Book Review: A Generous Orthodoxy Part 15 of ??
Charismatic/Contemplative
McLaren writes that his life has been greatly enriched by his association with charismatic (a term McLaren here uses interchangeably with Pentecostal) Christians. From them he learned that the "Holy Spirit is alive and active, a constant companion and source of empowerment and courage." McLaren writes that Pentecostals often have a joy and confidence that springs from their "robust spirituality vitality." However, he also sees a few problems that Pentecostals sometimes have, such as: "a tendency to exaggerate, to push too hard, to gloss over problems and pretend things were better than they were."
McLaren sees the charismatic experience as being found "one step beyond normal." That is, if people are sitting they need to stand, if they're standing they need to clap, etc. A danger of this though is that it could, "become a kind of treadmill where one has to work harder and harder to 'work up' an experience of the Spirit."
McLaren contrasts this charismatic approach with Catholic contemplatives who look for an experience of the Spirit "in the very center of normalcy," a practice he terms "practicing God's presence." I don't think I understand McLaren's explanation of this very well, but apparently it includes underlying activism with contemplation, quiet resting, and finding God "in the center of normalcy."
McLaren writes that his life has been greatly enriched by his association with charismatic (a term McLaren here uses interchangeably with Pentecostal) Christians. From them he learned that the "Holy Spirit is alive and active, a constant companion and source of empowerment and courage." McLaren writes that Pentecostals often have a joy and confidence that springs from their "robust spirituality vitality." However, he also sees a few problems that Pentecostals sometimes have, such as: "a tendency to exaggerate, to push too hard, to gloss over problems and pretend things were better than they were."
McLaren sees the charismatic experience as being found "one step beyond normal." That is, if people are sitting they need to stand, if they're standing they need to clap, etc. A danger of this though is that it could, "become a kind of treadmill where one has to work harder and harder to 'work up' an experience of the Spirit."
McLaren contrasts this charismatic approach with Catholic contemplatives who look for an experience of the Spirit "in the very center of normalcy," a practice he terms "practicing God's presence." I don't think I understand McLaren's explanation of this very well, but apparently it includes underlying activism with contemplation, quiet resting, and finding God "in the center of normalcy."
posted by Freethinker at 7:11:00 PM
3 Comments:
Good stuff.
Let's talk about the pro's of con's of adding Ron Artest to the Mavericks now baby!
I wouldn't use the terms Pentecostal and charismatic interchangeably. Maybe that is because of my (advanced) age.
Here's a quote from Wikipedia:
Often confused with Pentecostalism (which it was inspired by), Charismatic Christianity tends to differ in key aspects: most Charismatics reject the preeminence given by Pentecostalism to glossolalia, reject what they consider to be legalism sometimes associated with Pentecostalism, and often stay in their existing denominations such as Roman Catholic Charismatics.
Because of the continual cross-over between Pentecostalism and the modern Charismatic movement, it is increasingly difficult to speak of Charismatics and Pentecostals as being part of separate movements. Yet because neither movement is monolithic, it is also unfair to speak of them as being one movement either. The difference is primarily one of origins. Beliefs of the two groups are very similar; each movement, however, is unique in its historical beginnings. Having been conceived in unique contexts, the difference may secondarily be described in terms of contrasting church cultures evidenced through each movement's manners and customs (i.e., worship styles, preaching styles, altar ministry methods). Until a more acceptable broad nomenclature is used, it needs to be understood that both movements share a great deal in common, and yet can sometimes be clearly differentiated.
Perhaps you see how, in some contexts, the terms could be correctly used interchangeably?
Post a Comment
<< Home