding on to the practice, equally does not answer the theological questions that I hope this book reflects upon. For these reasons I chose not to consider the views of Irving to reflect upon as a source of possible application to a Reformed context.

There are two Reformed authors who seem to have suggested a positive appreciation for the charismatic: D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and R. T. Kendall, who were previous ministers of Westminster Chapel, London.⁹¹ Lloyd-Jones argued for an experience of the Holy Spirit after conversion.⁹² The motivation for seeking this experience was a desire for the great blessing that characterized the early church.⁹³ One of the reasons why I chose not to use Lloyd-Jones, as a possible companion in the conversation, was his association with separatism. When he retired, Westminster Chapel approached Eric Alexander to fill the pulpit.⁹⁴ He declined the offer because, as a Church of Scotland minister, he did not share Lloyd-Jones’ separatist leanings.⁹⁵ The issue of Church Polity is significant to Presbyterians. In the service for ordination, installation or induction, the candidate declares their acceptance of the Presbyterian form of Church government, which was noted when discussing Irving. There have been instances of Congregational Churches being formed by seceding Presbyterians. In 1927, the ecumenical talks about forming a united Protestant Church in Northern Ireland failed because of the insistence that it must adopt Congregational polity.⁹⁶ While Lloyd-Jones may be held in a high regard amongst Presbyterians, the local issues of relations with Congregationalism may make it difficult to apply his principles. Another issue is his focus on writing about the Holy Spirit, which we have noted, was to experience a spiritual blessing. John Piper notes that his main focus was experiencing God and biblical doctrine. Yet, he notes that Lloyd-Jones opposed the claiming of spiritual gifts.⁹⁷ Lloyd-Jones was focusing on proving the theological experience of the individual believer, and while Wimber does the same, as we shall note in chapter 5, he also deals with wider issues regarding the experience of the Holy Spirit. The last issue is a practical one. Lloyd-Jones’ books are manuscripts of his sermons, so they do not contain references or citations. It may be somewhat unfair to take a sermon and attempt to give academic evaluation, when that was not the purpose for which it was published.

The same criteria can be applied to some of Kendall’s writings as their genesis was as sermon material. He is also associated with the believer’s baptism position, devoting a chapter in his theology to proving the immersionist view.⁹⁸ This position would be contrary to that of the Westminster Confession.⁹⁹ This alone may not entirely dissuade Irish Presbyterians away from Kendall; however, it may be an issue. The bigger issue may be over his book Once Saved, Always Saved.¹⁰⁰ This book caused a stir amongst Conservative Evangelicals, and we have noted that Irish Presbyterianism has maintained that conservative nature. Iain Murray believes that this book suggests antinomianism.¹⁰¹ This theme was further taken up by Richard Alderson, an ex-member of Westminster Chapel.¹⁰² Murray suggests that it was Kendall’s openness to the Spirit that damaged Westminster Chapel.¹⁰³ None of this claims that Wimber would be any less controversial for Reformed Christians than Kendall might be. It is that the main issue of his argument may be lost because of a preoccupation with a perceived doctrinal issue, much like Irving may be preoccupied because of heresy.

It may also not be true to the principles, outlined by Wimber, to connect him with a new ecclesiastical or denominational stream. He seemed to seek for the radical middle, the road between Evangelicalism and Pentecostalism.¹⁰⁴ David Pawson notes that Wimber’s pragmatic aim, to bring Evangelicals and Charismatics together in evangelism, was because of their mutual dependence upon each other.¹⁰⁵ This pragmatism dovetails with the pragmatic function of practical theology, but does not negate Wimber’s place as a theologian.¹⁰⁶ Wimber’s theology does not seek to reconcile different positions on pneumatology, but offers a theological praxis of action. This may be because of his own background as a practical theologian of church growth. The differences between evangelical and charismatic appear to be immense because of the conviction on both sides. Wimber focuses on what the Church is doing in practice, bypassing these issues.¹⁰⁷ Pawson notes: What all this boils down to is an assurance that Evangelicals can embrace charismatic gifts without any theological adjustment.¹⁰⁸ The choice of Wimber, therefore, is a practical choice because it means that there may be no need to reassess or reinterpret Reformed doctrinal standards in order to implement his suggestions. His suggestions may work from any systematic or historical basis, and is truly ecumenical, without demanding a change of ecclesiastical distinctives.

Wimber may offer a system of theology and practice from a unique source. Van der Kooi suggests that the Reformed Churches have been influenced by the Charismatic Renewal and continue to be taught by it. This, he suggests, happens specifically through Wimber and the movements that began under