Pentecostalism: "Catholicism without priests?"

[Barbkw]

Additional information concerning the Holy Spirit is available in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Confirmation, 1285-321

age for receiving, 1307-08
apostolate of the laity and, 900, 941
character of, 698, 1121, 1304-05, 1317
New Law and, 1210
preparation and purposes for, 1309
priesthood of the Christian faithful and, 1546
salvation and, 1286-92
significance of, 1289
state required for receiving, 1310, 1318-19
who may receive the sacrament of, 1306-11
witness and, 2472
See also Chrism; Sacrament(s)

Confirmation and the sacraments
Christian initiation and, 695, 1212, 1275, 1285, 1533

effects of Confirmation
increase of baptismal grace, 1303, 1316
indelible character of, 1304-05, 1317
the outpouring of the Spirit, 1302
the Seal and, 698, 1121

Rite of Confirmation, 1297-301
anointing, 695, 1242, 1291, 1294, 1300, 1523
celebration separate from Baptism, 1233, 1290, 1321
to be conferred only once, 1304
godfather and godmother, 1311
handing over of the Lord’s Prayer, 2769
Holy chrism, 1297
laying on of hands, 1288
minister of, 1312-14, 1318
signs and rites of, 1293-301, 1320

 

[AmateurPianist]

My comments:

(1) Pentecostals are logical descendants of John Wesley. Which means roughly speaking if you were to take the difference between classic reformed Protestant versus Catholic and cut it in 1/2 in regards to issues pertaining to Sola Fide you will have roughly the difference between most Pentecostals and Catholicism.

(2) Pentecostals believe God still speaks today through the gifts of the Holy Spirit today. Which again means we are closest to the Prima Scriptura of John Wesley. Which means you can similarly cut in about 1/2 issues related to Sola Scriptura as opposed to classic reformed Protestant versus catholic.

There are differences in the above but they would elongate this post quite a bit

(3) Most Pentecostal groups today accept the working of the Holy Spirit in the Catholic church via the charismatic renewal. Thus we generally are not “The Catholic Church is not Christian” as say John MacArthur (who also does not like us btw )

(4) We are in 95% agreement with Catholics on moral theology (the difference being contraception which to me is not a biggie either). Here we are in agreement also with classic Protestant bot not liberal Protestant.

(5) The big difference I would say is that we are not sacramentally oriented as you all are. But I am not sure that to many of us this is that big of an issue.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

There is also an active charismatic movement in the Anglican/Episcopal Chruches.

 

[Marybeloved]

What I’ve always found interesting is this thing I see with Pentecostals that looks a lot like an attempt at sacramentalism- I mean, they pray over clothes that supposed to carry healing to the owner, people send prayer requests and they are laid out on an “alter” and prayed over and it’s supposed to touch the senders, holy oil etc- I saw that and thought to myself “These guys would probably condemn the sacraments as traditions of men, yet they are creating their own sacraments!” They explain it as the need for “a point of contact”.

That sense of objects of the world of matter becoming instruments of grace (sacraments) with real power, is lost on Many evangelicals, but I always thought that if a Pentecostal asks me about sacraments, I’ll just point them to the prayer clothes/handkerchiefs/prayer requests on paper being prayed over and say- That right there is the basic idea of a sacrament- Indeed most of it would probably be called sacramentals, if authorized by the Church for Catholics- especially the prayer cloth. I’d also point to the prayer healers who command illnesses and demons in Jesus’ name by saying “I command you…in Jesus’ name” and say, that’ the basic idea of confession right there- The Priest absolves sins in God’s name on behalf of and in the faith of the whole church.

-So I do see some type of understanding in the Pentecostal mind that could make it very easy to understand some catholic concepts, unlike with the other evangelicals.

 

[ltwin]

Marybeloved, thanks for that post.

I certainly think that these things in Pentecostalism could be compared with sacramentals. It is my understanding that Catholics believe that sacraments function automatically as means of grace while sacramentals function as possible means of grace if the believer receives them in the proper spiritual state. This is essentially the Pentecostal position that things such as laying on of hands, prayer cloths, anointing oil, anointed prayer shawls, etc. can be spiritually beneficial to the believer if they are in a proper spiritual state and receive the Lord’s blessing by faith. Everything we have in the Christian life we receive by faith.

Such things—laying on of hands, prayer cloths, anointing oil, and covering with prayer shawls—become symbols of the bestowal and transferability of the “anointing” or the Spirit’s manifest (real) presence. There is nothing sacred in these things in and of themselves; they function as symbols of a real reality, that the Spirit’s presence and power can be imparted to those who will receive it.

Likewise, physical manifestations—speaking in tongues, dancing in the Spirit, resting in the Spirit, uncontrollable weeping or laughing—are physical shadows of a spiritual reality.
In glossolalic prayer, our speech is changed into something that is foreign to us, being spoken “as the Spirit gives utterance.” A more important consequence of glossolalic utterance is that it is a form of intimate prayer and communion with the Holy Spirit where “the Spirit intercedes for us in our weakness.” Thus, the baptism in the Holy Spirit might be the closest parallel between Catholic and Pentecostal ideas of real presence. And by extension, speaking in tongues does take on a sacramental nature. It is through tongues and interpretation that God directly speaks to a congregation; when this occurs in a service, it is often treated as the most solemn time. So tongues, as a visible sign, represents many different spiritual realities.

Dancing in the Spirit (where a believer consciously dances with eyes clothes under the direction of the Spirit) or “shouting” becomes a “blessing,” an expression of the joy that is ours in Christ and a reminder that God cares not only about our spirits, but he concerned with our bodies as well.

“Running the aisles” is a physical act that can have multiple spiritual meanings. It could mean that the believer is being set free from something that once bound her. A minister or elder of a congregation might feel led to tell someone, “I feel led to tell you (or the Lord showed me) that you’ve been under a spiritual attack (or that you’ve been bound up by something not of God), but God wants to set you free,” and the person will be told to run. It is not the running that does anything, but it is the act of faith. Running could also be an expression of thanks to God. Walking could be an expression of weakness or being overwhelmed by a situation while recognizing that God is your strength and that you have not given up. So your act of walking around the church is an act of faith that God in his sovereignty responds to. Often time, the person will not walk alone, but will be surrounded and supported by others in the church. Obviously this has powerful symbolic meaning, but the spiritual benefit for those acting in faith is real.

There was a family in my church many years ago whose grandchild was born with severe complications and not expected to live. The grandparents left the hospital and came to church. During the service, the grandmother ran around the church, and (I’ve been told) the child’s condition improved at about that same time. So, the running was an act of faith which was in someway related to the recovery of that child.

Other things take on similar meaning, such as weeping. A woman in my church experienced a miscarriage. Her family was at a Wednesday night church service when it happened. During the prayer in that service, one of the ministers began to weep uncontrollably (as if in travail) and no one at the time knew why. Of course, this prompted those in the church to gather around him and intercede. While this was happening or after, the family got the call that something was wrong and the woman was being rushed to the hospital.

When it comes to demon possession, in theory Pentecostals believe that all Christians (as ambassadors of Christ) can command demons to depart. Of course, in practice, we only encourage those who spiritually fit and prepared to attempt anything approaching an exorcism. However, there is this idea that “greater is he that is in me than he that is in the world.” We do not have to be controlled or tormented by Satan. We can plead the blood of Jesus over ourselves and our families. An old saying still spoken in my church and family sometimes is that “the Devil can’t cross the bloodline.”

 

[Marybeloved]

Marybeloved, thanks for that post.

I certainly think that these things in Pentecostalism could be compared with sacramentals. It is my understanding that Catholics believe that sacraments function automatically as means of grace while sacramentals function as possible means of grace if the believer receives them in the proper spiritual state. This is essentially the Pentecostal position that things such as laying on of hands, prayer cloths, anointing oil, anointed prayer shawls, etc. can be spiritually beneficial to the believer if they are in a proper spiritual state and receive the Lord’s blessing by faith. Everything we have in the Christian life we receive by faith.

Such things—laying on of hands, prayer cloths, anointing oil, and covering with prayer shawls—become symbols of the bestowal and transferability of the “anointing” or the Spirit’s manifest (real) presence. There is nothing sacred in these things in and of themselves; they function as symbols of a real reality, that the Spirit’s presence and power can be imparted to those who will receive it. "

Hello, Itwin,

I think you were right before to compare Pentecostalism among Protestants and popular piety of Catholics/folk catholicism- Your stories sound eerily like the kinds of stories I hear about miracles attributed to Our Lord, Our Lady or a Saint, except that instead of “she ran around the Church” it’ll be “she went before the Blessed Sacrament/the shrine/the crucifix/picture of Our Lord or Our Lady, said the rosary, said this/that novena, made a pilgrimage, said this prayer etc etc” …and this miracle happened.

I even heard once of a kind of weird story of a grandmother who brought a totally burnt child to a certain priest at mass- The priest placed the child under the alter covered over with the clothes of the alter! After the mass, the child was taken out completely healed without the faintest scar! And one about this guy with a devotion to the Divine Mercy in the Philipines who died on the operating table, went into rigor mortis or blood clotting etc, kept in the morgue/mortuary for 2/3 days and then just rose up from the dead saying he had seen Christ of the Divine mercy! Same goes with apparitions- approved by the Church or not, most tend to involve the same kind of popular piety and miracles. I don’t know what that is exactly, but it seems present within both Catholicism and Protestantism, but takes on different shapes/looks:shrug:.

 

[mothom]

I read some place once, I think it was either on this forum, or somewhere on the Catholic Answers website, or I may have heard it on Catholic radio, anyway, the statement was that Pentecostals were the furtherest away from Catholicism than any other Protestant group, and the Lutherans were the closest. When I logged in here to post this, the advertisement at the top read “Jimmy Swaggart made me Catholic.” Well, he’s Pentecostal, and I can assure you he has a pretty negative view of Catholic beliefs, and probably wouldn’t agree with the comments mentioned by the OP. I decided to study the matter myself, instead of let others (non-Catholics) tell me about the Catholics. I’m not finished studying, but from what I’ve learned so far I have to think that in our beliefs we’re much more like the Catholics than most of us would admit. I don’t know if we’re furtherest from Catholicism than any other non-Catholic Christian group, but I think we’re close enough that if we are the furtherest, then the others are swimming around in the Tiber. We might be the closest, I don’t know. I accept practicing Catholics as legitimate Christians, and I think most Pentecostals do too, but there are still many who don’t.

 

[ltwin]

I read some place once, I think it was either on this forum, or somewhere on the Catholic Answers website, or I may have heard it on Catholic radio, anyway, the statement was that Pentecostals were the furtherest away from Catholicism than any other Protestant group, and the Lutherans were the closest. When I logged in here to post this, the advertisement at the top read “Jimmy Swaggart made me Catholic.” Well, he’s Pentecostal, and I can assure you he has a pretty negative view of Catholic beliefs, and probably wouldn’t agree with the comments mentioned by the OP. I decided to study the matter myself, instead of let others (non-Catholics) tell me about the Catholics. I’m not finished studying, but from what I’ve learned so far I have to think that in our beliefs we’re much more like the Catholics than most of us would admit. I don’t know if we’re furtherest from Catholicism than any other non-Catholic Christian group, but I think we’re close enough that if we are the furtherest, then the others are swimming around in the Tiber. We might be the closest, I don’t know. I accept practicing Catholics as legitimate Christians, and I think most Pentecostals do too, but there are still many who don’t.

There are many types of Pentecostals, as you well know. Jimmy Swaggert does represent that wing of the movement that is suspicious of Catholics. Then there are Pentecostals like David du Plessis, “Mr. Pentecost,” who had extensive contact with the World Council of Churches and was invited as a Pentecostal representative to the 2nd Vatican Council.

 

[ltwin]

Hello, Itwin,

I think you were right before to compare Pentecostalism among Protestants and popular piety of Catholics/folk catholicism- Your stories sound eerily like the kinds of stories I hear about miracles attributed to Our Lord, Our Lady or a Saint, except that instead of “she ran around the Church” it’ll be “she went before the Blessed Sacrament/the shrine/the crucifix/picture of Our Lord or Our Lady, said the rosary, said this/that novena, made a pilgrimage, said this prayer etc etc” …and this miracle happened.

Oh yes. I know exactly where you are coming from. I’m not a particular fan of TBN (I don’t appreciate its health and wealth/blab it grab it caricature of Pentecostalism), but my parents watched it growing up. I remember Jan Crouch telling a story about when she was a little girl and she had this baby chicken or something that was ran over or something. Anyway, the chicken died and Jan was sad and didn’t want it to die, so she decided to pray over it but didnt have any anointing oil. All she had was some crisco, so she used that. And what do you know, the chicken lived.

I think the ideas are similar. Though God doesn’t always act miraculously, there are times when we go before him in simple acts of obedience and faith that he will step into whatever is going wrong in our lives and move in an extraordinary way. Afterward, we have a responsibility to give him the praise, honor, and glory for what he has done.

A couple years ago, my sister decided to take my mom out for a day of manicures and pedicures for her birthday. So they are sitting getting pedicures and all of a sudden my mom just has some kind of black out. It scared my sister and the Asian workers to death. It was so bad that my sister had 911 called out. Out of nowhere, this black lady comes up to my mother with a rag and wipes off her face and says it will be ok and begans praying for her in tongues. And then she left just as quick as she came in. My mom spent the night in the hospital but she was fine. Afterward though, my mom and mys sister knew that whoever that woman was she had been sent there by God to provide comfort and reassurance in a very confusing time.

I even heard once of a kind of weird story of a grandmother who brought a totally burnt child to a certain priest at mass- The priest placed the child under the alter covered over with the clothes of the alter! After the mass, the child was taken out completely healed without the faintest scar! And one about this guy with a devotion to the Divine Mercy in the Philipines who died on the operating table, went into rigor mortis or blood clotting etc, kept in the morgue/mortuary for 2/3 days and then just rose up from the dead saying he had seen Christ of the Divine mercy! Same goes with apparitions- approved by the Church or not, most tend to involve the same kind of popular piety and miracles. I don’t know what that is exactly, but it seems present within both Catholicism and Protestantism, but takes on different shapes/looks:shrug:.

I heard about a Pentecostal preacher in Africa who was called on to console a grieving family in his village when their child died. The mother of the child told the pastor that he had to do something, he couldn’t just let the child die. So, he took the child inside the church and fasted and prayed over the body for days until the child rose from the dead.

Do visions and dreams play an important part in Catholic folk piety? It does in Pentecostalism. Alot of the earlier accounts are especially vivid, like this one from Lucy Leatherman, an Azusa St. particpant:

While seeking for the Baptism with the Holy Ghost in Los Angeles, after Sister Ferrell [sic] laid hands on me I praised and praised God and saw my Savior in the heavens. And as I praised, I came closer and closer and I was so small. By and by I swept into the wound in His side, and He was not only in me but I in Him, and there I found that rest that passeth all understanding, and He said to me, you are in the bosom of the Father. He said I was clothed upon and in the secret place of the Most High. But I said, Father, I want the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the heavens opened and I was overshadowed, and such power came upon me and went through me. He said, Praise Me, and when I did, angels came and ministered unto me. I was passive in His hands working on my vocal cords, and I realized they were loosing me. I began to praise Him in an unknown language.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

If we look at the theology of Lutheran, Anglican and Reformed groups, they have a much higher view of the sacraments. They actually call them sacraments. Pentecostalism, following the Anabaptist and Baptist groups, see them as ordinances. They do not see baptism as anything more than a testimony to the conversion of the one being baptized. The Lord’s Supper is merely a rememberance of the death of Christ. Lutherans, Anglicans and some Reformed see them as means of grace, like the Catholics do. Maybe Pentecostalism is more accepting of sacramentals than sacraments because they don’t have a theology that denies the idea. God speaks to us through the preaching of His Word and through the Sacraments. He acts through all the means of grace. That is a doctrine taught by the Magisterial Reformers- Lutherans, Anglicans and Reformeds. The Pentecostals must be moving closer to that view through such things as prayer shawls, etc. God graciously stoops to our weaknesses by providing us His Sacraments to see and view and touch the realities of the Gospel in addition to hearing the Gospel in the preaching of His Word. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[ltwin]

If we look at the theology of Lutheran, Anglican and Reformed groups, they have a much higher view of the sacraments. They actually call them sacraments. Pentecostalism, following the Anabaptist and Baptist groups, see them as ordinances. They do not see baptism as anything more than a testimony to the conversion of the one being baptized. The Lord’s Supper is merely a rememberance of the death of Christ. Lutherans, Anglicans and some Reformed see them as means of grace, like the Catholics do. Maybe Pentecostalism is more accepting of sacramentals than sacraments because they don’t have a theology that denies the idea. God speaks to us through the preaching of His Word and through the Sacraments. He acts through all the means of grace. That is a doctrine taught by the Magisterial Reformers- Lutherans, Anglicans and Reformeds. The Pentecostals must be moving closer to that view through such things as prayer shawls, etc. God graciously stoops to our weaknesses by providing us His Sacraments to see and view and touch the realities of the Gospel in addition to hearing the Gospel in the preaching of His Word. Just my 2 cents worth.

Actually, Pentecostals don’t see water baptism or communion as merely symbolic. Christ is there in a spiritual way in each, and some Pentecostals actually use the term “means of grace” to describe them. However, it is the believer’s faith that makes these things spiritually significant. The 4Square Church’s doctrinal statement says:

IX. WATER BAPTISM AND THE LORD’S SUPPER
We believe that water baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Ghost, according to the command of our Lord, is a blessed outward sign of an
inward work; a beautiful and solemn emblem reminding us that even as our Lord
died upon the cross of Calvary so we reckon ourselves now dead indeed unto sin,
and the old nature nailed to the tree with Him; and that even as He was taken down
from the tree and buried,** so we are buried with Him by baptism into death**: that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we should
walk in newness of life.

We believe in the commemoration and observing of the Lord’s supper by the sacred
use of the broken bread, a precious type of the Bread of Life, even Jesus Christ,
whose body was broken for us; and by the juice of the vine, a blessed type which
should ever remind the participant of the shed blood of the Savior who is the true
vine of which His children are the branches; that this ordinance is a glorious rainbow
that spans the gulf of years between Calvary and the coming of the Lord, when in the
Father’s kingdom, He will partake anew with His children; and that the serving and
receiving of this blessed sacrament should be ever preceded by the most solemn
heart-searching, self-examination, forgiveness and love toward all men,** that none
partake unworthily and drink condemnation to his own soul**.

I’ll also quote an article by Wayne Benson, an executive presbyter of the Assemblies of God:

Every new person who is saved has the right to be baptized in water and needs to be baptized as soon as possible. Why jeopardize a new Christian’s spiritual security and development? He needs the strengthening benefits of baptism so he may “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18). Let us communicate with passion the urgency of being baptized. Let us teach believers and lead them into all the means of grace provided for them by our wonderful Christ and Lord.

 

[cajunhillbilly]

well I stand corrected. I did not know Pentecostals referred to the sacraments as means of grace. Perhaps they have a higher view of the sacraments than I realized. Thanks for the info.

 

[ltwin]

Yeah, I think you will get Pentecostals who view them as a means of grace, and then you will find Pentecostals who tend more toward the idea that these are merely symbolic. However, I find it hard for Pentecostals (who have traditionally had a well defined sense of the reality and imminence of Christ’s presence and who take the Bible literally) to justify that these are purely and completely symbolic.

For more on this aspect of Pentecostal thought, I’ll quote from Spirit and Power: Foundations of Pentecostal Experience, by William W. and Robert P. Menzies, pg. 28-29:

Proclaiming the imminent coming of the Lord was marked not by gloom and forboding, but by an intense sense of joyful expectation. Pentecostals had tasted the glory of God’s presence and longed to see him face to face. Some observers of Pentecostalism were inclined to toss this off as an escape mechanism from the harshness of poverty and deprivation in which most Pentecostals found themselves. Nonetheless, the joy and the warmth found in the oft-beleaguered bands of Pentecostals were in striking contrast to the cold formalism characteristic of much of American Protestantism in that era.

A common banner heralding what visitors might expect in a Pentecostal mission hall proclaimed “Come to the church where Jesus is real.” “Reality” was a term used to capture what these believers experienced. Baptism in the Spirit had made Jesus intensely real for them. This sense of God’s nearness led naturally to a lifestyle that would not offend the Holy Spirit. Holiness of life was an authentic quest for these ardent believers.

The Lord’s Supper and water Baptism are two practices that Jesus explicitly commanded to be done until he returned. Of course, these would be more than merely symbolic.

 

[mothom]

The pentecostal circles I’m acquainted with don’t view water baptism as anything more than symbolic. I’m not disputing that there are those who do see it as a sacrament of sorts. I remember in my younger days hearing some of my pentecostal elders say that you can’t make it to heaven if you aren’t baptized in water. But I never heard it from the pulpit. If I did, I wasn’t paying attention.

One way Pentecostals can be considered like Catholics is that we don’t believe in OSAS, and because of that, I have heard OSASers accuse us of trying to work our way to heaven like they accuse Catholics. They call our nonacceptance of OSAS the same as faith plus works = salvation. Now, there is the occasional Pentecostal who will adhere to OSAS, but by and large, most of us don’t. I don’t.

 

[ltwin]

The pentecostal circles I’m acquainted with don’t view water baptism as anything more than symbolic. I’m not disputing that there are those who do see it as a sacrament of sorts. I remember in my younger days hearing some of my pentecostal elders say that you can’t make it to heaven if you aren’t baptized in water. But I never heard it from the pulpit. If I did, I wasn’t paying attention.

I’ve never heard any tell me that you had to be baptized in water to get to heaven. Our church doesn’t even require it for membership. I also agree that Pentecostals do believe it is symbolic, but I think if they really thought about it they would not just leave it at symbolic. For the baptized who truly has faith in Christ, it is so much more than a symbolic act. It is a deeply spiritual event; that is why some Pentecostals experience Spirit baptism while being water baptized, or they start shouting when it happens.

For me, I just felt washed. I still remember the feeling I had after it happened, and it felt like I had entered a new phase in my walk with God. I felt like I had entered into a deeper level of commitment and I felt a new found strength.

One way Pentecostals can be considered like Catholics is that we don’t believe in OSAS, and because of that, I have heard OSASers accuse us of trying to work our way to heaven like they accuse Catholics. They call our nonacceptance of OSAS the same as faith plus works = salvation. Now, there is the occasional Pentecostal who will adhere to OSAS, but by and large, most of us don’t. I don’t.

I agree.

 

[mothom]

The oneness teach, and I might be wrong, that one must be baptized in water in Jesus name and come up speaking in tongues, else they’re not saved. I was raised Assembly of God, but there was a branch of my family that was oneness, and it was from elders on that side of the family that I heard you had to be baptized in order to get to heaven. My mother wasn’t a oneness, but she believed you had to be baptized before you can to get to heaven.

Jesus commanded baptism. So, if a believer has the opportunity to be baptized and fails to do so, then he breaks the commandment, i.e. sins if he refuses to be baptized. That strongly implies that one will not go to heaven if they refuse to be baptized.

I put “has the opportunity” in italics because of hypothetical situations that might make it impossible for a believer to be baptized. Which brings me to another point where Pentecostals, unbeknown to them, are like Catholics: the subject of mortal sins versus venial sins. It is my humble opinion that we Pentecostals are inconsistent in our doctrine(s) on mortal sin versus venial sins. I’ll more fully address that issue in another post if you want me to. It’s quite lengthy, and I’ll need to be very careful how I word it. I don’t want people to misunderstand me.

 

[ChrisRedfield47]

“Pentecostalism closer to Catholicism than any other form of Protestantism?”

No protestants are in fact “close” to Catholicism imo. I don’t see how pentecostalism is in any way close to it. The difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is the difference between a consecrated bread and a non consecrated bread. Huge difference. The only ones “close” are the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox, and those are not protestant.