(The Neo-Pentecostal Playbook?)
Setting the Scene
Well, there’s no soft-soaping this commentary and even after considering the title for some time, it still landed as it has. If it feels abrupt and even pejorative, then it’s probably because is brushing up against an entrenched posture that has been reinforced ad-nauseum for nigh on 40 years in the now Neo-Pentecostal genre of Christianity.
To set the record straight from the beginning, I am firmly and unabashedly a Proto-Pentecostal. The Pentecostal movement was birthed in a prayer saturated profound understanding of holiness, awe and the lucidity that God’s love and power work best in that context.
So, ‘where is this coming from?’, will no doubt be a question rising in some of you who are reading this?
I think it started for me as a very fresh newcomer to the world of the Pentecostal church. I had had some very powerful spiritual experiences in my life, including my Salvation during the Jesus People Revivals in the very early 70’s, but had never encountered a ‘Pentecostal’ person or theology until I was about 20 years of age.
To be crystal clear, I had no expectations or reservations at this stage about this movement, even though I was raised in a Methodist home. I remember, for instance, when I was told about ‘speaking in tongues’ and if that was an issue, I clearly recall saying; ‘it’s in the Bible right? Well, I guess it’s okay’. Such was the profound theological capacity of a recently returned backslider who wasn’t yet tainted by the soon to be discovered controversies about this movement that so many ‘mainstream’ Christians had already experienced.
The Early Years
My first encounter with what is referred to in spiritual gift nomenclature, was with Word of Knowledge and Prophecy. I was a 19-year-old attending a traditional denomination (Uniting Church of Australia) camp where a ‘charismatic’ church leader was speaking. I had no idea of what was to happen, all I knew was I had to get back to a ‘touch stone’ after my return to the Lord – that was the chapel in the hills where I was first saved. I knew the Holy Spirit was in that place, the same presence I experienced (not just felt) 8 years earlier.
As mentioned, the supernatural was always very real to me after my salvation experience had transfigured me as an 11-year-old, so ‘weird’ or ‘heresy’ were not yet in my repertoire. I will not recount the powerful three-way conversation that the Holy Spirit had with me and the minister at this retreat but it was utterly powerful and deeply personal, with zero room for manufacture or manipulation that has become so common place in the Neo-Pentecostal contexts.
Again, the supernatural God of the Bible was doing His thing, with only very little (yet important) involvement from His servants.
My journey into a more consistent engagement with the movement started in 1981 when I attended a Baptist Church in rural city and worked with a couple of guys who went to that church. It turned out they were ‘closet Pentes’ and were part of a small group run by a previous member of what was known then as the Apostolic Church. Their home group was open to worship, speaking in tongues and other gifts. Again, for me, all good, I wasn’t speaking in tongues, wasn’t even water baptised, and I was okay with that as a rough and very independent 20-year-old – because I had experienced big spiritual stuff. (the seeds of pride were sown).
Long story short, in time, I did get baptised, then I began to speak with other tongues or was it the other way around? Well, it wasn’t causal it was correlate. However, I do remember being encouraged in prophecy – not in a coercive or ‘how to’ manner, but more mentored in understanding the things of the spirit. When I did prophesy, I mimicked the environment I was instructed in… with a ‘thus saith the Lord’ motif – I know, let’s not go down that road.
I was then introduced into to the theology of another Biblical Gift set found in Ephesians, these gifts were people – offices that were gifted so to train and equip the saints to do the work of the ministry, not perform it for them – Apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. This too made perfect sense to this uninitiated, but not undiscerning soul. In fact, it was one of the doctrinal positions that made sense more readily. (of course, where this doctrine has gone in recent years in other circles since then has created a great deal of controversy and concern much of it warranted, ah, but I digress)
The wonderful gentlemen who mentored this difficult to manage lad was Richard Dougherty who discipled me in an open home relational way and focused on the Word of God, righteousness and holiness before anything else – Remember this, it is important.
The only obvious Pentecostal church in the town at that time was an Assembly of God Church, and it was ‘pumping n jumping’ and it was here I got my first taste of the culture at that time. I still remember enjoying the atmosphere, but the leader, the Pastor (nice enough guy) presented in what I was to learn, was the flavour of the time. He wore a flash suit, red (I was to learn a lot later) power tie and spoke relevantly, passionately and conversationally – different to the Methodist church I’d been part of. Yet even then (and it was partly due to my ‘cowboy’ nature) there was something off. Of course, a fledgeling 20-year-old acolyte with serious spiritual experience, but very limited Biblical literacy, saw whatever concerns I had, dismissed as a need for attitude adjustment and growth – fair call, I reluctantly thought at the time.
Not too much later, I ended up being part of an Apostolic Church plant in that town with my Mentor Richard. As part of the planting there was a commissioning in the parent church which happened to be in the LaTrobe Valley, some three hours away from our town. It was here I had my first real collective Pente prayer meeting – and boy, what an initiation! 50 plus people in the room pacing and yelling, praying loudly in English and other tongues. This was my first ‘weird out’. I thought I can’t hear myself think and it I was a little shell-shocked.
However, at the commissioning service following that prayer ‘assault’ (and on the day before my 21st birthday) I was prophesied over by an ordained Prophet in that parent church. The process and experience were very much in line with what I had previously encountered, powerful and confirming. I even remember saying to Richard, “what did you tell him about me?” He laughed and said not a thing. The Prophet must wait on God to get a word if there was one.
By-the-way, this prophetic word not only came to pass, but was the key to my recalibration and engagement with the Scriptures. To this day, 44 years later, it is still being fulfilled, such is the true gift exercised by true prophets.
Soon after a couple joined our fledgeling church plant where I was then introduced by an ex ‘Revival Centres’ (too long a side-bar here, but check out the movement if you need to – one of their big things was, if you don’t speak in tongues then you were not saved) church member to Kenneth Hagin and the Word of Faith movement. Again 21 years old, just listening to people the age of my parents enthusiastically exhorting me of my need to get this stuff into me. I did engage, not with hesitation, but, again, with the backdrop of some already powerful supernatural encounters to compare it to. Some of the teaching was very good and shifted me toward a more powerful trust in my Awesome Lord. Some teaching along with a culture and attitude whilst attractive, there was a seemingly incongruence, but I couldn’t put my finger on it then. This ‘power-broking’ authoritative culture of these actors was beginning to set my understanding of (what I was years later to label the) early Neo-Pentecostals ‘flavour’.
A thread that was common in nearly all these actors was (as mentioned) an air of authority that wasn’t so much demonstrated as demanded. Sometimes subtle, other times, quite direct. It was then into the late 1980’s and early 90’s hearing more of the, what I can now articulate as elitism. Language, posture and presentation that projected superiority – a ‘calling’ made them just a little better than others. Most of the time it was not coercive, though insisting. However, growing attitudes saw not only the insistence of titles and limited conversations, but statements that I still hear echoing.
‘Touch not the Lord’s anointed’, was a common refrain, and more than a few times, the genuine non-jesting statement of ‘If you’re wondering what the voice of God sounds like, it sounds a lot like mine.’
Whilst I reluctantly complied in those settings, there were still leaders in my space who did not carry such baggage and their genuine servant heart and passionate desire to know God more, is what kept me in this sheep fold.
What continued to feed and breed these postures was the crowd gatherings and platform style of church. Sure, churches always had pulpits and taught the Word from that place, but this was different. It was moving more from character to Charismatic. The style, the energy, relevant and contemporary atmosphere started not only shaping service, but the content delivered. Relevant, contemporary and contextualised teaching are all good things, as long as full Counsel is deployed. More and more it was shifting to entertaining, motivational and emotive speeches that were being delivered for reaction more than renewal. One such movement founder got to the point of standing on lecterns to get a reaction.
(I could regale you with some pretty disturbing stories of not only ministers in this movement that I heard about and bumped into, but others sat under and with. Honestly, some of the stuff you’d think I was making up, so suffice to say, the spectrum of behaviours was from laughably bizarre to down-right abusive and vile. So, for all our sakes, the ‘regaling’ can be for another time.)
It was here that I began to really see a demarcation between what I now refer to as Proto and Neo Pentecostals.
Now the platform was becoming a stage and the new altar, the Church was now more an event not a people. The atmosphere and performance were a priority, if we are going to ‘attract’ an audience.
Even then I was always fascinated that many of these same people spoke boldly against legalism and dismissed the Old Covenant, yet there entire setting was an Old Testament structure. An Altar presided over by a Priest, and the anointing was down the front with them in the new ‘synagogue’. Ah, but I digress – again!
Now these trappings my seem all external, and one could argue, it’s just setting and semantics, but it is some of the Old Testament attitudes not necessarily of Priests, but of Kings that begins to be imbibed and traded from in this burgeoning new genre of ‘church’. Is this a malicious intentional act? I really don’t think so, but control and influence have a very real capacity to corrupt the heart that seeks success over service. This, however, is a motif that is contrary to the New Covenant and the posture the Incarnated God invaded to create.
Remember this too!
The Kings and Priests Misnomer?
One of the other refrains often heard in the Neo-Pentecostal space, particularly in reinvented Apostolic doctrines is we are Kings and Priests. However, The New Testament’s clearest statement on this only appears once is in Revelation 1:6, which says Christ, “made us kings and priests,” but the “kings” wording sits as something of an outlier when read alongside the broader biblical pattern. Revelation 5:10 and 1 Peter 2:9 more naturally emphasise that believers are a kingdom of priests or a “royal priesthood,” which fits the stronger New Testament theme: not so much individual kingship, but a shared priestly identity before God – Keep this in mind too, as you progress.
This is the servant posture that The Christ, who is The only King, came to reinstate in His fallen creation, and His Church is that New Covenant Ark building community of servants.
Respect and humble preferring of one another is foundational in all New Covenant teaching. However, honour, is a tricky word, particularly when cultures reinvent language, now on an average of every two to five years. How is honour expressed in a Western First World Culture, in an ‘influencer’ marketplace? I’ll let you think of how those sycophantic responses are manifest in your world, but this should never be in the church, but it is now prevalent in many Neo-Pentecostal settings.
Ministers to or in churches are not just introduced when they are to speak; they are lauded and applauded onto their elevated crowd performing stages. They are often repeatedly referred to in glowing terms – all to help lift expectation and faith of the people, of course! They are given large ‘love offerings’ and profile boosting accolades as if the ‘gift’ they received from God is somehow their special, elite privilege and deserving of inscrutable affirmation – Just like the Kings of old!
Divine Despotism has long been the claim of monarchs through history. ‘Chosen’ and appointed by God and therefore the final authority that must be unquestionably heard and followed – sound familiar? Of course, ‘The Gift makes way for the man’ is another caveat invoked to dampen any doubts about character failings or secret behaviours in said ‘star’ of the platform.
I am going to borrow a Theological framing tool here, in speaking to this King posturing. The terms are magisterial and ministerial. To define in its proper context magisterial means “authoritative” or “ruling,” while ministerial means “serving” or “subordinate.” In practice, the distinction asks whether something stands above Scripture and governs it, or whether it serves Scripture and helps explain it… Hmmm, I’ll let you, the reader, ponder on how certain actors in your context conduct themselves in not merely handling Divine Counsel, but where they stand in relationship to it. Jesus will have a bit to say about that as we progress.
The New Hyper-Grace and The King David Caveat
Add to this new culture of honour, the recently emerged hyper-grace phenomenon. I won’t try and describe it here, suffice to say all behaviour can be ‘excused’ if not forgiven and repeat offence, not by maturing fledgling acolytes but Priests of God, can all be waived, especially if the actor in question is high-profile, well connected and a truly big ‘influencer’.
Now enter the favourite Old Testament hero for the potentially fallen minister of God. The icon of ministry rescue and restoration – King David
To reference an old and well-worn sermon quip. ‘King David didn’t sin when he saw Bathsheba – he sinned when he got the binoculars.’
Anyway, David’s sin with Bathsheba begins when he sees her bathing. Now baths where on house roof tops to ensure privacy, but King David had two issues this day. One, an elite vantage point in his elevated residence afforded him not for indulgence but defence. Two, he was not serving his kingdom in battle, but exempting himself, not for rest, but relaxation – a posture of privilege and simultaneously, one of spiritual vulnerability.
David takes her to himself, and commits adultery, even though she is the wife of Uriah the Hittite – He knowingly does this and thinks his coerced sexual tryst will go unnoticed. When Bathsheba becomes pregnant, this sin compounds.
David tries to cover up the sin by bringing Uriah home from the battlefield, but his faithful righteous warrior servant of the kingdom will not even visit his wife to enjoy a right that David had stolen from him. It gets even worse! When that fails, he arranges Uriah’s death in battle. The final egregious insult is after he has had Uriah murdered, David takes Bathsheba as his wife, but the act deeply displeases the Lord.
Could it get worse? Indeed in could! David unswervingly continues, unapologetic for this serious of shocking crimes – thinking he got away with the entire thing – not least the passive sexual violence against this woman. Whilst she did not ‘cry out’, the power imbalance and being ‘brought’ to David (a King who has the final authority) a context that indicates a less than consensual setting. There is no indication of contrition for the act rather a doubling down on maliciously self-preserving and in more modern nuance, ‘brand managing’ behaviour that took adultery to murder.
Now, I’m going to stop here and ask you to seriously reflect on what you just read. Maybe for the first time it is been laid out for you the utter shocking crimes that have been perpetrated here. Crimes that are almost always ‘brushed over’ by pulpiteers in their rush to get to the ‘redemptive’ bit of this story – the bit we all so love to hear – especially if we are looking for a cover for our conduct.
It is only until God nudges the prophet (What I euphemistically call ‘Covenant Watch Dogs’) Nathan to confront David by telling him a parable about a rich man who steals a poor man’s only lamb. It is worthwhile to note that God brought David back to his ‘First Love’ setting – the shepherd’s heart after God that was there in the beginning, the heart that set him apart from all others, but had been corrupted by fame, comfort, accolade and elitism reinforcing honour.
When David condemns the man in the story, Nathan declares, “You are the man!” and exposes David’s abuse of power, his taking of Uriah’s wife, and his murder of Uriah. It is here that David now repents – not just sorrow for being called out, but his heart is awakened again to the deep grief he has caused. He admits, “I have sinned against the Lord,” (this is something Saul, a less of sinner, would not do – admit error and genuinely seek forgiveness and repent) Nathan tells him that God has taken away his sin, though serious consequences will still follow for David’s house (Galatians 6:7 ‘God will not be mocked – whatever a man sows that will he reap’) and reap he did.
Tragically, it is not just David who will suffer, but as with all toxic leadership, the fall out is significant and far reaching.
One devastating consequence becomes visible later in David’s family through the rape (malicious sexual violence) of Tamar, Absalom’s sister, by Amnon. Absalom does not speak to Amnon openly about it, but he hates him deeply because of what he did to Tamar. That silent hatred becomes part of the wider collapse of David’s household, showing how David’s earlier sin spread pain and disorder through his family.
When open rape happens in his family, David is not repulsed, appalled and acts decisively, no! Why? Because he has done a similar thing – lusted for something that wasn’t his, exercised power and took it – and it’s not grace being extended to Amnon it’s leniency (an excusing not requiring accountability) – a leniency that tacitly rewards the perpetrator and re-wounds the victim. Tamar was utterly lost in all this.
Remember this well, as we proceed.
- When David heard what Amnon had done, he was very angry, but he did not punish Amnon.
- The biblical text records no word of comfort, justice, or discipline from David toward Tamar or Amnon.
- David’s inaction is explicitly noted as a key factor: Absalom hated Amnon deeply and, because David took no steps to hold Amnon accountable, Absalom later waited two years and killed Amnon himself and then the chaos really begins.
We’ll end the wicked ripple effect there, but even that snapshot of egregious harms should make any follower of Christ reel with deep grief and disgust, but that isn’t the way we remember King David, particularly in the Neo-Pentecostal world. No, the above account is rarely visited. What is incessantly recounted is the refrain ‘A man after God’s heart’ and that God restored him!
That is now the lens that obscures. if not erases, these almost incalculable crimes.
The Fallen Return?
So, how does all this revisiting of David’s story inform conduct and discipline in the Modern church – particularly the Neo-Pentecostal one?
We have lost count in recent decades of the moral, ethical and criminal behaviour of many church leaders, most – if not all, in the Neo-Pentecostal Church. The fall is a tragedy and egregious blight on the Bride of Christ, but yes, His Blood and grace can forgive the truly penitent and bring them back into fellowship and right relationship with God, on that there is no dispute.
The Restitution dynamic of repentance can also go a long way to healing and restoring those wounded by the actions of these so-called ‘Lord’s Anointed’, but to put these actors back into leadership is to invite similar scenarios to the above, which we have seen very recently in just one prominent Neo-Pentecostal movement. Predator’s ‘repenting’ without restitution and undiscerning hyper-grace peddlers inadvertently facilitating re-harming of already wounded sheep in their flock.
One very prominent actor is this shocking now ‘outed’ debacle when issuing a statement of a quasi ‘apology,’ uttered that perhaps one of his failings was that he showed ‘too much grace’. Again, softening accountability and I would argue holding God’s precious resource culpable for his repeated covering up of toxic behaviours.
If these perpetrators truly repent (which includes all five ‘R’s of Repentance) can these people serve, have fellowship and give – yes, but they are no longer fit to be ‘over’ people and have influence in their lives, this is forfeited for both their sake and the sake of the Body of Christ. This is where the King David Caveat is invoked by perpetrators who say they have repented and believe they and their gift need to be ‘reinstated’ as the gift cannot be revoked (peddling a misuse of Romans 12) and that the ‘resource’ will be a terrible waste if not restored.
This is a toxic narrative that must be excised, as I believe Jesus The Christ taught.
Enter The King – The True Magisterial
This King’s incarnation alone should be more than enough to fully understand what true leadership and priesthood should look like. (Philippians 2:6) If one just sits with this for a short moment, the model and manifestation are unimpeachable and prescriptive pre-requisites for those wanting to minister.
Yet instruction was to follow. Our Lord’s most renowned Sermon on the Mount should be our lens in all these deliberations. When the Author and Perfector of our Faith takes the seriousness of sin out of the arena of action and even words, and lands it in the realm of thought, then we have a new clear standard of what Kingdom conduct will look like.
You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28 NKJV)
Having imbibed that apparent impossibility, at the very least such errors we catalogued above are inconceivable for a person claiming not only to be a Christian, but a Leader in Christ’s Kingdom.
Yet, if this inner adultery dare migrate into the arena of behaviour and now the internal personal sin infects another’s body, soul and spirit, then the solution prescribed, again, by Jesus Christ – God incarnate, is uncompromisingly clear.
If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. (One might add if one’s penis causes you to sin then….)
King David did not have this command, but we do.
Is this austere? Yes, because it is loudly projecting again the wrecking ball that sin is to God’s creation – Then it is instructing us that GRACE is a power construct to act as a safety net to help us grow and be transformed to conform with the image of God’s Son, but we must not make it a hammock into which we recline to be comfortable with our errors – a posture I believe the ‘untouchable anointed’ King David had adopted.
The resources given to a person when they repent and are saved is immense – Again, nothing less than the Third Person of the Trinity entering into your life. His access and capacity to equip you is only limited by your decisions to follow Him or follow your M.U.S.T do’s (Mood, Urge, Symptom, and Tastes). One very significant thing Salvation does is give you back your Agency – the ability to engage fully with best practice, not be a slave to those MUST’s. It is still choice, always. To quote Sy Rogers; “Jesus is not may Lord once – He is made Lord in every decision we make every day.” When we stop looking to best-practice and stop seeking to know and grow, then what are we looking to instead?
The Law of Liberty
Arguably, the Law of Liberty commissions a far greater expectancy on us than the legislative requirements of the Old Covenant. Referencing again this magnificent Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5 verse 20, we can easily miss a warning from the Author of the New Covenant and our Faith – “For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.”
The expectation on those who claim Christ, who have the Holy Spirit living in them, is significantly higher. To repeat, your agency has been restored, powerfully, and your capacity to choose, demonstrate and make manifest best is now fully equipped. Along with that, God promised that you would not be tempted by Him, or be tempted beyond your capacity to deal with it… This is grace empowering, not exempting.
When you don’t pluck out your eye, but merely triage, then you continue to enable sin to have its way (Genesis 4:7) If your hand and eye cause you to sin, you should cut and pluck it out – Maimed until glory.
Harsh? Only if you don’t understand the utterly toxic nature of the poison that is sin in you. But our SAVIOUR does! This poison – this sin – is so devastating that it required God Himself to deal with it. This is beyond serious, it’s.. it’s.. there are no words! But we in our new perverted hyper-grace context can ‘wink at it’ and then ‘plead the blood’ with a newly found, but completely illegitimate, impunity.
At the very least those in leadership who have so grieved the Kingdom by their sinful conduct must amputate their position so they can then truly reengage as servants. Those who merely triage and reinstate are culpable on many levels and a reckoning with the HOLY God will not bode well.
The Messiah – The ONLY true King – came to recalibrate what real authority, power and leadership looked like. We have examples in the Old Testament of good and godly people who truly knew God, but if positions of influence was their station they had to be recalibrated away from the trappings that King David entered into. Trappings that God warned Isreal about when they wanted to have a proxy King instead of God.
Job – Joseph – Daniel – Isaiah.
All these souls were in positions of great influence, but you will note, none of them became the ‘final authority’. For example, Joseph and Daniel were essentially bureaucrats, who were vessels for Divine resourcing and capacity, but this always pointed back to their real KING. They all had to be humbled in various ways so that that could operate in the most profound capacity and authority, without becoming a causality of their gift, calling and subsequent influence these Kingdom resources produce.
Epilogue
Our Lord and Saviour incarnates not only to ‘tell us’ this but demonstrate how these Disciples, these Ambassadors of another Kingdom are to operate.
And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called ‘benefactors.’ But not so among you; on the contrary, he who is greatest among you, let him be as the younger, and he who governs as he who serves. For who is greater, he who sits at the table, or he who serves? Is it not he who sits at the table? Yet I am among you as the One who serves. (Luke 22:25-27 NKJV)
Surrender – Sacrifice – Serve
However, if we continue outside this new posture and seek to be over others, and use the irrevocably deployed gifts of God in this impenitent space, these are the ones Jesus Christ Parabolically outlined in story of the 10 Virgins and the hapless invited guest at the Great wedding feast, and of course those patently labelled in Matthew 7:21-23
“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
… The refrain in all settings is, depart from me for I don’t know you.
I’ll pose the question again; can these fallen leaders be restored to relationship and fellowship if they have truly repented. The answer God’s sanctifying grace declares is, yes! Why, because that true repentance and the revelation of the havoc their sin has wreaked and a full embrace of the new pursuit of holiness, will ensure opportunities for such will never wanted to be revisited again – Their new posture of this repentant soul now is to serve, not lead.
Shane Varcoe - Disciplesplanet