•12.2.09
Pentecostalism always had an imagery of dynamism that is somewhat chaotic where
structure is concerned. Whenever one reads of records of early Pentecostalism, there were a few newspaper articles
that used some lay terms to describe the scene back in the days such meetings took place;
"Wild dancing", "like drunk men", "babels", "cultic", "noisy". However, that's what the reporters recorded.
We all know what it was and is nothing new to Christians.
We read it in the book of Acts and we have seen it happening again and again in video records and experientially in our own parish.
The phenomena that swept Los Angeles and in other states in the early 1900s all began with one thing: prayer and hunger for God.
That was Pentecostal spirituality at its rawest and genuine state.
Believers were hungry for God, for revival, for an outpouring like that of the one in Acts.
Someone was passionate and bold enough to believe and preach about it when it was frowned upon.
It set a community on "fire". It revived those dead in spirit. It renewed passion for the mission work.
It brought about unity when color separation was law. It spread like a wildfire throughout the world.
Over here, in an obscure land called Malaya back then, men and women hailled from this
Pentecostal movement in the States, brought to our shores two things; truth and fire.
To me, that's what I would describe Pentecostal spirituality to be.
It's raw. It's cutting edge because no other movement has caused such positive chaos throughout history.
Sadly, it is dissipating today.
Why? We have allowed professionalism, too much structure and programs, moderation, over-sensitivity to mesh with its raw form to become what it is today.
So what is it?
Bi-annual events to attract the masses.
Monthly events to invite them back
One hour, once-a-week prayer meeting.
30 minutes of preaching.
20 minutes of worship that must be accompanied by a full band.
Feel-good sermons.
Entertainment.
I know I am stepping on some toes here and it is not to point the finger at anyone but myself.
As I read more about just the early foundings of Pentecostalism, I am just ashamed of myself how I am what I am today because I did not embrace my roots.
If we do not educate the essence of Pentecostalism, or passionately embrace it, we will lose a generation.
It is not about us. It is not about reminiscing the past experiences and "outpourings"(was it even an outpouring or just a glimpse?).
It is about keeping the fire ablaze for the next generation to understand that fires only work best in this nature and not sparks.
We can not keep starting sparks and hope for the best.
Fires spread the best and fastest when environments get really hot and uncomfortable.
What is your take on this?
structure is concerned. Whenever one reads of records of early Pentecostalism, there were a few newspaper articles
that used some lay terms to describe the scene back in the days such meetings took place;
"Wild dancing", "like drunk men", "babels", "cultic", "noisy". However, that's what the reporters recorded.
We all know what it was and is nothing new to Christians.
We read it in the book of Acts and we have seen it happening again and again in video records and experientially in our own parish.
The phenomena that swept Los Angeles and in other states in the early 1900s all began with one thing: prayer and hunger for God.
That was Pentecostal spirituality at its rawest and genuine state.
Believers were hungry for God, for revival, for an outpouring like that of the one in Acts.
Someone was passionate and bold enough to believe and preach about it when it was frowned upon.
It set a community on "fire". It revived those dead in spirit. It renewed passion for the mission work.
It brought about unity when color separation was law. It spread like a wildfire throughout the world.
Over here, in an obscure land called Malaya back then, men and women hailled from this
Pentecostal movement in the States, brought to our shores two things; truth and fire.
To me, that's what I would describe Pentecostal spirituality to be.
It's raw. It's cutting edge because no other movement has caused such positive chaos throughout history.
Sadly, it is dissipating today.
Why? We have allowed professionalism, too much structure and programs, moderation, over-sensitivity to mesh with its raw form to become what it is today.
So what is it?
Bi-annual events to attract the masses.
Monthly events to invite them back
One hour, once-a-week prayer meeting.
30 minutes of preaching.
20 minutes of worship that must be accompanied by a full band.
Feel-good sermons.
Entertainment.
I know I am stepping on some toes here and it is not to point the finger at anyone but myself.
As I read more about just the early foundings of Pentecostalism, I am just ashamed of myself how I am what I am today because I did not embrace my roots.
If we do not educate the essence of Pentecostalism, or passionately embrace it, we will lose a generation.
It is not about us. It is not about reminiscing the past experiences and "outpourings"(was it even an outpouring or just a glimpse?).
It is about keeping the fire ablaze for the next generation to understand that fires only work best in this nature and not sparks.
We can not keep starting sparks and hope for the best.
Fires spread the best and fastest when environments get really hot and uncomfortable.
What is your take on this?
|
15 reactions:
Hi Jon,
I agree, we are in a dilemma and yet most of the time we don't realize it. You said "If we do not educate the essence of Pentecostalism, or passionately embrace it, we will lose a generation."
Well my question is how would you educate them? By what means will you use to bring back our pentecostal heritage back to where it should be?
Hi John,
Thanks for your interesting posting. You commented, "We have allowed professionalism, too much structure and programs, moderation, over-sensitivity to mesh with its raw form to become what it is today." If base on this fact we are indeed far away as compares to the early years of Pentecostal movement - chaotic may be the word. I believed there is a season for everything. The early years of Pentecostalism reacted to the mainline churches which 'represented' in many ways - structured, organized, not to mention anti-intellectual. The main-line churches also limited the working of the Holy Spirit therefore I believed God brought forth this movement. But in latter years, this movement has become more organzed and structured; forming thousands of Pentecostal denominations. I believed the only way to arrest the Pentecostal dissipation maybe rest on the leadership to play a crucial role to restore the yester-years but with a balance and check. What is your opinion?
Hey Jon, I just added ur link at the main yahoo group. Hopefully your blog will be filled with comment soon:)
I agree we need to get in a palce where we get uncomfortalbe with ourselves and the lack of spirituality we are in.
but will head knowledge be enough? and what should we emphasise?
As a youth leader, how will you revive the Pentecostal fire among youths. Take the youth culture into consideration
Right now the Pentecostal spirituality is dissipating. Do you forsee a greater dissipation in the future? id yes why
Thank you for the responses. I will attempt to answer the issues at hand.
Kenrick & Charity: It's obvious that it is dissipating at an alarming rate. Education begins with us. Are we truly Pentecostals? Honestly answer that question. Have we embraced our heritage?
How many of your peers (BCM-ers) do you know are aware of their Pentecostal heritage (minus the ones who are taking this course for the first time)? Then my next question is, how many pastors do you know, have been emphasizing the heritage?
My point is, education has to keep the fire going. Does it take a revivalist (like the Smithton Outpouring in Pensacola) to stir up fire among believers in order for people to experience Pentecostal outpourings or are times changing where we will see God sending the latter rain over a generation and not just on individuals?
I do not forsee a dissipation in the future though because we are already in dissipation now. If we look back, it took people to hunger and thirst and yearn to see souls get saved. Are we then teaching Pentecostal spirtuality as ways of experiencing/seeing miracles happening, powerful prayer language, being slain in the Spirit and divine healing? I'm not discounting all of these but what was the effect and impact of our heritage?
One word. Souls.
So if we talk about Pentecostal heritage, and how to revive that fire, what are we implying?
Freddie: You took the words right out of my mouth. Haha. You are definitely right in saying that the leadership has that responsibility. With great power comes great responsibility right?
In reference to that, are we willing to take on that responsibility? What if by leading church the way early Pentecostals did, leaders will have to compromise the comfort of the non-believers in the church, throw away their yearly themes, re-channel church funds into management of the church and missions, cut down on ministry departments, have services that will last at least four hours, get involved in the affairs of the government, deal with backlashes from other religious groups, handling social problems and the list goes on...
To pray for that kind of revival would mean a lot not just for the leadership but Christians all over. Are we really ready for all that? If it's the kind of chaos we want, we'd better be prepared for it.
Hi Jon,
It only boils down to one thing, maybe the possibility of the revisiting of the Holy Spirit as of the early years is the answer. Afterall am I right to say that it was NEVER the work of man to bring this enormous movement of the early twentieth centiry and allow it to last over this 100 years. As a movement it seems it is indeed losing the cutting edge but there is still hope. For God will and ensure His Church will not lose the cutting edge in our generation because the coming of Christ is just around the corner. What do you think?
Nice discussion going on here, mind if i just join in? Isn't it funny how we sometimes make things dependant on us? If the Holy Spirit comes it is what we do, if we behave acertain way or live a certain way God can work. it is us who destroy the work of God and the Holy Spirit.
Are we leaning too much of us?
Hey, am in agreement with your blogpost and the discussions.. Just wanted to add that (as quoting Freddie) Although it is true that its not and never the work of man but that of the Holy Spirit, I am glad (and scared) that it is us whom He has chosen to work through, thankful for He beckons our participation and partnership :)
Wow. whatever you guys are talking here, seems to get my attention! So how then do we draw the line or should i say, striking a balance with placing so much emphasis on ourselves for the Holy Spirit to use us as vessels but at the same time acknowledging the Holy Spirit is also not limited by us to freely move among us?
Lionel: Noted.
Freddie: You are right in saying that it was never man's work.
Let me clarify something here. The vantage point of this discussion is that we as Pentecostals realize the importance of preserving our heritage. It also means that we might be losing it because we could have allowed certain ways of man to run the church. Man's role in line with the Holy Spirit's movement is essential because it has to do with us in the first place. The only reason why the Holy Spirit is existent is solely because of the command Jesus gave.
I disagree when it is said that we destroy the work of God and the Holy Spirit because we are unable to do that. In a way there are alot of things that are dependent on us because the Holy Spirit is a gentleman. If we are sincere and hungry for a move of God, the Holy Spirit works in that environment. If we are proud and want to do things contrary to the will of God, then the Holy Spirit steps back because He is not one who will force His way through. We can be that barrier. However, it does not mean we have destroyed or killed the work of God.
What does it mean when a work of God is no longer in action? Is there even such a thing that can happen? Or is it our OWN ministries that we considered a WORK of God? Sometimes there are seasons where ministries take a turn for either the worse or good. In anycase, who are we to say whether a work of God is jeopardized or not? In the first place, what we perceived may be a narrowed perception of what God is or can do within the church or nation. Take Moses for example. He was a Hebrew saved in the house of Pharoah that was already a miracle in itself. He ran away from a situation where he could have maybe delivered the Israelites in that point of time but he didn't. Instead it took him 40 years before he stepped into the shoes of the deliverer. 40 years before, one could have thought that he should have done the 'work of God' and save the people but he took matters into his own hands and made the mistakes and sort of 'messed up' the 'ministry he had'.
So in a way the work of God does not lean on us because God works beyond our ways and imagination and in spite of us. However we are also the main factor because apart from us, there is nothing else to save.
Another example would be some churches that do not acknowledge the Holy Spirit. We do not really see any move of the Holy Spirit in those churches. Why is that? To be more specific, I'm talking about the churches in UK that have beautiful structures and hardly anyone. So why is that happening?
I could go on but I won't. All I am saying is that we as people who are born again, spirit-filled need to ensure that the next generation walks the same kind of journey in their relationship with God. We need to ensure that we do not allow ourselves to shirk that responsibilty of preserving a heritage that is not of tradition but of a greater plan that is fulfilling the Revelation prophecies. Our agenda is that we remain faithful until He comes again.
Another thing..
I think we all realize that there must always be a balance between the person's role in partnership with the Holy Spirit and the liberty of the Holy Spirit moving as and when God wants to.
To answer Kenrick,
We can't really know how well to balance unless we discover the person and dynamics of the Holy Spirit (that's a course in BCM btw..hehe).
So as much as it's experience it is also theology and pneumatology that teaches us to strike that balance.
Some questions to ponder...
Why does God not anoint or move in a service?
Why does pride seem the main problem that becomes an obstacle in the move of the Holy Spirit?
Does pride stops the Holy Spirit from moving in and through a person only or in the congregation at large?
What about disbelief? Lack of faith?
Can one minister's disbelief or lack of faith affect the service?
If Lionel asked what if the focus was leaning too much towards the human factor, what then is the focus of a dissipating Pentecostal spirituality in this generation?
What is your opinion?