Committee to Study Third Wave Pentecostalism – Majority Report Outline of the report I. Introduction II. Continuity with 1973 report on neo-Pentecostalism (Report 34) III. Overview of the third wave movement A. Pentecostal, charismatic, and third wave Excursus: Biblical interpretation in the third wave Excursus: Baptism/filling with the Holy Spirit B. Key representatives of third wave Excursus: Key representatives C. Beyond the third wave: New apostolic reformation D. Distinctive facets of the third wave movement 1. Prophecy and hearing the voice of God 2. Powerful prayer 3. Healing ministries 4. Spiritual warfare and deliverance ministries E. Conclusion to the overview IV. Why third wave has widespread appeal A. Theological compatibility B. Ongoing renewal within the church C. Cultural context V. Evaluating the third wave A. Reformed worldview framework B. Evaluation VI. Recommendations Appendices Appendix A: Bibliography Appendix B: Executive Summary of the Survey I. Introduction In response to an overture from the council of Plymouth Heights CRC and a strong appeal from the floor of synod, Synod 2004 appointed a study committee To examine the biblical teaching, Reformed confessions, theological implications, and pastoral dimensions related to “third wave” Pentecostalism (spiritual warfare, deliverance ministries, and so forth), with a view to providing advice to the churches. (Acts of Synod 2004, pp. 608-9) 1 Committee to Study Third Wave Pentecostalism – Majority Report The grounds for the request indicate that while the 1973 report on neo- Pentecostalism still has much useful and applicable advice for our churches, the unique emphases of the third wave movement and its growing influence on various ministries within the CRC warrant further reflection. Synod 2004 asked the committee to report to Synod 2006. Unfortunately, we were unable to make this deadline in part because of the sudden illness and untimely death of Dr. David H. Engelhard who served as chair of our commit- tee for the first three meetings. We are grateful to Synod 2005 for granting our request to extend our mandate until 2007 so that we might complete our work and prepare the following report for the churches. It is worth pointing out that the term third wave Pentecostalism is not in common use. We understand our mandate to refer to what Peter Wagner and others have designated as the “third wave of the Holy Spirit.” The other so- called waves were the Azusa Street revival of the early twentieth century, which gave rise to the Pentecostal churches, and the charismatic movement (neo-Pentecostalism) of the 1960s and 1970s. Because the term Pentecostalism is not usually applied to the third wave, this report will henceforth speak simply of the third wave or the third wave movement. Furthermore, because the committee sees itself as standing in fundamental continuity with the 1973 report on neo-Pentecostalism, it does not consider it necessary to duplicate that report’s extensive material on the teaching of Scripture and the Reformed confessions on the work of the Holy Spirit (see Acts of Synod 1973, pp. 413-35), and we refer the churches to the excellent work reflected there. In pursuit of its mandate, the committee as a whole met seven times, after which we decided (regretfully but amicably) to separate into a minority and a majority. The majority subsequently held one additional meeting. While members of the committee brought a wealth of personal experience to our discussions, we also relied heavily on the writings of key representa- tives (see Appendix A) to acquaint ourselves with the third wave movement. In order to assess the familiarity with and influence of the third wave in the Christian Reformed Church, the committee drafted a questionnaire with the help of Dr. Rodger Rice of Calvin College, which was distributed to every congregation in the denomination. Its results were tabulated and analyzed by Dr. Rice for the benefit of this report. (See Appendix B for the executive summary. The full survey can be viewed online at www.crcna.org/pages/ synodical.cfm.) Finally, we were greatly helped in our work of assessing this movement in light of the Reformed tradition by the academic submissions of a number of CRC pastors. Rev. John Algera developed an extensive twelve-session course entitled “Signs and Wonders of God’s Kingdom,” as part of his doctor of ministry degree with Westminster Theological Seminary in 1993. This project has been reworked as Signs and Wonders: A Reformed Look at the Spirit’s Ongoing Work, a resource for adult small groups published by CRC Publications. As part of his initial project, Rev. Algera conducted a signs and wonders survey of the CRC that formed the basis for the survey used by this study committee. Rev. Stan Kruis completed the thesis, “Towards a Theology of Miracles: Reformed and Third Wave Contributions,” as part of completing a master of theology degree in intercultural studies in 1999 at Fuller Theological Seminary. In his thesis, Kruis interacts with representatives of the third wave, primarily Committee to Study Third Wave Pentecostalism – Majority Report 2 Wimber, Wagner, and Kraft, from a distinctly Reformed theology and world- view. In addition, for an independent study at Fuller Theological Seminary in 2001, Rev. John Dykhuis prepared the paper, “The Healing Ministry of Jesus for Fellowship CRC Today,” appealing for the place of healing ministry in the church today. II. Continuity with the 1973 report on neo-Pentecostalism (Report 34) Because it is now more than thirty years old, the 1973 report (see Acts of Synod 1973, pp. 398-493) retains its value as a careful and balanced, yet, at the same time, bold and prophetic statement of a Reformed biblical response to the challenge of the charismatic movement a generation ago. Although the 1973 report was a response to what today is sometimes called the second wave of the broad Pentecostal-charismatic movement, its basic emphases are those that undergird the present committee’s evaluation of the third wave of our own day. To a significant extent, we see our work as an updating of the 1973 report in light of contemporary developments. The basic attitude of the 1973 report to neo-Pentecostalism (that is, “the charismatic movement” [443] of its day) can be described in the phrase open, but cautious (see chapter 2 in the helpful 1996 book edited by Wayne Grudem, Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views). On the one hand, the report is remarkably open to the charismatic movement and its attendant phenomena, but, on the other hand, it is cautious, warning against specific theological teachings and emphases in the movement. A fundamental part of the report’s openness is that it directly challenges, on biblical grounds, the cessationism that had long been held in Reformed circles; that is, the teaching that some of the more unusual spiritual gifts of the New Testament era, such as healing and tongues-speaking, had ceased after the time of the apostles (445-46, 481). Furthermore, the report states quite plainly: “There can be little doubt that neo-Pentecostalism is essentially a revival movement within the confessional and traditional churches” (403), and it gives considerable space to the testimony of those who have been spiritually revitalized by the movement (403-6). It acknowledges that “any unprejudiced evaluation of neo-Pentecostalism must begin with the acknowledgment that two of its main emphases, viz., (1) that salvation must be a profound and transforming experience in addition to a confession of a body of doctrine, and (2) the importance of the Holy Spirit in applying salvation to sinners, are in accord with the Scriptures” (413). With respect to Paul’s teaching concerning the spiritual gifts or charismata, the report says, “it is clear that the apostle recognized that God in Christ had effected in the lives of believers by the Holy Spirit a ‘third work’ (other than conversion and sanctification). He has also given certain ‘gifts’ to members of the believing community” (423). In fact, the Holy Spirit may see fit to give charismatic gifts today that the apostles do not mention because the lists of charismata found in the New Testament should not be understood as either complete or normative (421, 424, 444). Other statements in the report are equally positive: “We gratefully acknowledge that the Pentecostals have focused attention on the Spirit, whose work has all too often been overlooked or ignored by the established churches.” “Those who have experienced what they call ‘the baptism in/with the Holy Spirit’ show a remarkable change in their lives, eager to be vibrant Christians. We are grateful and praise God for 3 Committee to Study Third Wave Pentecostalism – Majority Report any and every manifestation of newness in Christ Jesus” (438). Furthermore, the gift of prophecy today need not exclude the possibility of prophetic prediction (452). After all, “nothing in Scripture forbids us to believe that the Lord may work signs and miracles in our day” (456). The report is also quite open to the present reality of demon possession and exorcism (463). The openness of the 1973 report to many of the claims and phenomena of the charismatic movement is balanced by its equally forthright cautions against the errors and excesses associated with it. For example, it repeatedly points out that an emphasis on the charismatic gifts of the Spirit should not obscure the more fundamental value of the fruit of the Spirit mentioned in Galatians 5:22-23 (421, 423, 428, 443). It emphasizes that Scripture makes no distinction between miraculous (or spectacular or dramatic) spiritual gifts and those that we experience as ordinary (422, 444). It challenges the notion that to act spontaneously is somehow more Spirit-led than to act with deliberation or careful preparation (452).