ARM:
A MEMBER OF THE BODY
by Peter Bement -Vice Chairman
ARM
exists to encourage the spiritual renewal of the Church in Wales and other Welsh
churches. We believe that the Flames
of Fire conference and our work in encouraging renewal within the
dioceses are a vital nucleus for the revival of the church.
During the past year, the Executive Committee has been thinking hard
about the best way to develop and raise
the profile of this work, convinced that God is calling us to a more visible and
effective presence in the church and nation.
Our
roots go deep into the charismatic movement, that rediscovery of the person and
work of the Holy Spirit that has done so much to bring new life to churches of
all denominations during the last 25 years or so.
The vital elements of this have been the recovery of experiences of the
presence and power of God in worship and in ministry, and of the possibilities
of the prophetic and the miraculous in the church. But the charismatic movement has not been without its
critics, and it is worth attending to what other parts of the Church have said,
and continue to say, about us.
The
most persistent criticism is that charismatics are excessively subjective and
emotional, attempting to sustain their faith upon experiences rather than upon
the unchanging and objective facts of salvation in Jesus Christ; emphasising
feeling at the expense of doctrine. We
reply with John Wesley that Christianity is nothing if it is not a religion of
the heart; that worship devoid of emotion is at best a cold and cerebral thing;
and that faith without experience is in danger of becoming a set of doctrinal
propositions rather than a living relationship with Christ.
Nonetheless, have we got the balance right?
Our
critics also say that the charismatic movement is shaped by contemporary
consumerist culture, which sees little beyond the individual’s need to satisfy
his or her desires. Do we, for
example, detect a shadow of secular individualism in the concern with healing
and deliverance? While obviously
biblical, has the wholeness and happiness of the individual been pursued at the
expense of other, equally biblical imperatives?
The consequence of this individualism, the critics argue, is that the
charismatic movement is almost entirely lacking an ecclesiology: that it has a
very undeveloped sense of the wider Church in its catholicity and diversity, and
of the great purposes that God has invested in it.
We reply that healing is a sign of the Kingdom, that God loves us as
individuals: and that it would be absurd to say with Lord Melbourne, Queen
Victoria’s minister, ‘Things have come to a pretty pass when religion has become personal.’
But have we got the balance right?
Most
of the tensions around the charismatic movement, of course, are generated by its
styles of worship, and people whose religious culture has been shaped by
traditional Anglican worship have been quick to dismiss what they see as
‘happy-clappy’. But there are
more searching criticisms: no-one could deny that a very high proportion of the
songs, choruses and anthems of charismatic worship are written in the first
person (‘I’, ‘me’), whilst the content of traditional hymns tends to be much
more objective in its concerns with doctrine and biblical narrative.
Compare a Nineteenth Century hymn such as Whittier’s Immortal
Love, forever full with, say, I get so
excited Lord, / every time I realize / I’m forgiven, I’m forgiven ... We reply that traditional hymnody under-represents simple
personal expressions of love for the Lord.
But the fact is that we need both the subjective and the objective.
But
another point about liturgy is also sometimes made.
The charismatic preference is on the whole for expressive free-flowing
worship which reaches its climax in prayer ministry - often for some grace or
anointing, sometimes for healing or even deliverance. The traditional Anglican expectation is that the climax
should be the Word (as at morning or evening prayer) or the sacrament of
Communion, which is, after all, the central act of Christian worship. Do we need to ask ourselves about the place that Word and
Sacrament have in charismatic worship, as compared with these traditional
expectations?
It could seem to the outside observer that the charismatic emphasis is
rather too much on the worshipper and not enough on Christ; too much on healing
and deliverance, not enough on salvation. (Luke
10:20.)
I
rehearse these familiar criticisms in order to stimulate self-examination.
Of course we stand by the charismatic renewal, believing that it has much
yet to do in our churches. We
rejoice in the rediscovery of the Third Person of the Trinity, and that He has
brought us closer to the Father and the Son.
But there is always the danger that we might indeed become what others
say we already are: inward-looking, self-obsessed, isolated from the rest of the
Church. It is very noticeable that at the Flames of Fire
Conference, it is speakers and seminars on personal subjects - overcoming the
anxieties, problems and diseases that afflict us physically, emotionally and
spiritually - that attract the most popular support. Topics relating to discipleship and the mission of the church
are less often offered, and receive little response. There is a large demand for personal ministry at the end of
meetings and at other times during the conference. On one level, of course, this points to a huge pastoral need
in our constituency which is not being met by the local church.
But on another level it makes us aware of the need to be seeking to
mature in our faith. Paul reminds
us that Jesus called the Church and its ministries into being in order ‘to
prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be
built up, until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son
of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of
Christ’ [Ephesians 4:12-13].