Why Discuss "Post-Charismatic" Anyway?
![]() | The work I'm putting into writing on what it means to be "post-charismatic" is taking more and more of my time, not only in research, but in the actual writing, as well. There's two main reasons why I want to devote a solid chunk of my thinking and writing time on this subject: |
- There are so many people in the emergent conversation that are ex-Vineyard, ex-Pentecostal, ex-you-name-the-charismatic-grouping, and many of them are wounded by their experiences, particularly those who were attempting to be voices of change. A friend of mine recently commented to me that he was planning to attend a more mainline denominational church, not because he intended to join it, but because it was "the church where wounded ex-charismatics tend to go".
As someone who is also ex-Vineyard, I share the same journey to greater or lesser degree, and I believe there needs to be -- to use the emerging phrase so popular these days -- "conversation" on what it means to be post-charismatic, but not necessarily non-charismatic or anti-charismatic. - The second reason is that I firmly believe that if emerging expressions of the Body are going to be healthy and missional, there needs to be an understanding of how spiritual gifts can function within the Body, whether in a larger group setting or even in a simple/home church gathering. I posted my thoughts on making room for giftedness earlier this year, and I'm becoming more convinced than ever that it's vitally important that we grapple with these questions.
Part of re-capturing a balanced Trinitarian theology must include developing a proper understanding of the Holy Spirit's work in us and through us, both as individuals and as communities of faith.





0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home