By Jerry Munk

By examining the rich tradition of the Orthodox Church, we come to see that the charismatic experience is very much a part of that tradition. First published in Theosis Newsletter in November 1978.

Throughout its history, the Orthodox Church has sought to respond to God as He reveals Himself to us, and we understand that the Lord speaks through Holy Tradition: the Old and New Testaments, the decisions of the ecumenical councils, the writings and sermons of the Church fathers, doctors, confessors, holy ascetics, and saints, the hymns of our church, indeed the very history of the Orthodox Catholic Church. Through Holy Tradition, we come to understand something of the nature, will, and movements of God. Therefore, to examine the charismatic experience from and Orthodox perspective, we must look to this Holy Tradition. Obviously, within the confines of this article, I cannot hope to present anything close to the totality of Orthodox thinking on the charismatic experience, but I can touch briefly on a few sources that point to God’s intention: that those who have been born anew in Jesus Christ should personally experience the person and the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

The Spiritual Gifts

In the twelfth chapter of I Corinthians, the Apostle Paul sets forth for us a list of the various charisms (gifts of the Spirit).

“To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.” (I Corinthians 12:7-11)

This list of charisms is repeated in many of the patristic writings. Gregory Nazianzen in his oration at the church of Anastasia (resurrection) cites this passage as he encourages his flock to “respect and keep this order” set forth in I Corinthians 12. (Nazianzan, ‘Oration XXXII’)

Similarly, Gregory Palamas uses this very list as he defends the various charisms as gifts from God.

“What then? Since to prophesy is greater than to speak in tongues, according to the apostles is not then the charism of tongues a gift of God? And since love is the most perfect of gifts, is only this a divine gift to the exclusion of all the other? Does one exclude prophecy, the gifts of working miracles, of helps, of governments, the charisms of healing, the words of divine wisdom and of knowledge and the discernment of spirits? Those who prophesy, those who heal, those who discern, and all those who in general have simply received the grace of the divine Spirit. All have charisms, greater or less great, in their own field. Thus Paul thanks God because he speaks in tongues more than all: but he who has the less greater has a gift also of God. ‘Seek earnestly’ the same apostle says, ‘the greatest charisms;’ therefore there must be lesser ones.” (Gregory Palamas, Defence des Saints Hesychastes, Triads II 2, II)

Spiritual Gifts – A Common Expectation

It is important to note the context of these quotations. In each the writer is addressing “common” people, members of the Church. This may appear odd to many Orthodox Christians. We tend to think of the spiritual experience being reserved for a few monks, ascetics, bishops, priests and other “holy” people. Yet this does not seem the expectation of the Apostle Paul, Saint Gregory Nazianzen or Saint Gregory Palamas; they strongly encourage all the faithful. The Apostle Paul goes so far as to say to the Corinthians “to each is given the manifestation of the Spirit.”

Looking a little deeper into Holy Tradition we see why this charismatic experience is not reserved for the few but should be the expectation of all. On the day of Pentecost when people first experienced the infilling of the Holy Spirit of God, the apostle Peter, drawing upon tradition himself as he quoted the prophet Joel, said

“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; Yea, and on my menservants and my maidservants in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.” (Acts 2:17-18, emphasis mine)

This same theme is again taken up by Justin Martyr as he explains: “God imparts charismata from the grace of His Spirit’s power to those who believe in Him according as He deems each man worthy thereof.” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, emphases mine). St. Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem exhorts even the catechumens to receive the gifts of the Spirit: “The Holy Spirit is no respecter of persons, for He seeks not dignities, but piety of soul. Let neither the rich be puffed up nor the poor dejected, but only let each prepare himself for reception of the Heavenly gift.” (Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Lectures)

Lamentation of the Spiritual State

Perhaps this relegation of the spiritual gifts to only the exceptional stems from the lack of ongoing exercise of these spiritual gifts within Orthodoxy today. This very condition was lamented by Saint John Chrysostom in his commentary on I Corinthians 14.

“What now can be more awful than these? For in truth the Church was a heaven then, the Spirit governing all things…but the present Church is like a women who has fallen from her former prosperous days and in many respects retains the symbols only of that ancient prosperity…and I say not his in respects of (spiritual) gifts, for it were nothing marvelous if it were this only, but in respect also of life and virtue.” (John Chrysostom, On First Corinthians)

As Saint Seraphim was instructing his spiritual son N.A. Motovilov on the acquisition of the Holy Spirit, he also expressed his disappointment of the lack of charismatic experience during his time.

“In our times because of the almost universal coldness toward the holy faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, we have reached a state in which we may be said to have withdrawn almost entirely from the true Christian life. (St. Seraphim, Conversation With Motovilov)

In his paper on “The Holy Spirit and Parish Renewal,” Reverend Constantine Monios took up this lamentation of Saints John Chrysostom and Seraphim and showed its relevance for our personal lives today.

“Both Scripture and Holy Tradition support the reality of the Holy Spirit. The reality of his presence and his influence in our lives were known to us at least in theory. No one could dare say that this gift was a false one, no one could dare say that the Holy Spirit would be a dormant gift. If, then the Holy Spirit was not dormant then we were! Something was wrong with us!” (Rev. Costantine Monios, The Holy Spirit and Parish Renewal)

Receiving The Spirit of God

In response to this challenge of Father Monios we must ask ourselves the question, “How can I experience this power of the Holy Spirit?” As Orthodox Christians we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit at Chrismation. When the priest anoints us, the Spirit of God enters us in a special way and empowers us to live the Christian life. As already stated, the Holy Spirit is not intended to be a dormant gift. His power and grace actively work in our lives. Yet we may be dormant, not allowing the Holy Spirit – bound by our free will – to work freely in our lives.

In writing to Timothy, the apostle Paul addresses this condition in the life of his spiritual child. “Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands: for God did not give us a spirit of timidity but a spirit of power and love and self-control.” (II Timothy 1:6,7)

St. Didymas the blind, who for over fifty years headed the Catechetical School of Alexandria, says it is our free will that dictates the release of the Spirit’s power in our life.

“The Holy Spirit is given to us providing we give occasion to receive him. For to obey God is optional, as is to believe. In those who have shared in the charismata, the Holy Spirit is given in proportion. In accord with this is ‘He will give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!” (St. Didymas, Commentary on Psalm 36:9)

Finally, we turn to the writings of Saint Symeon the New Theologian who encourages us…

“Let us be like those who knock patiently and to whom the Lord opens the doors of His kingdom, according to His promise, and like those who seek and are given the Holy Spirit. It is impossible for a man who seeks with all his soul not to find the Holy Spirit and be enriched by His Charismata.” (St. Symeon the New Theologian, Catachesis 22)

Conclusion

It becomes obvious as we look at these writings that the Lord, through His great mercy, has provided for His children a special power to live the Christian life and to attain union with Himself. He has given various gifts of the Spirit for the upbuilding and encouragement of His church. Although the charismata are not currently as widely practiced as originally intended, it remains the will of God for all the faithful to ask them of God, believing that He is true to His Word.

Let us then evaluate our own experience in light of Holy Tradition – not limiting the Lord with our smallness of spirit. Rather, let us expect our own experience to be a reflection of His will a, making personally relevant the words of the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 11:2, “I commend you because you…maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.”

A paraphrase of Saint John Chrysostom's Homily on 1 Corinthians 12. A quote lifted out of context is frequently used to argue that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are no longer given. By reading the entire homily we see that the beloved saint is making a very different point.

The Homily of St. John Chrysostom on I Corinthians 12: 1-11

Paraphrase by, Jerry Munk

“Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be uninformed. You know that when you were heathen, you were led astray to dumb idols, however you may have been moved” (I Corinthians 12:1-2).

This whole passage is very obscure, but this obscurity is the result of our own ignorance about these things, for they have now ceased to be practiced. They used to occur regularly but not anymore. This, of course, leads us to ask the question, “Why did they happen then but not now?” This, however, let us leave for another time. For the present let us simply examine what things were taking place at the time these verses were written.

[Paraphraser’s Note: A reason for the discontinuance of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is given in St. John Chrysostom’s commentary on the book of Romans. Here he says, “What now can be more awful than these? For in truth the Church was a heaven then, the Spirit governing all things…but the present Church is like a woman who has fallen from her former prosperous days and in many respects retains only the symbols of that ancient prosperity…and I do not say this regarding the spiritual gifts only, for it were nothing marvelous if it were only these, but also regarding life and virtue.” From this we can conclude that although the gifts are available to all Christians at any given time, they only become operational when the heart is receptive.]

Well, what was happening then? Whoever was baptized in water would immediately speak with tongues, and not just with tongues only, because many would also prophesy while others performed miraculous works. Since they were converted from idolatry, having no formal knowledge of or training in the ancient Scriptures, they immediately received the Holy Spirit upon being baptized. But they never saw Him because the Spirit is invisible.

Because of this, God in His grace would bestow a tangible proof of His activity. Thus, one would speak in Persian, another in the language of Rome, another in an Indian dialect, while still others would speak in some other tongues. This made it obvious it actually was the Holy Spirit who was speaking through the person. This is why it is written, “Each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” Just as the apostles received this sign first, so also the faithful received a similar manifestation: they would receive the gifts of tongues, but it would not always end there, for many went so far as to raise the dead, cast out devils and perform many other miracles. They would receive the gifts of the Spirit, some less and some more, But more abundant than all the other gifts was the gift of tongues.

Now this became for them (the Corinthians) a cause of great division (not because of the gift itself but from the impure motives of the individuals who received it). You see, the ones who had the greater gifts were exalted above those who received the lesser. These brethren were grieved because of this and envied those who possessed the greater gifts. Paul brings this out more clearly as he continues.

As a result of this problem, the Corinthians were receiving a fatal blow, causing the dissolution of their brotherly love. Thus, he takes great care to correct it. Now this also happened in Rome, but here it was not as serious. This is why he discusses it obscurely and briefly in his letter to the Romans, saying: “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our service; he who teaches, in his teaching; he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who fives aid, with zeal; he who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness” (Romans 12:4-8)

It also seems the Romans were falling into the sin of willfulness as can be gleaned from the beginning of his discourse where he says, “For by the grace given to me I bid every one among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith which God has assigned him” (Romans 12:3). Now with the Romans his comments were brief, for the disease of division and pride had not progressed very far. But with the Corinthians he demonstrated great anxiety, for the distemper had spread throughout the body.

Now this was not all that disturbed him about the Corinthians, for in the city there were many soothsayers (men and women who attempted to predict future events, a result of the extreme addiction to the customs of Greece). This, along with the rest, created great problems among them. This explains why he begins by clearly stating the difference between soothsaying and prophecy. “Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says ‘Jesus be cursed!’ and no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except by the Holy Spirit” (I Corinthians 12:3). This is why it was important they received discernment of the spirits: so they could discern and know who spoke by a pure spirit and who by an impure.

[Paraphraser’s Note: For brevity’s sake I have deleted a lengthy passage in which St. Chrysostom discusses the sorcery and idol worship of Corinth. Although this is a most informative discourse, it is not crucial to the discussion of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The beloved saint is well-known for his tangential comments.]

“Now there are varieties of gifts but the same Spirit” (I Corinthians 12:4)

Paul directs his first attention to the one who is grieved because he possesses the lesser gift. What he is saying is “Are you dejected because you have not received as much as another? Well, consider it is a free gift not a debt, and this will sooth your pain.” This is why he begins, “Now there are varieties of gifts.” Notice he did not say signs or wonders but gifts. Because it is exactly that, a free gift, he prevails upon them not to grieve but rather to be thankful.

“Consider this,” he is saying, “that even if you feel yourself inferior because of what you have been given, you should know that indeed you have equal honor with the one who has received more because you have both received from the same source.” For certainly you cannot say the Holy Spirit bestowed a gift on him, but you received yours from an angel. Rather, both gifts were bestowed by the same Holy Spirit. This is why he stresses, “but the same Spirit.” So even if there is a difference in the gift, there is no difference in the giver. You are both drawing water from the same well.

“And there are varieties of service, but the same Lord” (I Corinthians 12:5).

In saying this he enriched the consolation by mentioning in this verse the Son and, in the next the Father. Notice he now calls the gifts by another name; this is designed to increase the consolation. This is why he says, “There are varieties of service but the same Lord.” Now one who hears the word “gift” but received a smaller share may perhaps grieve, but when he speaks of service, the reaction is much different. Service, you see, implies sweat and labor. “Why do you grieve,” he is saying, “if the Lord has assigned another the greater work and spared you?”

“And there are varieties of working but the same God who inspires them all in every one. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good” (I Corinthians 12:6-7)

“Now what,” you may ask, “is a working, and what is a service?” These are only differences in names because in themselves they are the same. For what is sometimes called a gift is also called a service or an operation. Therefore, he exhorts, “Fulfill your ministry” (II Timothy 4:5), and again in another place, “I magnify my ministry” (Romans 11:13). As he writes to Timothy, he says, “Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you” (II Timothy 1:6). Again, in this letter to the Galatians, he says, “For He who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles” (Galatians 2:8). So you see, he implies there is no difference between the gifts of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Not that he confuses the persons of the Trinity, God forbid! Rather, he declares equal honor of essence. For in the gift the Spirit gives, the Father also works, similarly the Son ordains and grants it. Surely if one member of the Trinity were inferior to the other, he would not have presented it in this manner nor would this be a good way to console one who was upset.

After saying this, he comforts them in another way. He asks them to consider the measure freely given to them as profitable, even if it is not large. For having comforted them by saying it is “the same Spirit,” “the same Lord” and “the same God,” he now brings another consolation: “To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” Thus, if one should say, “So what if it was the same Lord, the same Spirit and the same God – I have received less,” Paul’s reply is that even so, the gift was used for the common good.

Now he calls these miracles “a manifestation of the Spirit” for a good reason. For I, as a believer, know if a man has the Spirit because of his baptism; this would not be evident to an unbeliever unless he sees the miracles. Again this provides no small consolation. For even if there is a difference of gifts, the evidence is the same. Whether you have received little or much, you are equally manifest. So if you ever desire to show you have received the Spirit, you have a sufficient demonstration.

In summary, we know the Giver is one, the gift itself is a pure favor and that by it you are shown to have received the Spirit, and this is for the common good. So do not grieve or feel despised. God has not done this to dishonor you or declare you inferior to another. Rather, He wishes to spare you out of concern for your welfare. For to receive more than one is able to bear is unprofitable and is truly a cause for dejection.

“To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge, according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit” (I Corinthians 12: 8-9).

See how each time he makes the statement, “according to the same Spirit” and “by the one Spirit”? He did this because he knew the comfort from this was great.

“To another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues” (I Corinthians 12:10).

Since they always boasted in this, he placed it last and then adds :

“All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills” (I Corinthians 12:11)

The universal medicine of his consolation had a common root, for out of the same treasure, out of the same streams, they have all received. In accordance with this, he dwells upon this expression from time to time to equalize the apparent inequality, and thereby he consoles them. Previously he credits the Spirit, the Son and the Father as supplying the gifts. Here he simply mentions the Spirit to enable you to understand their dignity is the same.

But what is “the word of wisdom”? It is a gift which Paul had, as did John, the son of thunder.

And what is meant by “the word of knowledge”? It seems most of the faithful possessed the gift, but they could not easily teach or convey what they knew.

“And to another faith”: Now by this he is not referring to belief in right doctrine, rather the faith of miracles. Christ spoke of this saying, “…For truly I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you” (Matthew 17:20). This is the faith the apostles were seeking when they said “increase our faith” (Luke 17:5), for this is the mother of miracles. But possessing the gift of miracles is not the same as having the gift of healing. The one who has the gift of healing could use his gift only to cure the sick, but the one who has power to perform miracles can also use his gift to punish. For a miracle is not for healing only but also for punishing, even as Paul inflicted blindness and Peter slew.

“To another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits.” This ability to distinguish between spirits” is to know who is spiritual and who is not – who is a prophet and who is a deceiver. As he says to the Thessalonians, “Do not despise prophesying, but test everything; hold fast to what is good” (I Thessalonians 5:20,21). For at the time there were a great number of false prophets as the devil was striving underhandedly to substitute lies for the truth.

“To another various kinds of tongues, to another interpretation of tongues.” For one person had knowledge of what he was saying but could not interpret the message to others while another man had received both of the gifts or the gift of interpretation alone. Now this seems to be an important gift because it was the first gift the apostles received and most of the Corinthian believers obtained it also, but the word of teaching (wisdom) was not so. For this reason he places teaching first but tongues last; for tongues and their interpretation were present on account of the word of teaching (wisdom). Indeed, so were all the rest: prophecies, working of miracles, as well as differing tongues and their interpretation. For none of the gifts are equal to the first. On account of this he has also said, “Let the elders who rule well be considered of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching” (I Timothy 5:17). Again he writes to Timothy saying, “Attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching. Do not neglect the gift you have” (I Timothy 4:13,14). See how once again he calls it a gift.

[Paraphraser’s Note: At this point St. John departs from the text of I Corinthians 12 to argue against a heresy prevalent among the Macedonians which denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit. He returns to conclude this section of his homely with the following comment.]

What Paul is saying in this passage of Scripture is this: Let us not, I beg you, be at a loss, neither let us be burdened or distressed, saying “Why have I received this and not that?” Neither let us demand account of the Holy Spirit. If you know He graciously gave this gift out of His all-knowing care, consider that from this very same care. He has also determined the measure of it. Therefore be content and rejoice in what you have received. Do not complain about it; rather, confess God’s kindness that you have not received things beyond your power.

By Jerry Munk

This key question is examined from the perspective of scripture and two prominent Fathers of the Church. First published in Theosis Newsletter in October 1986.

In the New Testament Church we see many overt manifestations of the Holy Spirit: speaking in unlearned languages (languages known and unknown to mankind), prophetic utterance, supernatural healings, visions and dreams, working of miracles, and several others. This is not generally our experience today. In fact, the very gifts which once served as the catalyst for establishing and extending the Church of Jesus Christ, would today be rejected in all but a very few of our Orthodox parishes. Why?

An Innovation?

I suspect the majority of Orthodox Christians have not given much thought to the place of spiritual gifts in the life of the Church. We tend to be a traditional lot and pretty much accept the idea that the way we do things now is the way they have always been done. Since little place is given to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, it is easy to assume that this has always been the case, and therefore the charismata (spiritual gifts) must be some Protestant innovation. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Indeed, the record of the early Church tells us that charismatic ministry was the norm for the first several hundred years. It worked hand in hand with and often overlapped the hierarchical ministries of the Church (see Charismatic Gifts in the Early Church by Ronald A. Kydd, Hendricks Publishing Co.). Rather than being a recent innovation, there is a great deal of evidence that the charismatic renewal we see today is, in fact, a restoration of early church, and therefore Orthodox, practice.

Cessation Theology

On the other hand, there are a number of Orthodox Christians (Protestant and Catholic as well) whose opposition to charismatic manifestations goes much deeper. They hold a developed theology that says the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased, or were severely curtailed, with the close of the Apostolic age.

Several passages, at first reading, seem to support this idea of cessation. Also, until the Pentecostal awakening early in this century, spiritual gifts seemed almost extinct, and this argues in favor of cessation. But, as we examine the evidence closely, and bring to the discussion some additional information, a strong argument emerges that it was and always has been God’s intent for His children to exercise the gifts of the Holy Spirit which so typified the New Testament believers.

Orthodox Position

Before we pursue this discussion, however, it would be good to address a point of major concern for Orthodox Christians. That is the question: “what is the position of the Orthodox Church in all of this?”

I an afraid that question lacks a definite answer as yet. There are some writings by respected authors that lean one way, but just as many writings by authors equally respected that lean the other. A few bishops have condemned the Charismatic Renewal, several have endorsed it, but most have been silent.

You see, this question, although it is an important one, has never been addresses by anything close to Ecumenical Council of Bishops. As a result, people hold a variety of understandings on this issue, but no one can claim to have the Orthodox position.

Three Passages

There are three main passages used to support the cessation theory, one from Scripture, and two from Church Fathers: Augustine and Chrysostom.

“…For we know in part and we prophecy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.” (I Corinthians 13: 8-10)

“The sign (speaking in tongues) was given and then passed away. We no longer expect that those on whom the hand is laid…will speak in tongues.” (St. Augustine)

“This whole passage (ref. to I Corinthians 12: 1-2) is very obscure, for they (the spiritual gifts) used to occur regularly but not anymore…” (St. John Chrysostom)

Primary weight should, of course, be given to the passage from Holy Scripture. We will examine the first.

I Corinthians 13: 8-10

There are three main points in the I Corinthians passage; (1) Spiritual gifts are partial; (2) something perfect is coming; (3) the partial will cease.

The first point, that our Spiritual gifts are partial or imperfect, is quite clear and direct. This fact can be seen in the record of the New Testament Church (in the Corinthian believers), in the early Church (the Montanists), and even in our own day among many charismatics. There is little question about its meaning and is accepted at faced value.

The second point, however, generates a question for the reader which is not directly answered in this passage or in the surrounding material. Just what is this perfect thing?

How you answer this question will determine how you interpret the passage. Because there is no general agreement on the answer, there is also a lack of agreement about what the passage means. In fact, this one passage is used both to argue that the gifts have ceased and that they have continued.

In my reading I have encountered four different explanations of what this perfect thing might be: the establishment of the Church, the New Testament revelation, an eschatological reference indicating the return of Jesus Christ or the close of the age, and personal maturity in a Christian.

Several Understandings

Some say that the gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to the Apostles for the work of establishing the Church (although the Bible records several non-apostles as ministering in the gifts of the Holy Spirit). They argue that as the Apostles died, the gifts died with them. Others cite the acceptance of Christianity by the Emperor Constantine as the watershed bringing to as close the time of charismatic gifts.

Others, however, would say that spiritual gifts, especially word gifts, ceased when the written Word of God was completed, but even here people point to two different dates: the Revelation received by John near the close of the first century AD, or the establishment of the New Testament Cannon several hundred years later.

Still others stipulate that Paul was referring in this passage to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. In this case, the perfect thing would represent the realized Kingdom of God. The surrounding verses support this interpretation: “What we see now is like a dim image in a mirror; then we see shall see face to face.” (I Corinthians 13: 12) Proponents of this view argue that spiritual gifts will not be needed in Heaven since we will then know Jesus face to face, but until then they continue.

St. John Chrysostom, on the other hand, sees this passage as a teaching on spiritual maturity (the word translated “perfect” can also be translated “mature”). Again, there is support for this interpretation in surrounding passages. The following verse, for example, says, “When I was a child, my speech, feeling and thinking were those of a child; now that I am a man, I have no more use for childish ways.”

Before we leave this passage, we must also examine the third point: that something partial or imperfect will cease. Even here, there are two possible options; the spiritual gifts themselves will cease, or the imperfection of the spiritual gifts will cease, i.e. an individual’s gifts will be made pure. Either understanding could be acceptable depending on how one understands the preceding point.

Clarity Needed

What have we determined by this discussion of the first Corinthians passage? Essentially this, that the passage is not clear. It could mean that the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased many years ago, that they will be perfected as we mature, or they will continue until Jesus comes again.

If we look to the rest of Scripture to clear up the confusion, we come up empty handed. No other passage says that spiritual gifts should cease or will cease. We have several different lists of spiritual gifts, pages of instruction about their place and use, even a lengthy correction for misuse of God’s gifts, but nowhere else is there any indication that such gifts will cease. If Paul, or any of the other writers of the New Testament, had understood that spiritual gifts would come to an end, they never came out and said so. Rather, one gets an impression that they felt charismata constituted an important aspect of Christianity, one that would be essential to the Body of Christ into the foreseeable future. Surely, if Paul intended to communicate cessation, he would have done so much more clearly.

The Fathers

Let us now turn to the quotations of Sts. Chrysostom and Augustine. While both comment that spiritual gifts are not a common or expected phenomenon, they do not develop a theology which excludes them. In fact, John Chrysostom acknowledges that the situation is confusing, and in his commentary on Romans longs for the days when “the Spirit controlled all things.”

The passage from St. Augustine (cited above) is used by many to say that the spiritual gifts have ceased. But, later in his life (City of God, book XXII) he says: "Even today miracles are being wrought in the name of Christ." It may be that he changed his opinion; it may be he did not. With this further evidence, however, it would be hard to argue that St. Augustine maintained the idea that all of the spiritual gifts had ceased by his time. Clearly he believed that the spiritual gift of healing, at least, continued.

Actually, all that we can safely determine from these quotations is that spiritual gifts, especially the gift of tongues and prophecy, were not common during the time or in the vicinity of the authors.

Ongoing gifts

Of course, one of the greatest arguments against cessation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is the fact that the gifts did not cease. To be sure, spiritual gifts became the exception rather than the norm, but even so, from time to time, throughout the history of the Church up to this present day, the Holy Spirit has worked powerfully giving His gifts for the edification of the Church.

Justin Martyr, writing in the middle of the second century, testifies “we see among us today men and women who possess the gifts of the Spirit of God.” St. Gregory of Nyssa, who lived in the fourth century, also speaks of contemporaries who possess the gifts of the Holy Spirit: “I know the deeds of our fellowmen who walk in the Spirit and give evidences of the power of healing…and have great power against the demons.” As late as the fourteenth century, Nicholas Kabasilas speaks of charismatic ministries, “Even in our day…some possess such charismata and they have predicted the future, expelled demons, and healed diseases with prayer alone.”

Expectant Seeking

Indeed, if the gifts of the Holy Spirit passed away with the Apostles, to what are these Saints testifying?

The truth is that the faithful have ministered in the gifts of the Holy Spirit in every age. At times there have been many charismatics and at other times few, but the simple fact of their presence and their acceptance by respected Fathers of the Church stands as evidence that such gifting should be expected, sought and approved in our day.

Life and Virtue

In his commentary on first Corinthians, John Chrysostom teaches, “the present church is like a women who has fallen from her former prosperous days and in many respects retains only the symbols of that ancient prosperity… and I say this not in respect of the gifts, for it would not be notable if it were this only, but also in respect to life and virtue.”

In times past, the faithful had great expectation of what the Holy Spirit would do when He entered a consecrated believer. Healing, prophecies, the expulsion of demons, and spiritual prayer, if not the norm, was a very present possibility. At the very least, a life changed to glorify Jesus Christ was expected.

Today, we are less comfortable with supernatural manifestations. The gifts of the Holy Spirit, so many think, belong to another time, to the Saints to the monasteries – a nice safe distance from any impact on “my” life.

Is the Church richer because of this rejection?

Does it present a more powerful witness to the reality of Jesus Christ? The real issue, as John Chrysostom points out is not whether the gifts of the Spirit are exercised, but rather, is the Holy Spirit free to work in and through the lives of the faithful as He wills. Perhaps, by closing ourselves to the gifts of the Spirit, we have also limited His work of producing the fruit of life and virtue.

In 1997, The Christian Activist, a publication edited by Frankie Schaeffer, published The Charismatic Revival, an article by Fr. Seraphim Rose, who was an ardent critic of the charismatic renewal. This response was offered--and printed in the next issue of The Christian Activist.

December 4, 1997

Dear Editor:

Not too many years ago, I had the pleasure of publishing Theosis, a little newsletter serving the charismatic renewal in the Orthodox Church. So, it was with some nostalgia that I read again the article by Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Charismatic Revival (reprinted in the last issue of The Christian Activist).

When he wrote this article, Fr. Seraphim inserted the Fundamentalist Protestant notion of dispensationalism (nicely wrapped up in Orthodox clothing, but dispensationalist to the core) into the Orthodox debate about the charismatic gifts - a nifty trick for one who declares that non-Orthodox have nothing to teach the Orthodox.

I would like to offer a different view on a few of Fr. Seraphim’s major themes. When it comes to the issue of the charismatic gifts, we should expect some diversity of opinion. The fathers themselves differ as they explain what the gifts are, how and by whom they are exercised, and whether or not they are to be widely experienced. So today, Orthodox Christians must endure a bit of diversity when the subject of spiritual gifts is discussed.

Fr. Seraphim begins with a cry heard more often today than back when the Charismatic Revival was first published: that since the Orthodox Church is the true Church of Jesus Christ, neither salvation nor spiritual gifts can be found outside of her. I find this an incriminating position for Orthodox Christians to hold.

If we truly believe that salvation is exclusive to Orthodox Christians, the blood of the condemned masses stains our hands, for we exhibit little zeal to share the message of salvation with those bound for Hell. We sit passively in our pews while those outside the Ark slip beneath the waves. Worse yet, we erect barriers to keep those of different language, different culture, or different color from coming aboard and contaminating our fraternity.

I came into the Orthodox Church 21 years ago because I believed it to be the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. But, who can say that the grace of God extends only to those baptized and Chrismated within her. To quote Bishop Kallistos Ware: “It is false to conclude that those who are not Orthodox cannot possibly belong to the Church. Many people may be members of the Church who are not visibly so....The Spirit of God blows where it chooses.”

Fr. Seraphim says “speaking in a tongue as a true gift of the Holy Spirit cannot appear among those outside the Church of Christ.” I ask simply, who made us the judge of who is or is not a member of the Church of Christ?

Fr. Seraphim chronicles the divisions among Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians - as opposed to the unity demonstrated among us Orthodox - and concludes that the “spirit” behind the charismatic renewal is demonic in origin. This is an awkward contrast for us Orthodox Christians. The Body of Christ cannot be broken, but can we point to ourselves as a witness of that unity? Is Christian unity best expressed by the division between the Old Calendars and the New, the Patriarchal Church and the Church in Exile, the near schism of Constantinople and Moscow (Note: a short time before this letter the two Patriarchs had a spat over Estonia and were not in communion for a while.), the competing ethnic jurisdictions in the Americas, or the conflicting claims of canonicity in The Ukraine (to cite a few examples)? Do we make the leap that such disunity in Orthodoxy reveals a demonic spirit inspiring us? Of course not. We are quick to explain that our squabbles flow from the fact that God is at work among fallen and sinful humans - that is to say you and me. Can we not extend the same generosity to others that we extend to ourselves?

“My sins pour out behind me, and I do not see them, yet I come today to judge the sins of my brother” (Abbot Moses).

Fr. Seraphim says “there are numerous cases in which people have lost interest in prayer, reading the Scriptures, and Christianity in general” upon becoming involved with the charismatic renewal. He uses this report to further question the source of the spirit behind charismatic renewal. I find this a baffling observation about the charismatic movement.

In my 24 years of involvement in the charismatic renewal, I have known thousands of people who have experienced the power and the gifts of the Holy Spirit renewed in their lives. Without exception, they have reported an increased desire to pray, read Scripture, and live zealously for Jesus Christ. They sometimes fail (which of us do not) but their desire is for a greater life in Christ, not for less. Charismatic Christians are notorious for their religious zeal, not the lack of it. The reason I find Fr. Seraphim’s observation baffling is that in the very same issue of The Christian Activist Frank Schaeffer laments the “loss of faith among Orthodox.” Let’s admit it, brothers and sisters, we Orthodox Christians are not generally known for our deep knowledge of Scripture and our unfailing devotion to prayer. Again, we place the blame on our all-too-human weakness, not on the “spirit” that inspires us.

Fr. Seraphim says that “the gifts of the Holy Spirit exist only in Orthodox Christians who have attained Christian perfection.” Others experiencing the gifts, he says, are succumbing to a demonic spirit of fancy. This assertion, I believe, is both erroneous and dangerous. In the Old Testament we see many examples of the Holy Spirit coming upon people with little evidence of ascetic perfection: Samson, David, and Balaam’s ass come to mind. In the New Testament, the pattern continues: in Acts 11, the spirit falls upon un-baptized Gentiles, while the book of I Corinthians is addressed to people who exercise the gifts of the Holy Spirit apart from the fruit of that same Spirit. After the New Testament period, we read in the Didache instructions for dealing with people exercising charismatic gifts while at the same time indulging the flesh. In none of these situations is it automatically assumed that the “spirit” behind the gift is from the devil. Just as one can receive Holy Communion unworthily, so one who is unworthy can exercise the gifts of the Spirit - but there is danger in doing so.

Yes, the Evil One masquerades as an angel of light, seeking to deceive God’s elect. Therefore, we must exercise discernment (another one of those pesky spiritual gifts). But, God also uses fallen, sinful human beings (people like you and me) to do His work. Surely this is something of which every priest at the altar is painfully aware. It is comfortable to say that God uses only those who lived long ago, far away, and in a state of perpetual holiness - it lets us off the hook. “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us” (II Corinthians 4:7).

The charismatic renewal has prompted millions of Christians to devote their lives more fervently to Jesus Christ and to worship and proclaim Him as God and Lord. The Apostle Paul says, “no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit” (I Corinthians. 12:3). The resounding proclamation of the charismatic renewal is “Jesus Christ is Lord!” To say that the “spirit” behind such a proclamation is demonic in origin astounds me. Say we charismatics are mistaken, say we are unbalanced, say we are fanatics, but do not make the indiscreet judgment that this Christ-centered renewal, reflecting the experience of the early Church, is the work of evil spirits. The Apostle Matthew warns us that “the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men” (Matthew 12:31). Fear alone gives counsel that we should be cautious.

Sincerely,

Jerry Munk

By Kallistos Ware, Bishop of Diokleia

Bishop Kallistos Ware, a well-know Orthodox theologian and writer, presented a paper at the European Pentecostal/Charismatic Research Conference held in Prague, 10-14 September 1997. This scholarly work gives a survey of Orthodox writers on personal experience of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit supplies all things:
He causes prophecies to spring up,
He sanctifies priests,
To the uninitiated He taught wisdom,
The fishermen He turned into theologians.
He holds in unity the whole structure of the Church.

- From an Orthodox hymn on the Feast of Pentecost

Solovetsk and Sunderland

Around the year 1890 an Anglican traveller from Sunderland, the Revd Alexander Boddy, Vicar of All Saints, Monkwearmouth, came as a pilgrim to the great Solovetsky Monastery on the White Sea in the far north of Russia. One thing in particular impressed him. It was a depiction of the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost:

'In the dome of the great cathedral and the monastery of Solovetsk is a striking representation of the first Christians gathered on the first Whitsunday, looking up with glorified faces as the flaming baptism of the Holy Ghost falls upon the infant Church. In the centre of the foreground is the mother of our Lord also receiving the gift.' ¹

When, nearly two decades later, on the occasion of a famous visit from T.B. Barratt, there was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Boddy's Sunderland parish on 31 August 1907, is it not likely that this 'striking representation' of Pentecost that he had seen in Russia was still vividly present in his memory? A formative event in the history of British Pentecostalism turns out in this way to have, as one of its sources, the iconography of an Orthodox monastic church.

This unexpected connection between Orthodox Christianity and the origins of the twentieth-century Pentecostal movement in Britain naturally leads us to ask: can we discover other links, on a more specifically theological level, between Orthodoxy and Pentecostalism? How far is the Christian East sympathetic to a 'charismatic' understanding of the spiritual life? At first sight it might appear that there is but little affinity. Orthodoxy, it might be said, is liturgical and hierarchic, whereas Pentecostalism is grounded upon the free and spontaneous action of the Spirit; Orthodoxy appeals to Holy Tradition, whereas Pentecostalism assigns primacy to personal experience.

Anyone, however, who searches more deeply will soon realize that stark contrasts of this kind are one-sided and misleading. In actual fact, many of the Greek Fathers insist with great emphasis upon the need for all baptized Christians to attain in their own personal experience a direct and conscious awareness of the Holy Spirit. No one can be a Christian at second-hand: such is the frequently repeated teaching of the Fathers. Holy Tradition does not signify merely the mechanical and exterior acceptance of truths formulated in the distant past, but it is in the words of the Russian theologian Vladimir Lossky - nothing else than 'the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church² here and now, at this present moment.

"The worst of all heresies"

The vital significance of the Holy Spirit for the Christian East will be apparent if we consider one of the outstanding mystical authors of the Middle Byzantine period, St. Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022). Each of us, he maintains, is called by God to experience the indwelling presence of the Spirit ' in a conscious and perceptible way', with what he describes as the 'sensation of the heart'. It is not enough for us to possess the Spirit merely in an implicit manner:

Do not say, It is impossible to receive the Holy Spirit;
Do not say, It is possible to be saved without Him.
Do not say that one can possess Him without knowing it.
Do not say, God does not appear to us.
Do not say, People do not see the divine light,
Or else, It is impossible in these present times.
This is a thing never impossible, my friends,
But on the contrary altogether possible for those who wish.³

All the charismata available to Christians in the apostolic age, Symeon is passionately convinced, are equally available to Christians in our own day. To suggest otherwise is for Symeon the worst of all possible heresies, implying as it does that God has somehow deserted the Church. If the Gifts of the Spirit are not as evident in the Christian community of our own time as they are in the Book of Acts, there can be only one reason for this: the weakness of our faith.

Symeon goes on to draw some startling conclusions from this. When asked, for example, whether lay monks, not ordained to the priesthood, have the power to 'bind and loose' that is to say, to hear confessions and to pronounce absolution he answers that there is one essential qualification, and one only, which empowers a person to act as confessor and to bestow forgiveness of sins; and that is the conscious awareness of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. Monks who possess such awareness, even though not in holy orders, may confer absolution upon others; but anyone who lacks such awareness - even though he may be bishop or patriarch - should not attempt to do this.⁴

Symeon speaks also of a 'second baptism', the baptism of tears, which is conferred on those who are 'born from above' through the Holy Spirit:

'When someone suddenly lifts up his gaze and contemplates the nature of existing things in a way that he had never done before, then he is filled with amazement and sheds spontaneous tears without any sense of anguish. These tears purify him and wash him in a second baptism, that baptism of which our Lord speaks in the Gospels when He says, 'if someone is not born through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.' Again He says, 'If someone is not born from above' (cf. John 3:5,7). When He said 'from above', He signified being born from the Spirit.'

Symeon even seems to consider the second baptism more important than the first; for he regards the first baptism - sacramental baptism through water - as no more than a type' or foreshadowing, whereas the second baptism is to be seen as the truth' or full reality: 'The second baptism is no longer a type of the truth, but it is the truth itself.' ⁵

How far is Symeon's standpoint typical of Eastern Christendom? He himself warns his readers that he is a 'frenzied' or 'manic zealot':⁶ are his remarks, then, to be discounted as the ravings of an extremist? Let us compare Symeon with three other writers, all of whom emphasize the Holy Spirit, and all of whom are held in high esteem within the Orthodox spiritual Tradition: with St. Mark the Monk (Plate fourth or early fifth century), alias Mark the Hermit or Mark the Ascetic; with the author or authors of the Homilies attributed to St. Macarius of Egypt, but in fact of Syriac origin (late fourth century); and with St. John Climacus (c.570-c.649), author of The Ladder of Divine Ascent, a work which Orthodox monks are supposed to reread each Lent.

Three Questions

In assessing how these different writers understand baptism 'with the Holy Spirit and fire' (Luke 3:16), let us ask three more specific questions:

(i) Must the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit be always a conscious indwelling, or can there be an indwelling of the Paraclete which is unconscious yet nonetheless real?

(ii) What is the relationship between sacramental baptism that is to say, water baptism - and 'baptism with the Holy Spirit and fire'? Is the 'second baptism' in the Spirit to be seen as something radically new, conferring a fresh grace distinct from that of water baptism, or is the 'second baptism' essentially the reaffirmation and fulfillment of the first - not a fresh grace but the realization and manifestation of the grace already received in our sacramental baptism with water?

(iii) What outward experiences - tongues, tears and the like - accompany and express our attainment of a conscious awareness of the Spirit?

Any answers that we propose need to be offered with diffidence and humility, for it is hard to contain within verbal formulae the living dynamism of the Spirit. Pointing as He does always to Christ and not to Himself (John 15:26; 16:13-14), He remains elusive and hidden so far as His own personhood is concerned. He is 'everywhere present and filling all things', to use the words of a familiar Orthodox prayer, but we do not see His face. Symeon the New Theologian emphasizes this mysterious character of the Paraclete in an Invocation to the Holy Spirit which precedes the collection of his Hymns. 'Hidden mystery', he calls the Spirit, treasure without name ... reality beyond all words ... person beyond all understanding'; and he continues: 'Come, for Your name fills our hearts with longing and is ever on our lips; yet who You are and what Your nature is, we cannot say or know.' ⁷

Let us display, then, an apophatic reticence in all that we assert concerning the free and sovereign Spirit, who is like the wind that 'blows where it chooses: and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where goes' (John 3:8).

St. Mark the Monk: from 'secret' to 'active' presence

Little known in the West, Mark's writings have always been popular in the Christian East. They are included in the first volume of that classic collection of Orthodox spiritual texts The Philokalia; in the Byzantine period there was even a monastic adage, 'Sell everything and buy Mark'. Reacting against the Messalians (an ascetic movement originating in fourth-century Syria), Mark insists in trenchant terms upon the completeness of baptism. He is speaking, of course, about sacramental baptism:

'However far someone may advance in faith, however great the good he has attained ... he never discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he has already received secretly through .baptism.... Christ, being perfect God, has bestowed upon the baptized the perfect grace of the Spirit. We for our part cannot possibly add to that grace, but it is revealed and manifests itself increasingly, the more we fulfil the commandments .... Whatever, then, we offer to Christ after our regeneration was already hidden within us and came originally from Him.'

Mark ends - for he is strongly Pauline in spirit - with a quotation from Romans 11:35 - 36: 'Who has first given a gift to God, so as to receive a gift in return? For from Him... are all things.⁸

Baptism, according to the Monk's teaching, confers upon us a total purification from all sin, both original and personal; it liberates us from all 'slavery', restoring the primal integrity of our free will as creatures formed in God's image; and at the same time, through our immersion in the baptismal font, Christ and Holy Spirit take up their abode within us, entering into what Mark terms 'the innermost and uncontaminated chamber of the heart', the innermost and untroubled shrine of the heart where the winds of evil spirits so not blow'.⁹

At this point Mark makes a crucial distinction, summed up in the two Greek adverbs m u s t i k v V meaning 'mystically' or 'secretly', and e n e r g u v V , meaning 'actively'. Initially, at sacramental baptism -and Mark seems to envisage primarily the situation of infant baptism - the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit is given to us 'secretly', in such a way that we are not at first consciously aware of it. We only become 'actively' conscious of this presence if we acquire a living faith, expressed through our practice of the divine commandments. In this way baptism plants within us a hidden seed of perfection, but it rests with us - assisted always by God's grace - to make that seed grow, so that it bears conscious and palpable fruit. While we cannot "add* to the completeness of baptism, God nevertheless awaits a response on our part; and if we fail to make that response, although the Spirit will still continue to be present 'secretly' in our heart, we shall not feel His presence 'actively' within us, nor experience His fruits with full conscious awareness.

Such is Mark's map of the Christian pilgrimage. Our starling-point is the presence of baptismal grace within us 'secretly' and unconsciously; our end-point is the revelation of that grace 'actively', with what he terms 'full assurance (p l h r o j o r i a ) and sensation (a i s q h s i V )'. As he states:

'Everyone baptized in the Orthodox manner has received secretly the fullness of grace; but he gains assurance of this grace only to the extent that he actively observes the commandments.' ¹⁰

Our spiritual program can therefore be summed up in the maxim 'Become what you are'. We are already, from the moment of our sacramental baptism as infants , 'Spirit-bearers' in an implicit and unconscious manner. Our aim is therefore to acquire conscious experience - several times Mark uses the Greek term p e i r a - of Him who already dwells within us:

'All these mysteries we have received at our baptism, but we are not aware of them. When, however, we condemn ourselves for our lack of faith, and sincerely express our belief in Christ by performing all the commandments, then we shall acquire experience within ourselves of all the things that I have mentioned; and we shall confess that holy baptism is indeed complete and that the grace of Christ is invisibly hidden within us; but it awaits our obedience and our fulfilment of the commandments.' ¹¹

We are now in position to assess the answers which Mark offers to our three questions.

(i) It is abundantly clear that Mark allows for an indwelling presence of the Spirit that is unconscious yet nonetheless real. Such, in his view, is precisely the position of those who have been baptized in infancy. They receive a genuine indwelling of the Paraclete, and this 'secret' indwelling will never be altogether lost, however careless or sinful their subsequent lives may be; as Mark puts it, 'Grace never ceases to help us in a secret way. ^l2 At the same time Mark regards this 'secret' presence as no more than an initial starting-point; and he clearly affirms that the vocation of every baptised Christian without exception is to advance from this to a conscious awareness of the Spirit.

(ii) In Mark's view, this conscious awareness of Spirit experienced 'actively' and 'with full assurance and sensation' is in no sense a new grace, distinct from the grace conferred in water baptism, but it is nothing else than the full 'revelation' of the baptismal grace conferred upon us at the outset. The baptized Christian 'never discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he has already received secretly through baptism'. Everything is contained implicitly in the initial charisma of baptism.

(iii) As to the outward experiences which accompany this conscious awareness of the indwelling Spirit, Mark is reticent. He does not speak about visions, dreams, trances and ecstasy.

Nowhere have I found in his writings anything that could be interpreted as a reference to speaking with tongues. His allusions to tears are infrequent; so far from exalting the gift of tears, he warns us, 'Do not grow conceited if you shed tears when you pray.'¹³ He does indeed believe that our aim is to experience consciously the energies of the Spirit' and to reach the state above nature', where the intellect (n o u V ) 'discovers the fruits of the Holy Spirit of which the Apostle spoke: love, joy, peace and the rest' (cf. Gal. 5:22).¹⁴ But he does not specify what precise form these 'energies' and 'fruits' are to take.

When interpreting an author such as Mark, it is helpful to make a distinction between 'experience' (in the singular) and experiences' (in the plural). There are surely many Christians who feel able to say in all humility, 'I know God personally', without being able to point to any single event such as a vision, a voice, or a concentrated 'conversion crisis' of the kind undergone by St. Paul, St. Augustine, Pascal or John Wesley. Personal experience of the Spirit permeates their whole life, existing as a total awareness, without necessarily being crystallized in the form of particular 'experiences'. When Mark and other Greek Fathers refer to our conscious awareness of the 'energies' or 'fruits' of the Spirit, they may well have in view an all-embracing 'experience' of this kind, rather than any specific and separate 'experiences'.

The Macarian Homilies: light, tears and ecstasy

The Homilies attributed to Macarius are better known in the West than are the writings of Mark the Monk: John Wesley, for example, was an enthusiastic reader of the Homilies, characteristically observing in his diary for 30 July 1736, 'I read Macarius and sang.' Whereas Mark is evidently an opponent of Messalianism, the Homilies are commonly regarded as a Messalian or semi-Messalian work. But in fact, when Mark and the Homilies are carefully compared, their respective theologies of baptism turn out to be not so very different. It is true that the best-known group of Macarian texts, the collection of the Fifty Spiritual Homilies (known as Collection II or Collection H), is largely silent about sacramental baptism; but there are a number of important references to it in the other main groups, Collection I (B) and III (C).

In agreement with Mark, the Macarian Homilies see sacramental baptism as the foundation of all Christian life: 'Our baptism is true for us and valid, and it is the source from which we receive the life of the Spirit.' ¹⁵

The Homilies concur with Mark in insisting furthermore upon the completeness of baptism: 'In possessing the pledge of baptism, you possess the talent' in its completeness, but if you fail to work with it, you yourself will remain incomplete; and not only that, but you will be deprived of it.' ¹⁶

Mark would not have said, 'you will be deprived of if, for he believes that the gift of baptismal grace can never be wholly lost. But otherwise the two authors agree: baptism is 'complete' or 'perfect', but in order to experience the full effects of the sacrament, we need to 'work' with the initial charisma of baptism by fulfilling the commandments.

Once more in agreement with Mark, the Macarian writings state that the gift of the Holy Spirit is conferred 'from the Moment of baptism'.¹⁷ Just as Mark envisages a progress from baptismal grace present 'secretly' to baptismal grace experienced 'actively', so likewise the Homilies maintain that the indwelling presence of the Spirit, conferred at baptism, is something of which we ere initially unconscious. The Spirit's working is at first so slight that the baptized person is ignorant of His activity:

'Initially divine grace exists within a person in such a subtle way that he is unaware of its presence and does not understand [that it is within him].... But if we persist and advance in all the virtues, struggling with full exertion, then baptism will increase in power and will be revealed in us, making us perfect through its own grace.' ¹⁸

This, as we have noted, is exactly Mark's teaching: through our fulfilment of the commandments and our ascetic struggles, the hidden grace of baptism is gradually 'revealed' in its full power.

At the outset, then, so the Homilies affirm, the Spirit is present 'invisibly', but if we persevere on the path of Christian obedience we shall gradually come to experience His presence with power and assurance':

'In His own wisdom the heavenly Physician bestows the heavenly bread - that is to say, the power of the Spirit invisibly through the holy mystery of the "washing of rebirth' (Titus 3:5) and of the Body of Christ; and through the "word of consolation' (Heb. 13:22) in the Scriptures He nourishes and warms the damaged soul that is still subject to the passions and that is not yet capable of experiencing the energy of the Spirit with power and assurance, whether on account of its childishness or because of its lack of faith and its carelessness. Every soul, on receiving the remission of sins in holy baptism according to the measure of its faith, participates in the energy of grace: one receives it with power and assurance, another with weaker energy of grace .... Thus the grace of the Spirit bestowed in baptism seeks to overshadow each person in abundance and to grant to each more speedily the perfection of divine power, but the degree to which someone shares in this grace depends on the measure of that person's faith and piety.' ¹⁹

This is less clear and coherent than the treatment that we find in Mark; also the Homilies seem to envisage adult baptism whereas Mark thinks primarily in terms of infant baptism. But there is no fundamental discrepancy between the two authors. Both agree that there is a progressive advance from an unconscious presence of the baptismal gift of the Spirit to a conscious awareness of the baptismal gift "with full assurance and sensation' (a phrase used by the Homilies as well as by Mark).

How, then, do the Macarian Homilies answer our three questions?

(i) The Homilies clearly assert that, in certain cases at any rate, the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit conferred at baptism is at first unconscious: He is present within us 'invisibly, in such a way that we are 'unaware' of Him. At the same time, however, it is the vocation of every baptized Christian to advance from unconsciousness to conscious awareness, so that we experience this gift of the Spirit 'with full assurance and sensation'. Here the Homilies, like Mark the Monk, rely heavily upon the language of feeling. Sometimes the Homilies describe this higher stage of conscious awareness as 'baptism with fire and the Spirit',²⁰ a phrase nowhere found in Mark's writings.

(ii) This 'baptism with fire and the Spirit' does not, however, connote a new and distinct gift of the Spirit, but according to the Homilies it is nothing else than the developed and conscious awareness of the gift of the Spirit inherent in water baptism. As with Mark, it is water baptism that constitutes the 'source' of all our life in the Spirit.

(iii) lf the Homilies and Mark prove thus far to be in substantial agreement, in their respective answers to the third question there is a significant difference between them. The Homilies emphasize various outward experiences that accompany the conscious awareness of the Spirit, in a way that Mark does not. Macarius speaks, for example, about a vision of divine light received by the spiritual aspirant,²¹! and about his illumination by 'non-material and divine fire'.²² These Macarian texts concerning light and fire had an important influence upon the mystical theology of the fourteenth-century Byzantine Hesychasts, and they were taken up in particular by St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359). The Homilies also attach more importance than Mark does to the gift of tears. Only if we 'weep' shall we experience the 'power" of the Spirit:

'If anyone is naked because he lacks the divine and heavenly garment which is the power of the Spirit... let him weep and beseech the Lord that he may receive the spiritual garment from heaven.' ²³

Unlike Mark, the Homilies speak explicitly about trance-like and ecstatic experiences:

'Sometimes a person when praying has fallen into a kind of trance (e c t a s i V ) and has found himself standing in church before the sanctuary; and three loaves of bread were offered to him, leavened with oil...'

There have been other occasions, Macarius continues, when the impact of a vision of inner light has proved so devastating that a person loses normal self-control:

'Swallowed up in the sweetness of contemplation, he was no longer master of himself, but became like a fool and a barbarian towards this world, so overwhelmed was he by the excessive love and sweetness of the hidden mysteries that were being revealed to him.' ²⁴

There is no parallel in Mark's writings to this kind of language.

There is even a possible allusion in one Homily to speaking with tongues. Recalling the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost, Macarius says: As for the apostles, they cried out willy-nilly. Just as a flute, when air is blown through it, gives out the sound that the flute-player wants, so it is also with the apostles and those who resemble them. When they were 'born from above' (John 3:3,7) and received the Paraclete Spirit, the Spirit spoke in them as He wanted.²⁵

The reference here to those who 'resemble' the apostles suggests that the speaking with tongues on the day of Pentecost has been continued in later ages of the Church. But this is an isolated passage which has no exact parallel elsewhere in Macarian corpus, and so it would be unwise to base too much upon it.

Counterbalancing this passage on Pentecost, there are other occasions when the Homilies condemn the use of 'unseemly and confused cries' during times of prayer. Probably the author has in mind certain 'enthusiasts' among the more extreme Messalians:

'Those who draw near to the Lord ought to make their prayers in quietness and peace and great tranquillity, not with unseemly and confused cries .... There are some who during prayer make use of unseemly cries, as if relying on their own bodily strength, not realizing how their thoughts deceive them, and thinking that they can achieve perfect success by their own strength.' ²⁶

Yet even if the Homilies do not in fact provide clear support for glossolalia, it is evident that their author (or authors) expected the conscious experience of the Spirit to be marked by other external expressions, such as tears and ecstatic visions.

St. John Climacus: the baptism of tears

The Ladder of Divine Ascent by St. John Climacus, abbot of Sinai, provides relatively little material to help us in answering our questions. Although The Ladder contains a few (but not very many) references to baptism, and also a few (but not very many) references to the Holy Spirit, nowhere are these two themes - the gift of baptism and the grace of the Spirit - mentioned together in the same passage. It is clear from numerous statements in The Ladder that Climacus attaches great importance to personal experience, but he does not develop the point in explicit detail.

There are, however, two passages in The Ladder that are significant for our present purpose. First, Climacus indicates that there is a direct connection between the gift of the Spirit and obedience to a spiritual father or mother:

'If you are constantly upbraided by your director and yet acquire greater faith in him and love for him, then you may be sure that the Holy Spirit has taken up residence in your soul and the power of the Most High has overshadowed you.' ²⁷

To some contemporary Christians there might seem to be a contradiction between, on the one hand, strict obedience to a spiritual guide and, on the other, the personal experience of freedom in the Holy Spirit. But this is not the way in which Orthodoxy views the matter. On the contrary, it is precisely through obedience that we learn freedom. The role of the spiritual guide or 'soul friend' (Celtic amchara) is not to act as a substitute for the Spirit, but it is specifically through our relationship with our guide that we are helped to attain personal awareness of the Spirit's presence. So far from discouraging a direct contact with the Spirit, our guide seeks to open the door for us; to vary the metaphor, he or she aims to be transparent.

The second and more important passage in The Ladder concerns the gift of tears. Climacus, as Symeon the New Theologian was later to do, regards this as a second baptism, which is to be placed on an even higher level than the first baptism in sacramental water:

The tears that come after baptism are greater than baptism itself, though it may seem rash to say so. Baptism washes off those evils that were previously within us, whereas the sins committed after baptism are washed away by tears. The baptism received by us as children we have all defiled, but we cleanse it anew with our tears. If God in His love for the human race had not given us tears, those being saved would be few indeed and hard to find.²⁸

This is relevant to the third of our questions. What outward signs accompany direct experience of the Spirit? Climacus says nothing about speaking with tongues, but he attaches deep value to the charisma of spiritual tears. The gift of tears is also strongly emphasized by Climacus's contemporary, St. Isaac of Nineveh (Isaac the Syrian).²⁹

St. Symeon the New Theologian: 'he cries and shouts'

Let us now return to the author with whom we started, St. Symeon the New Theologian. How far do his answers to our three questions correspond to those found in Mark the Monk and the Macarian Homilies?

(i) It might seem at first sight that Symeon excludes the possibility of an inner presence of the Spirit that is unconscious yet real; for) in a passage already cited, he states unambiguously, 'Do not say that one can possess Him without knowing it.³⁰ Taken literally, these words suggest that Symeon identifies the reality of grace with the conscious awareness of it. This is often regarded as a typically 'Messalian' deviation (although what the Messalians actually believed is notoriously difficult to establish). In fact, however, there are other passages in Symeon which imply that he did not in fact endorse such an extreme position. More than once he definitely allows for an unconscious working of grace:

'Let us seek Christ, with whom we have been clothed through holy baptism (cf. Gal. 3:27). Yet we have been stripped of Him through our evil deeds; for, although in our infancy we were sanctified without being aware of it (a n a i s q h t v V ), yet in our youth we defiled ourselves.' ³¹

'As it is written, 'He who endures to the end will be saved' (Matt. 10:22). Not only will he be saved, but he will receive help - at first, without being aware of it, then with conscious awareness, and soon afterwards with the illumination that comes from Almighty God.' ³²

'When the fear of God leads someone to cut off his own will, God grants him His will, without the person knowing it, in a way that he does not perceive.' ³³

Symeon - more than Mark the Monk, more even than the Macarian Homilies - attaches crucial importance to the attainment, by every Christian without exception, of a direct, conscious awareness of the Spirit; and this may sometimes lead him to exaggerated statements. But, as the passages quoted above clearly indicate, he does not altogether exclude an unconscious presence of Christ and the Spirit. He too, in common with Mark and Macarius, envisages a progress from a 'secret' to an 'active' indwelling.

(ii) Does Symeon also agree with Mark and Macarius in regarding 'baptism with the Holy Spirit', not as a new grace, but as the 'revelation' and fulfilment of water baptism? It has to be admitted that his answer is less clear than that of his two predecessors. As we have seen, he asserts that water baptism is no more than a type', while the second baptism of tears is the truth'.³⁴ He even suggests, in words that I find disturbing, that not all the baptized receive Christ:

Let no one say, ' I have received and I possess Christ from the moment of holy baptism.' Such a person should recognize that it is not all the baptized that' receive Christ through baptism, but only those who are strong in faith and in perfect knowledge.³⁵

Perhaps Symeon's point here is that none of us should rest satisfied with a purely external and mechanical appeal to our baptism; we have to live out its effects. But in that case it would have been clearer if he had said, as Mark does: 'We receive Christ in baptism, but we only become aware of Him if we fulfil the commandments.'

In general, however, Symeon affirms categorically that baptism confers forgiveness of sins, total liberation from tyranny, and the indwelling presence of the Spirit. To use his own words:

'Descending from on high our Master through His own death destroyed the sentence of death against us. He entirely destroyed the condemnation that we inherited from the transgression of our first father, and through holy baptism He completely delivers us from it, regenerating and refashioning us; and He places us in this' world altogether free and no longer subject to the tyranny of the enemy, honouring us with our original power of voluntary choice.' ³⁶

'You renewed me through the holy baptism that fashioned me anew, adorning me with the Holy Spirit.' ³⁷

'Through divine baptism we become children and heirs of God, we are clothed with God Himself, we become His limbs, and we receive the Holy Spirit who comes to dwell within us, which is the royal seal.... All these things, and other things yet greater than these, are given to the baptized immediately from the moment of divine baptism.' ³⁸

After a careful assessment of the evidence, Archimandrite Athanasios Hatzopoulos concludes:

'When Symeon speaks of Baptism in the Spirit, he means the grace of the renewal of sacramental Baptism. It is the same grace of the Spirit that makes water-Baptism a sacrament, which in turn makes possible the gradual renewal of the image.... The grace man receives in Baptism, which promotes his spiritual growth, acts as a starting-point in which the end is present in the beginning.' ³⁹

In the last resort, then, Symeon concurs with Mark and Macarius in regarding 'baptism with the Holy Spirit' - the second baptism of tears - as the full realization of sacramental baptism, not as a new and different grace. But it has to be confessed that here Symeon constitutes a borderline case.

(iii) Like Macarius, but unlike Mark, the New Theologian speaks in some detail about the outward experiences that accompany a full conscious awareness of the Spirit. First of all, he lays great emphasis upon the gift of tears: the second baptism is precisely 'a baptism of tears'. Here he appeals explicitly to John Climacus. Secondly, he assigns a central place in his mystical theology to the vision of divine light. This light, so he believes, is God Himself; Christ may sometimes speak to us from the light, although His bodily form is not seen m the vision. Thirdly, he describes ecstatic phenomena which have obvious parallels in modem Pentecostalism:

'A person who has within him the light of the most Holy Spirit, unable to endure it, falls prostrate upon the ground; and he cries out and shouts in terror and great fear, for he sees and experiences something that surpasses nature, thought and imagination. He becomes as one whose entrails have been set ablaze: devoured by fire and unable to bear the scorching flame, he is beside himself, and he cannot control himself at all. And though he sheds unceasing tears that bring him some relief, the fire of his longing is kindled to yet fiercer flames. Then he weeps more abundantly and, washed by the flood of his tears, he shines as lightning with an- ever-increasing brilliance. When he is entirely aflame and becomes as light, then is fulfilled the saying, 'God is joined in unity with gods and is known by them.' ⁴⁰

It is not surprising that Symeon's writings are popular among contemporary Orthodox who have come under the influence of the charismatic movement.

In conclusion, then, we may claim to have found a large measure of convergence between our Patristic witnesses:

(i) All agree that it is possible to possess the Holy Spirit within oneself, without being conscious of His presence.

(ii) All agree that the 'second baptism' - the baptism of tears or 'baptism with the Holy Spirit' - is an extension and fulfilment of the first baptism bestowed sacramentally with water. 'Spirit baptism' is not to be seen as conferring an entirely new grace, different from that conferred through "water baptism'.

(iii) Some Eastern Christian authors, such as Mark the Monk, are reticent in describing the outward signs that may accompany conscious awareness of the Spirit. Others, such as Macarius and Symeon, enter into much fuller detail, referring in particular to the gift of tears, the vision of divine light and even on occasion to something that resembles the modem experience of speaking with tongues. But their allusions to this last are very infrequent.

Of these three points, the second will surely prove of crucial importance in any future Orthodox-Pentecostal dialogue.

Footnotes

1. Alexander A. Boddy, With Russian Pilgrims: being an account of a sojourn in the White See Monastery and a journey by the old trade route from the Arctic See to Moscow (London, no date [ca.1931), p.181.1 am grateful to Dr. David N. Collins, of the University of Leeds, for drawing my attention to this passage.

2. In the Image and Likeness of God (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood 1974), p.152.

3. Hymn 27:125-32.

4. See Kallistos Ware, Tradition and Personal Experience in Later Byzantine Theology', Eastern Churches Review 3:2 (1970), pp.131-41, especially pp. 135-9.

5. Practical and Theological Chapters 1:35-36.

6. Catechesis 21:139-40.

7. Sources Chretiennes 156 (Paris 1969), p. 151.

8. On Baptism (PG [= J.P. Migne, Patrotogia Graeca] 65:1028BC). It is somewhat surprising that Mark, while speaking at length about baptism, says very little about the eucharist.

9. On Baptism (,PG 65:996C, 1016D).

10. On those who think that they are made righteous by works 85 (PG 65:944A).

11. On Baptism (PG 65:993C).

12. On those who think that they are made righteous by works 56 (PG 65:937D).

13. On the Spiritual Law 12 (PG 65:908A).

14. On those who think that they are made righteous by works 57, 83 (PG 65:940A, 941 CD).

15. B43:6.

16. C28:3.

17. Great Letter (ed. Wemer Jaeger), p.236, line 8.

18. B43:6.

19. B 25:2, §§2-4.

20. H 26:23; 27:17; 32:4; 47:1; etc. •

21. See, for example, H 1-8,10.

22. H 25:9-10.

23. H20:1.

24. H 8:3.

25. C 15:4.

26. H 6:4.

27. Ladder, Step 4 (PG 88:725D).

28. Ladder, Step 7 (PG 88-.804B).

29. See his Ascetical Homilies 14 and 37 (35), tr. Holy Transfiguration Monastery (Boston 1984), pp.82-83, 174: cited in Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood 1995), p.101.

30. See note 3.

31. Catechesis 2:139-42.

32. Catechesis 26:63-66.

33. Practical and Theological Chapters 3:76.

34. See note 5.

35. Ethical Discourse 10:323-6.

36. Catechesis 5:381-6.

37. Thanksgiving 2:17-18.

38. Letter on Confession 3 (ed. Kari Holl), p.111, line 26 - p.112, line 6.

39. Athanasios Hatzopoulos, Two Outstanding Cases in Byzantine Spirituality (Thessaloniki 1991), pp.135,137.

40. Practical and Theological Chapters 3:21. The final phrase is from St. Gregory of Nazianzus.

Father Mansour Azar of the Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of Mount Lebanon, Lebanon, wrote his masters thesis on St. Symeon the New Theologian--an Orthodox theologian and saint who is distinctly centered on the rebirth experience and on the awareness of grace for every individual Christian life. This paper can give a helpful Orthodox view of one having a tangible and life-changing relationship with Jesus Christ empowered and directed by the Holy Spirit.

Link To Paper

A consistent critique of Orthodox charismatics is that we sometimes pray with non-Orthodox Christians. People point to decisions of the councils that prohibit praying with non-Orthodox, but that is not all the Orthodox Church has to say about ecumenical relations. This link takes you to The Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in America's "GUIDELINES FOR ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS IN ECUMENICAL RELATIONS". This will not convince those who do not wish to be convinced, but it does indicate the prevailing Orthodox opinion which recognizes Christians outside the Orthodox communion as brothers and sisters in Christ. Another helpful document is the 1995 Common Declaration by Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew I, especially the 4th and 6th paragraphs.

COMMON DECLARATION SIGNED IN THE VATICAN BY POPE JOHN PAUL II AND PATRIARCH BARTHOLOMEW

June 29, 1995

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing." (Eph 1:3)

1. We also thank God for this brotherly meeting of ours which took place in his name and with the firm intention of obeying his will that his disciples be one (Jn 17:21). Our meeting has followed other important events which have seen our Churches declare their desire to relegate the excommunications of the past to oblivion and to set out on the way to re-establishing full communion. Our venerable predecessors Athenagoras I and Paul VI became pilgrims to Jerusalem in order to meet in the Lord's name, precisely where the Lord, by his Death and Resurrection, brought humanity forgiveness and salvation. Subsequently, their meetings at the Phanar and in Rome have initiated this new tradition of fraternal visits in order to foster a true dialogue of charity and truth. This exchange of visits was repeated during the ministry of Patriarch Dimitrios, when, among other things, the theological dialogue was formally opened. Our new-found brotherhood in the name of the one Lord has led us to frank discussion, a dialogue that seeks understanding and unity.

2. This dialogue—through the Joint International Commission—has proved fruitful and has made substantial progress. A common sacramental conception of the Church has emerged, sustained and passed on in time by the apostolic succession. In our Churches, the apostolic succession is fundamental to the sanctification and unity of the People of God. Considering that in every local Church the mystery of divine love is realized and that this is how the Church of Christ shows forth its active presence in each one of them, the Joint Commission has been able to declare that our Churches recognize one another as Sister Churches, responsible together for safeguarding the one Church of God, in fidelity to the divine plan, and in an altogether special way with regard to unity.

We thank the Lord of the Church from the bottom of our hearts because these affirmations we have made together not only hasten the way to solving the existing difficulties, but henceforth enable Catholics and Orthodox to give a common witness of faith.

3. This is particularly appropriate on the eve of the third millennium when, 2,000 years after the birth of Christ, all Christians are preparing to make an examination of conscience on the reality of his proclamation of salvation in history and among men.

We will celebrate this Great Jubilee on our pilgrimage towards full unity and towards that blessed day, which we pray is not far off, when we will be able to share the same bread and the same cup, in the one Eucharist of the Lord.

Let us invite our faithful to make this spiritual pilgrimage together towards the Jubilee. Reflection, prayer, dialogue, reciprocal forgiveness and mutual fraternal love will bring us closer to the Lord and will help us better to understand his will for the Church and for humanity.

4. In this perspective we urge our faithful, Catholics and Orthodox, to reinforce the spirit of brotherhood which stems from the one Baptism and from participation in the sacramental life. In the course of history and in the more recent past, there have been attacks and acts of oppression on both sides. As we prepare, on this occasion, to ask the Lord for his great mercy, we invite all to forgive one another and to express a firm will that a new relationship of brotherhood and active collaboration will be established.

Such a spirit should encourage both Catholics and Orthodox, especially where they live side by side, to a more intense collaboration in the cultural, spiritual, pastoral, educational and social fields, avoiding any temptation to undue zeal for their own community to the disadvantage of the other. May the good of Christ's Church always prevail! Mutual support and the exchange of gifts can only make pastoral activity itself more effective and our witness to the Gospel we desire to proclaim more transparent.

5. We maintain that a more active and concerted collaboration will also facilitate the Church's influence in promoting peace and justice in situations of political or ethnic conflict. The Christian faith has unprecedented possibilities for solving humanity's tensions and enmity.

6. In meeting one another, the Pope of Rome and the Ecumenical Patriarch have prayed for the unity of all Christians. In their prayers, they have included all the baptized who are incorporated into Christ, and they have asked for an ever deeper fidelity to his Gospel for the various communities.

7. They bear in their heart a concern for all humanity, without any discrimination according to race, colour, language, ideology or religion.

They therefore encourage dialogue, not only between the Christian Churches, but also with the various religions, and above all, with those that are monotheistic.

All this doubtless represents a contribution and a presupposition for strengthening peace in the world, for which our Churches pray constantly. In this spirit, we declare, without hesitation, that we are in favour of harmony among peoples and their collaboration, especially in what concerns us most directly; we pray for the full realization of the European Union, without delay, and we hope that its borders will be extended to the East.

At the same time, we make an appeal that everyone will make a determined effort to solve the current burning problem of ecology, in order to avoid the great risk threatening the world today due to the abuse of resources that are God's gift.

May the Lord heal the wounds tormenting humanity today and hear our prayers and those of our faithful for peace in our Churches and in all the world.