There was much discussion in Eastern Orthodoxy about the Charismatic Movement that began in the USA. Now, I must admit that the term Charismatic Movement is no longer accurate, but it was a once-used term. But, what about Eastern Orthodoxy and Pentecostalism and the Charismatic Movement?
Well, the charismatic movement never had a big influence in the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Part of the reason was that the Orthodox had never given up on the presence of the Holy Spirit as an active agent in the Church. Part of it was that Pentecostals were descended from the Nazarenes who were descended from the Methodists who were encouraged by John Wesley to read the Eastern Church Fathers. As a result, to some extent charismatics partially reflected Orthodox views about the active work of the Holy Spirit.
An Orthodox website makes the comment:
Our Fathers raised the dead. They cured the ill. They ascended into the Heavenly Realm and conversed with angels. They went to speak to those who spoke another tongue and found that, without having learned that tongue, they could preach to the people. (This evangelical gift, which allowed the Apostles to spread the message of Christianity, was present in the Early Church. St. Paul even warns those who have it not to cause confusion, but, in order to be consistent with the purpose of the gift—that of witnessing to the Faith—, to use the gift only if interpretation is available.) Our Fathers were so united with the power of things spiritual, that often their flesh was infused with the Spirit, their bodies failing to corrupt after death. YET, never once did the Fathers babble senselessly in tongues, let alone in the midst of the liturgy. Never did they conduct themselves in the manner of the modern charismatics.
You see, for the Orthodox, what are called the “charismatic gifts” by the Pentecostals never ceased. At the same time, we are convinced that the deposit that we have received from the Fathers includes the idea of a liturgy that is a reflection of both synagogue and Last Supper. The supposed charismatic gifts are not a contradiction, but they are not to take over the worship. In fact, we see St. Paul as warning the Corinthians about their mistaken notions about the Lord’s Supper (liturgy) and the “charismatic gifts.”
Orthodoxy has a long and continuing history of the Holy Spirit working in visible ways among us. Miracles, holy relics, healings, missions, icons that stream holy and miraculous oil, and, finally and most importantly, the Lord’s Supper, from which we derive sustenance and life. We do not deny the charismatic gifts, we simply refuse to classify them as somehow different and special from the rest of the life of the Church. In one sense, the charismatics were correct. The whole Church is charismatic. In one sense they were wrong. Their emphases were in the wrong place, though their heart was in the right place.
The problem seems to lie in the ecstatic nature of Pentecostalism. It was a natural (that is, predictable due to the fallen human nature) response of converts to the Church that their enthusiasm would mix with their spiritual gifts.
But from the beginning the Church has cautioned (Christ as well cautioned those He healed) a sober mind and a response of peace, not an artificially agitated emotional state.
The question for the Pentecostals is, are they, by surrendering to the overwhelming torrents of the flesh actually moving their hearts closer to God. Is such a dopamine and serotonin-filled state of altered consciousness good for them spiritually, or is it just an addiction no different than one drugs would produce making them slaves and not truly free in Christ?
Some also question some of the hesychast monks because of some writings that seemed to be so technique oriented that the same questions as you asked arose. Are those techniques producing an artificial experience, or are they merely helpful in stopping the sense from interfering with regular prayer, etc.?
My rule of thumb is that the more techniques that one has to learn in order to be able to correctly experience spiritual things, the more likely that one is experiencing physical reactions.
I think this is a good rule of thumb. I don’t think one has to be Barlaam to raise a point of concern against prayer-as-technique.
One of the things that I love coming to the Church is that its greatness of experience has two distinct flavors. First, that it circumscribes an incredible wealth of spiritual experience. Second, that it does not adopt any particular experience as supreme.
Being a monastic is good, but it is not “better” than being married which is also good. The clergy are ordained, but clericalism is condemned. A life of prayer and contemplation is exalted, but a life of service and alms to the poor is prepared for judgment day. Martyrs are celebrated, but St John (whom Christ loved) and the Theotokos are of the most loved and yet did not suffer a martyr’s death.
The Church contains all these things, but is not ruled by any one of them. This is a common theme. “To own” is usually “to be owned” by the thing owned. But the Church by the grace of the Holy Spirit is not so subjected.
Great post, Fr. Ernesto. You have provided a concise yet complete explanation of why the so-called charismatic gifts are not a part of Orthodox worship.
With your blessing, I would like to quote this article in toto on my blog (acknowledging not only the author but his sheer brilliance! :-))
Anyone is most welcome to quote me. If one wishes to scroll to the bottom of the blog, one will see that I have posted a Creative Commons Attribution – Noncommercial – Share Alike license. In other words, anyone can quote me provided they give attribution. No additional written permissions are needed.
I think a major problem with Pentecostalism is that it attempts to manifest extraordinary spiiritual gifts outside the context of the ascetic struggle (with the possible exception of some gestures toward fasting). Historically, those Saints who were wonderworkers were also great ascetics. In the more recent history of Byzantine Orthodoxy, names like Seraphim of Sarnov and Vladyka John the Wonderworker immediately come to mind. In the Roman Church, I think of Padre Pio and St. John Vianney.
Regarding the Hesychasts, my understanding, from everything I’ve read, is that the techniques in question were optional and were not to be practiced apart from the blessing of one’s spiritual father.
…thank you Father Ernesto .. this article helps me sort out some things from my Charismatic days way back when…