On Having a Personal Pentecost

In the early 1970s into the mid-1990s, Charismatic Renewal was a movement that changed my life and had a powerful influence on the Episcopal Church. The teaching about and invitation to experiencing a personal Pentecost was the core thread that drove this renewal not only for the Episcopal Church, but for other mainline churches, and the Roman Catholic Church. It also helped reinvigorate many Pentecostal Denominations, many of whose members felt like second class people in their own churches because they had not spoken in tongues. This was a result of the common belief among Pentecostals that speaking in tongues even only once was the sign of the Spirit’s anointing. So, no teaching was done on how to open to the anointing and how to receive it. There was also more emphasis on speaking in tongues than the anointing itself or the other gifts of the Spirit. Charismatic teachers in the mainline like Dennis Bennett and Terry Fullam changed all this. Ironically, many Pentecostals had to come to mainline renewal folks because we were willing to offer and encourage them in receiving the release of the Spirit. This was also a wonderful time of ecumenical engagements and events that excitedly shared this life in the Spirit. Often thousands of believers gathered for these Holy Spirit Conferences. I had the honor of teaching at some of these. Over the years, I have been asked whatever happened to the movement. I think the answer lies is the core teaching of the movement that for several reasons has gotten lost. After my encounter with the renewal of the holy Spirit, I was invited by Terry Fullam to attend several of his teaching events. I listened and learned. His key teaching was “Having a Personal Pentecost.” I saw literally hundreds of believers come forward at the end of his teaching when invited for prayers for the anointing of the Holy Spirit. This was often accompanied by physical and emotional healing. There were also manifestations of other spiritual gifts like those mentioned by Paul in First Corinthians. After the teaching, I would join the prayer team as we prayer for those who came forward. This would include an invitation to open themselves to the Holy Spirit. Then we would invite the Holy Spirit to come upon the person. This was accompanied by laying on of hands and followed by various anointings. This was often accompanied by folks speaking in tongues. For many this was a powerful experience with much joy. For others it was a quieter experience with less emotional aspects, but something happened to almost everyone who came forward for prayer. Like the day of Pentecost, believers touched by the Spirit were often eager to share their experience with others. This was the core dynamic of the movement. What was the basis of this teaching? Of course, it involved the second chapter of Acts with the story of the early disciples experiencing what Jesus had promised them after his resurrect. “But stay in Jerusalem until you have received power from on high, the promise of the Father. (The theme of the promise of the father is a great bible study found in both the Old and New Testament.) Terry would then share how the Spirit opened the Church to non-Jewish believers such as those in Samaria who had through Philip’s ministry “only received baptism with water for the spirit had not yet fallen on any of them.” So, the Apostles sent Peter and John to pray for these new believers, and they too received the Spirit as the first disciples at Pentecost. Importantly, Terry would share Peter arriving at Cornelius’ household (by divine invitation) and as he shared about Jesus’ resurrection, they too received the Holy Spirit. The followers of the way who had accompanied Peter were astonished that the gentiles had received the Holy Spirit just as they had. So, Peter seeing this proceeded to baptize these new believers because the Spirit’s anointing had also fallen on the gentiles as it did to the followers at Pentecost. Peter would have to explain this later to the followers in Jerusalem. In the New Testament, adult converts would receive baptism with water for repentance (as with John the Baptist) and were expected to receive the Holy Spirit’s power for witness and ministry. There were other passages too from Paul’s letters on the gifts and fruit of the Holy Spirt. But the core teaching was that Pentecost was normative for all Christians. In those days, this was commonly called “the Baptism in the Holy Spirit” but Terry and my other mentors preferred the term either of “the Anointing of the Spirit” or Dennis Bennett’s preferred “Release of the Holy Spirit.” This was to underscore the Apostolic teaching that people became Christians through the Spirit’s work in conversion to Jesus and baptism as the sign or sacrament of this new life. As Terry would say, “all Christians receive the Holy Spirit in their baptism, but it is clear that while they had received the Holy Spirit, they had yet to receive the Holy Spirit’s power.” I find this a constant truth. All Christians have the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit doesn’t have all Christians. Pastorally and evangelically, the word “release” is a good one to describe this anointing. To my surprise, I was called to be Rector of St. Luke’s in Seattle and became the second successor to Dennis Bennett. I inherited a weekly evangelistic service held every Wednesday night. It was advertised by word of mouth and on the local Christian radio station. Every week we had worship, scriptural teaching, a lay witness, and an invitation to come forward and receive prayer from members of our team. We never had less than five come forward and often more than 20. We sometimes had special guest speakers, and these would bring a much larger attendance. On two occasions, Brennan Manning spoke, and the church was packed with visitors many Catholics. What I want to hold up is how many nominal mainline Christians came forward seeking something more to their life in Christ. We also prayed for literally hundreds of Pentecostals who had not spoken in tongues and felt like failures. In seven years, I only had one such person who did not end the prayers by speaking in tongues. All they needed was an example of this and encouragement to try. The one person who did not speak in tongues told me afterward that she wanted the anointing but refused to speak in tongues because her pastor had told her that this didn’t happen today and that when it seemed to, it was a work of the Satan. She told me that no matter what she experienced, she refused to open her mouth and speak. Who could blame her? I should also mention that after some people spoke in tongues, they would comment something like “so that’s it?” Speaking in tongues was not always a dramatic emotional experience. Many who responded this way would follow up by saying that they expected to go into some sort of trance and lose control. We would assure them that the Holy Spirit works with and through them and never takes control over them. It is a fact that demonic possession works the other way. Many times, we saw those who had been afflicted by evil receive what can only be called deliverance. Well, it is not only in the Bible but is also a common experience for missionaries in pagan and spiritualists cultures. And Seattle was the most non-Christian place in America with all kinds of cults. How was deliverance possible? “On the Cross, Jesus had defeated the principalities and powers of darkness.” Christus Victor is the atonement theology of Holy Spirit people. Over the years, I have met hundreds of Episcopalians, or former members, who had been touched during that time. What happened to this movement? Many explain that like any movement, it just ran its course. Others believe that the Holy Spirit stopped giving this anointing and that discipleship, spiritual growth, and service are more important. I would simply point out what Dennis told me on several occasions. He said that “if the Spirit filled folks ever stopped teaching the release of the Spirit manifest with the gift of tongues and other spiritual manifestations, the movement would diminish. What are we sharing across the Episcopal Church this Pentecost? We are holding up Pride month and our need to be inclusive of all people. Some are celebrating “the birthday of the church” wearing red or holding ballons. Are we sharing the simple belief that we Pentecost is normative to the faith? Mostly what I hear from clergy is that all received the Holy Spirit in baptism, but nothing further or deeper is ever taught or offered. Lastly, let me mention that the movement hasn’t ended. It continues throughout world-wide Anglicanism especially in fast growing places such as Africa and Asia. As for us Episcopalians and ACNA members, it seems that we are just too busy with other things. How about you? Have you experienced a personal Pentecost? If you have, are you encouraging others to open themselves to the reality of the Spirit’s anointing?

Every Member a Minister

The Protestant Reformation had three essential principles. The first, of course, was “Sola Scriptura,” the Holy Scriptures alone as the basis of final authority in matters of faith. The second was that “we are saved by Grace and not by our works.” The third though seldom mentioned today was “the priesthood of all believers.” In this blog, I will be focusing our attention on the third. It was common during the charismatic renewal to see congregations rediscovering the experience of empowerment for ministry through the Holy Spirit. When it did, it was often called “every member a minister.” This is a contemporary way to refer to the priesthood of all believers. Paul taught that all believers receive the gift of the spirit, and the spirit empowers us for ministry. He urged new converts to “earnestly desire the spiritual gifts.” Congregations where this teaching took root would often list on their bulletin cover the various clergy who served but would add something like “Ministers – all members.” During the spiritual renewal movement of the 70s and 80s, this rediscovery of the biblical concept that all Christians were given gifts of the Spirit or charisms for ministry had a powerful impact on individual members and the corporate life of congregations. There was teaching on the gifts of the Spirit and therefore, ministry by laity in a wide range of areas. This is a topic worth revisiting because it is so explicitly biblical yet today, we seem to have returned to the wrong concept that the clergy minister to the members who act like either an audience or customers. We seem to accept that normally about 20% of church members are seriously engaged in ministry while the other 80% are recipients of ministry. This is probably the fallback position of the Constantinian Church. But for a season, this changed in many congregations. I had the privilege of observing several congregations that had taken on this “every member a minister” concept and to see the results. The first was that the number of organized ministries of a congregation expanded with empowered lay leaders responding to more and more opportunities for ministry to others both inside and outside the congregation. Instead of a handful of lay members participating in various established ministries such as lay readers and altar guild members, there were many ministries of prayer, study, and service. In my congregation in Seattle, our small group fellowships went from seven groups to over twenty in one year! We called these “Growth Groups” and their purpose was to aid members in becoming deeper followers of Christ and agents of the Church’s ministry. As the number of groups grew so did the whole congregation. At the end of that year St. Luke’s that had been a long-standing “light house renewal church” led by Dennis Bennett, grew to its largest ever. Outreach ministries also blossomed out of this basic formation ministry and in many congregations with a remarkable variety of caring activities. Many parishes began more overt evangelistic ministries, and some became known as centers for physical and emotional healing. All these where primarily lay led. It is safe to say that every member a minister never really penetrated that far into most Episcopal congregations, but before the renewal movement, few lay members were involved in prayer ministry and teaching others. Today, many Episcopal Congregations have followed the example and have members available to pray for others following communion for example. This was almost unheard of before 1970. Ministry was seen as the work of the clergy. Of course, this is simply clericalism. I observed congregations where 50% of members had become active in ministry. And an extraordinary result of this involved stewardship. In a typical congregation then and now 20 to 30% of the members give 70 to 80% of the donations received. In renewal parishes the number was often that 50 to 70% of the members gave a tithe (10%) to their congregations which helped fund many new ministry initiatives. Bishop Payne, who I worked with for 9 years, did not much care for charismatic renewal, but he often acknowledged those affected by it for their extraordinary giving. Members were often supported in this by Spiritual Gift Inventories that helped them discover areas of giftedness. With all these obvious benefits of such teaching, it is hard to understand why this emphasis has almost completely disappeared. So too has almost all teaching about the person and work of the Holy Spirit. These are topics I will pursue in future blogs. For now, let me remind us of the essential New Testament view of the Spirit: First, the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost for the evangelization of the world. Second, the Holy Spirit teaches and guides us into all truth especially about Jesus. Third, the Spirit is given to sanctify us, making us holy and imparting to us the “fruit of the Spirit.” Fourth, the Spirit gives gifts of ministry to all the baptized. Fifth, the Holy Spirit is the source of guidance for us. Bishop Taylor’s great book “The Go-Between God” underscores the work of the Holy Spirit for all Christians. It is still relevant today. In summary, the Holy Spirit is the experience of God in the present moment both for our life in Christ and for carrying out Christ’s ministry in our world. I should mention two common abuses in the emphasis on the work and gifts of the Spirit. The first was the tendency of some “spirit-filled” members to act judgmentally toward those without a dramatic experience of the Spirit. The second was for some “spirit filled” folks to look at various gifts as a series of spiritual merit badges. Despite these exaggerations and misuses, it is still a fundamental teaching of the scriptures that God’s people are to be “a royal priesthood, a holy nation to all others. Remember that the work of the Holy Spirit is both in our identity, “the Spirit bears witness to our Spirit that we are the Children of God,” and in our empowerment for ministry. The Holy Spirit empowers our mission of witness to Christ and to serve and care of all people. It is also the Spirit who empowers us to overcome the struggles of this world, making us victors over whatever troubles and pain we experience in this life. Should we return to a greater emphasis on the Holy Spirit and the Spirit’s empowerment of all Christians for ministry? Obviously, we should. It is the clear teaching of scripture. Will we? That remains to be seen. What is clear for the Episcopal Church is that without this work of the Spirit, we will continue to decline. Meanwhile let us continue to pray, “Come Holy Spirit and kindle in our hearts the fire of your love!” As the Prayer Book says, “For without you we are unable to please you.” For the gift of the Holy Spirit is the first fruit of the resurrection in us. Personally, I believe we have stopped teaching on these things because a new wave of clericalism has taken over much of the Church often expressed by clergy wanting laity to do what we think is important. Whatever the reason, it remains true that we sow what we reap. For clergy this means we reap what we preach and teach. If we preach Christian obligations and duties, we reap a religion of works. If we preach life in the Holy Spirit, we reap the spiritual imbued life and mission of all God’s people.

Addressing Our Statistics

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more Addressing Our Statistics With a Solid Plan If We Do What We Always Did, We Will Get What We Always Got Canon Robert Lewis In this second blog on addressing the statistics of decline released at the last House of Bishops meeting, we will look at some of the solutions that can turn the downward trend. Some of these are solutions discussed among the Bishops and I have added a few of my own suggestions. Recruit our immigrant neighbors - Episcopal church decline could immediately reverse if we were able to recruit 10% of those who are Anglicans from other countries now residing in the USA.(There seems to be a language issue with them knowing that "Episcopal" is Anglican in the USA) Seek those who have been wounded by the church - in the past few years, our greatest membership gains have been from those who were wounded in other faith traditions and now see the Episcopal Church as "safe". (This means divorced folks, LGBTQ, and immigrant groups). While that has been the dominant group of those joining from other faiths, it is imperative that we also step up our own evangelistic witness to those who have never considered themselves Christian. Commit to raising up an entrepreneurial priesthood. Seminaries have continued with the same model of classical preparation. Now in theory, they are learning the essentials of ministry, but praxis and theory are not the same thing. We have trained clergy in the past to be village chaplains. That model has continually yielded family and pastoral sized congregations - the demographic that is struggling the most. Some of our most successful clergy have learned from the business world how to engage people where they are. If clergy are waiting for our newest would-be parishioners to darken the doorstep, they need to understand that will yield a very limited result. The old adage “if we do what we always did, we will get what we always got” rings true here. It seems that every few General Conventions, there is legislation that adds to the training hours of clergy, usually for risk management or diversity issues. Unless we can teach new clergy an entrepreneurial model, we will get what we always got. (yet no one is suggesting that kind of training) Clergy committed to spending time with unchurched people. Our models show that we are simply moving market share and not resulting in new Christians. Our number of adult baptisms proves this point. I once heard that 10% of clergy hours should be used meeting people out in the world. I think 15% is more realistic in this age. All decline numbers seem to be a harbinger of death. But not if we do something with the information we have!. Too often we continue to do the same things and wonder why the leadership at the national or diocesan level does not do something to address the decline. The fact is that all of these numbers are reversible, but that starts at the local parish level with people determined to create something new, instead of simply maintaining the old. A colleague shared with me this model: This is the very picture of reforming the status quo. It does not interrupt the “old Guard” who are the financial mainstays, but it does recognize that a new order has to be created. The “Emergent System” recognizes that the cliff is approaching, and goes the work of imagining a new order, while still shepherding the old one to a good and holy death. One Illustration of this model is in 19th Century entrepreneur Cornelius Vanderbilt. After coming to this country as an immigrant, he slowly built a shipping empire. When it seemed that railroads were the new up and coming model, he slowly converted his shipping assets into rail assets. The process of arresting decline is no different than restoring a classic automobile. Although there is more work the longer the decline has happened, and a strategy needs to be developed, there is nothing hopeless except giving up. Canon Robert+

 

New Statistics Tell a Dire Story

This is the first of three guest blogs from my colleague and friend Canon Robert Lewis.

 In my eighteen years of parish ministry, I have had a bit of an eye roll every time new statistics come out. Don’t get me wrong, I think we all need markers of measurement to see what our church is doing well, and where we need to improve. I was not ready to receive the last set of numbers that I received from my bishop. At the House of Bishops meeting in March, the bishops gathered received some truly telling statistics that I will unpack and propose what I think we need to consider to address the issues:

First, what does Sunday look like in the Episcopal Church right now? The last decade has been rather disastrous. In 2014, our in person average Sunday attendance (ASA) was 604,938. A decade later, the latest statistics place it at 398,887. Over a third (34%) of those regularly worshipping with us ten years ago were lost to death, indifference, or simply got out of the “church habit’ during the COVID-era lockdowns.

Those same lockdowns gave us a new metric which really has too little data to be an effective tool - online average Sunday attendance. To be clear, one only needs to watch a portion of the service online in order to be counted. For 2024, 113,698 appear to have worshipped online as opposed to in-person. I do not wish to disparage this, since for the first time in the history of the Church, most congregations are finding ways to reach outside of their four walls and bring their services to living rooms and dens across the world. The congregation I serve even has those who worship online from other states and still provide needed pledge dollars for the work of the parish. The real question is, what does this metric really measure - and I’m not sure we can even figure that out for a few more years.

Next, let’s consider Easter attendance. In 2014, 1.37 million worshippers joined in our celebrations of the risen Jesus. Ten years later that number had fallen to 859,241 (a 37% decline). It would seem as we dip further into a post-Christendom culture, even the tradition of twice yearly attendance in church for those with the most marginal of commitments is failing.

I am among others who have noticed that the great number of pastoral sized parishes that dotted rural and county seat towns all over America have shrunk to the point where they can no longer retain one full-time clergy presence. In fact, the number of congregations that are now under 50 on an average Sunday has increased dramatically. In 2014, those congregations numbered 2,489. As of last year, that number had climbed to 3,102 (an increase of 613 congregations. Those same congregations have a number of options to weigh ; part-time coverage, licensed lay ministry leadership, long term supply - none of those options really has a statistical bent on growth. In fact one of the most trustworthy ways of ensuring some stability is a full time resident priest who commits to stay for a long tenure. With the failing ability of smaller churches to attract, call, and retain a capable rector, the numbers will get only worse.

But what about our larger congregations? For many years, I had heard that there was a law of outward tendency. Smaller churches would get smaller and larger ones would tend to grow. The new statistics really are punching a hole in that theory. In congregations reporting over 200 on an average Sunday, the decline is downright shocking. In 2014, there were 679 worshipping communities that had over 200. By 2024, that number dropped to 291.

So what is it, money problems? Hardly. The money is there, but it is in some limiting pockets. In 2014, the total dollar amount of endowments throughout the church was $4.2 Billion. That increased to $7.9 Billion by the close of 2024. That figure does not include Trinity Wall Street, as their holdings in Manhattan properties would seriously skew the sample. But 20% of those funds are controlled by only 32 worshipping communities. In a religious environment like the Episcopal church, this is troubling simply because the funds are likely to remain at the parish level while more financially strapped congregations may fail.

When we look at pledge giving units, it is important to realize that for every one pledge unit that is lost to death, 5-7 are needed among the Gen X and younger crowd to replace the same amount given by older generations. It is not true that younger persons are less likely to give, it is that they cannot give the same amounts as in previous generations with guaranteed pensions and employer absorbed health care. The game has changed. It used to be said that a congregation needed around 100 pledge units (on average) to support a full-time rector with benefits, care for a building and grounds, and have some programs. Now, that number of pledge units will have to be raised to account for the lack of younger parishioners' ability to give at the same levels.

What about leadership? This too is not spread evenly. There are currently 17,777 clergy in good standing, with active priests numbering 5,213. There are roughly around 7,000 congregations in TEC, so that illustrates the shortage. There are 1,236 inactive priests under 72. This means there are those who could serve a community but cannot or will not move to those places where a new cleric is needed. Explanations are manifold: spousal employment opportunities, good schools for children, or even being in a mortgaged property with a much lower rate than one could acquire if he or she moved to a new location. As with finances, leadership is unevenly distributed. Most of those inactive clergy are east of the Mississippi River.

Now let's look at how that shortage is split across full-time - Part-time lines. For every seven parishes seeking a part time priest, there is only one candidate looking for a call. Small parishes are becoming warden-led and recruiting supply clergy, if they are available. This entrenches the family-parish dynamics even further. Such congregations will, in coming years, look at a priest as a hired hand, and not a member of the community. For every three parishes seeking a full-time call, there is only one candidate looking for a call. If a vestry is blessed with resources, they may decide to hire a recruiter or "headhunter" to seek out candidates in rural communities to consider being on a slate of candidates for larger urban calls.

There is a great disparity of resources in our church, particularly between urban parishes and rural ones. Most buildings are underused and with high maintenance costs. Most have over $200K in deferred maintenance costs. Gifted clergy are staying out east instead of considering calls in the western US where there are more calls available.

In my next blog, I will address some potential solutions, and in the third (and last) blog in this series, will also suggest returning to time-tested, and mostly forgotten model in Anglican history that worked well. Now other non-Anglicans are beating us to it!

Canon Robert+