Skip to main content

What's the difference between a Pentecostalist and a Unitarian?

No, it's not a joke, but a theological reflection.

This just sparked off from reading a Unitarian prayer calling on 'the Spirit of Life to be with us.' It's the kind of phrase I would often say in a prayer too.

But how much do we mean this? It seems to me that one of the characteristics of the Spirit, as expressed in the Christian tradition, is that it 'blows where it will.' The Spirit has a wild, dangerous side. It can push us in uncomfortable directions, transform us, knock us down.

So what is the difference between what a Pentecostalist means by the Spirit, and what a Unitarian means?

It seems to me that we Unitarians are in daner of domesticating the spirit. Our soft humanism/minimalist theism tends to see the Spirit as something safe and comfortable. No doubt it can be, but how would we feel if the Spirit started pushing us out of our comfort zones?

Perhaps a relevant theological distinction is not whether one says 'God/Spirit' or not, but rather whether one believes that the Spirit/God is controllable or not. Is the Spirit just a projection, an idea, a metaphor for our inner selves? Well to a great extent I do believe the Spirit is those things. But is the Spirit then incapable of of being anything but a mirror of my own surface-level thoughts and feelings? No, I don't believe that. I believe the Spirit transforms. I believe the Spirit of Life, if we are truly open to her, can no more be controlled than the wind.

So I think the Pentecostalist tradition, at its best, has a greater grasp on the truly wild nature of the Spirit, and we need to learn that.

(By the way, I am aware that Pentecostal worship can be just as predictable as any other way of worshippping, in its own way, and that much talk of the spirit can be a disguise for power games and spiritual abuse, but as I say - at its best)

(By the way, if any one does know a joke about the difference between a Pentecostalist and a Unitarian, do let me know)

Comments

jfield said…
I think you are on to a really good question here (or perhaps I just think I agree with you). I have a tendency to borrow from Tillich and talk about being grasped and shaped by the spirit, while still wanting to avoid anthropomorphising the divine. I'm not sure how to decide what the volition of the spirit may be. Even if it is beyond our control, I'm not necessarily willing to go all the way towards giving too much of a will or personality to s/he/it. But that certainly leaves me in a strange place theologically.
7:57 pm
Anonymous said…
I don't think that there is an ist on Pentacostal. You are Pentacostal, not Pentacostalist. You go to a Pentacostal church, have Pentacostal worship that sort of thing. Just FYI.
10:00 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Swords into Ploughshares

  "They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:4 Palestine Action are doing just this: beating swords into ploughshares i.e. putting weapons out of use. In doing so they are fulfilling this biblical mandate. They are expressing God's peace as expressed in the Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition. God desires that our swords shall be beaten into ploughshares, that we should unlearn war. That the government wants to make this action illegal has to be confronted in the strongest terms. To rush to condemn attacks on weapons but not attacks on children is perverse. To call attacks on weapons terrorism but not attacks on children is perverse. When government comes to such an extreme position - legislating that peace is war, that weapons need more protection than children - then they have fundamentally gone wrong. This is the definitio...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...
14 comments
Read more

Clergy-wear during protests

OK, I'm wandering into the territory of Beauty Tips for Ministers here, but a couple of recent conversations have brought up the issue of what clergy should wear for protests. I know a number of Ministers who only wear clerical collars for protests. The logic is that it's important to identify as a Minister when you're supporting something society doesn't expect clergy to. So Ministers will wear a collar at gay prides or pro-choice rallies to make this point. Now I could understand this if it you wore a collar going about your general business, and also did during a protest, but I'm quite uncomfortable with the idea of wearing clerical wear ONLY for protests. The seems to be something worth exploring. I have said before that I'm not in favour of special titles or clothing for religious leadership, mainly because Jesus explicitly said this was a lot of nonsense. Religious leaders should not need these articial crutches. I have no problem with certain liturgical c...
11 comments
Read more