Reformed Charismatics - Again

An interesting comment from Howie on a previous post, asking if using a term like "reformed charismatic" is in danger of not only embracing the best of both those worlds, but is susceptible to the worst of both as well.

Clearly the answer is yes, in that all of us are susceptible to error, bad behaviour, sin, stupidity and nastiness. However we hope that people of good will generally try to think of others in the best possible light, not the worst possible light.

But I think Howie pinpoints something else that is helpful: if I use a term as a shorthand to describe myself, it is understandable if people respond to me according to the way they have historically understood that term, or have been treated by others who use it, or by whether they have seen good practise or bad practise from others who use it. That is, the term defines me. I don't define the term. 

The trouble is that almost all terms have some good historical associations and some bad ones. I can think of excellent things that attach in the mind to the term "conservative evangelical". And some less excellent ones. Same with "charismatic", same with "reformed". Some have suggested "continuationist" is a better term than charismatic, and I am inclined to agree. It is a functional label with a narrower range historical and doctrinal connotations and therefore much easier to define what you mean. Its a bit of a mouthful, though. 

We don't live by our terms, but by what our terms mean. But our knee jerk reaction to evangelicals who don't quite use our terminology always out to be to start with generous assumptions. Too often knee-jerk reaction to lingo and jargon leads to a guilty-until-proved-innocent suspicion of other evangelicals.

Comments

[Bobby Sparks]

I'm presently a member of a Southern Baptist Church. I came into the fullness of the Holy Spirit as a part of the Third Wave movement. I spent time in the Vineyard, a Charismatic Church, The Assembly of God, the Prophetic movement and then became a Calvinist! I started out Baptist....so I guess you could call me confused! So I like the term Charismatic Calvinist. I believe I've gotten the most negative response from being a Calvinist.

[Marcus]

Hi Bobby,

maybe we need a new category of "ecclesiastical migrant"? :-) Interesting that you get the negative response from the "Calvinist" bit rather than the "Charismatic" bit. Do you think that reflects the circles you move in?

I think the whole discussion here demonstrates that there are a lot of people who naturally sense they belong together on the broad outlines of confessional evangelical doctrine and practise, who love biblical preaching and lively worship, who are Bible-centred, Christ-centred, cross-centred and mission-centred, who think that social concern is not antithetical to the gospel and that compassion and mercy ministries are vital, but for whom either no obvious existing constituency quite covers all of them, or who resonate with each other across previous denominational boundaries that are now falling down.

I like the Gospel Coalition's statement that in this regard they are a "centred set" rather than a "boundaried group". They have a (very) clear statement of what the centre is, with flexibility on secondaries and a clear policy on as wide inclusion within their framework as possible. It seems to me that a lot of historic boundaried groups, constituencies or denominations want to know how to define who is in or out according to constituency minutiae. TGC want to encourage as many as possible in. A good model (and most helpful for confused ecclesiastical migrants?)

Blessings