|
|
|||||||
|
 |
|||||||
|
Snyder
Bible Home |
||||||||
|
Dear
Bishop Morley:
IN
"Here We Stand" (a position piece on his Traditional Episcopal
Church website), you make it a point to single out 'tongues' explaining
that it is not a valid expression of faith today (or so I read). I wonder how the TPEC explains this wide-spread and now
long-standing practice if it is not valid today. I would really like to know.
Thank you. Jackson snyder@jacksonsnyder.com
Dear
Jay (Jackson), Thank you for your good note. Glad you found our site of
interest.
I
think you are referring in your question to the Traditional Protestant
Episcopal Church position on the modern "tongues" movement and
Pentecostalism in general.
We
regard it to be unscriptural both in terms of exegesis of the pertinent
texts but also because of the subtle attack on the sufficiency of
Scripture long held by classical orthodox Protestantism, and upon the
historic Trinitarian teachings of the Church Catholic.
The
phenomenon of tongues in Acts ch. 2 was one of understanding, not
speaking. Peter spoke in only one "tongue" (one
"language," not "languages") but was HEARD by many
others. If you believe that the "Baptism
of the Holy Ghost" is a separate manifestation from the initial
indwelling of the Holy Spirit in he sacrament of Baptism then how can St.
Paul not be in error when he refers to one Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM in
Ephesians ch. 4? If speaking in tongues is for the church today, why does
St. Paul say that it is a sign not for them that believe but for them that
believe not, that there must be interpretation, that he would rather say
five words in a known "tongue" (language) than ten thousand in
an unknown one? I could cite countless other scriptural refutations of
what has come to be practiced as "tongues."
The
classical understanding of the person and work of the Holy Ghost stands
contrary to the "theology" of the same offered even by the most
moderate Pentecostal. If, as you imply, we should accept the tongues
movement because it is "widespread" and "long standing"
then we should re-embrace popery.
Roman
Catholicism is older and larger by far than Protestantism as a
whole.
Mormonism is the fastest growing religion in America. There are more
Muslims in the US than Presbyterians. Wicca is the oldest religion of man.
None of these examples would encourage me to embrace those religions.
The
tacit approval of non-charismatic Christians for their Pentecostal
brethren follows the same sort of tacit approval of the very things for
which traditionalists now find themselves separated from
"mainline" Christianity. Tacit approval of Bishop Spong, Bishop
Pike, liturgical revisionism, the social gospel, and countless other
"politically correct" issues
so weakened Anglicanism in this country as to have made us the
laughing stock of American Christianity. The gospel of tolerance is a
two-edged sword. How long will it be before Pentecostalism becomes the
NORM not the exception within "conservative" Anglican circles,
just as Anglo-Catholicism and liberalism did years ago, and the
Pentecostals outnumber the "tacit approvers?" "To each his
own" is better said at
Baskin
Robbins than in the congregation of the Body of Christ.
Pentecostalism
is a militant movement, not content to accept those who disagree with
their "interpretation" of Acts etc. It is INTOLERANT of
classical Reformed Christianity but represents itself as a new wave of the
work of the Holy Spirit speaking to the church in a new way in this new
age.
But
the Holy Spirit does not function apart from the Word of God. The
Pentecostal will solemnly declare the "authority" of Holy
Scripture but will not speak of its SUFFICIENCY. There Pentecostals depart
from orthodox Protestantism.
It is not the work of the Spirit to make people laugh or to heal their
diseases or to shout uncontrollably in church services. It is "to
reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgement." (John
16:8)
I
realize it is politically incorrect to say anything naughty about
Pentecostalism, especially as it now represents the strongest and most
influential movement in American Anglicanism, if not also in Christianity
worldwide. But Pentecostalism is totally foreign and antithetical to
Anglicanism. The fact that it has become socially acceptable to middle
class white males does not give it validity. These days, to paraphrase
Forrest Gump, "Anglicanism is as Anglicanism does." But it is
and has been politically incorrect to challenge ANY earnestly held belief
in the Christian Church in the last century. There is no more
"heresy" possible in the Christian Church - simply
"differences of opinion." If this is so, may God help us all.
Pilate was right, "What is truth?"
Please
let me know your thoughts. I would very much like to discuss the matter
with you further. Again, thank you for your letter.
Sincerely, Charles Morley Gal.2:20 Jackson Snyder, February 1, 2001 |
MORE DELIVERANCE Neil Anderson Pack, 2 Volumes Victory Over Darkness / The Bondage Breaker, updated editions Deep Wounds Deep Healing: Discovering the Vital Link Between Spiritual Warfare & Inner Healing Charles Kraft - helping self & others I Give You Authority Charles Kraft - how to have & use it Spiritual Housecleaning: Protect Your Home From Spiritual Pollution Alice & Eddie Smith |
