I am a Pentecostal. More accurately, I am a Spirit-Filled Christian in communion with the Vatican. Therefore, I would be classifed as a "Charismatic Catholic."
So, what difference does "Spirit-Filled" mean in being a Christian? In being a Political Voice?
To answer the first question, I can only answer by saying, it makes ALL of the difference whether or not one is Filled with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Triune God, is none other than God Himself here on earth. The Paraclete of Whom the Gospel of John writes, "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." (John 14:26)
Being "Filled with the Holy Spirit" does not mean that Spirit-Filled Christians are "better" than anyone else, or that they/we will not sin or "backslide" even, but that the very Presence of God Himself is living with us, both as individuals and as Christian communities.
Being "Filled with the Holy Spirit" also means that the TEACHING of Jesus is ever-present and that Spirit-Filled Christians are reminded of this teaching constantly. In fact, the Christian celebration of Pentecost (Acts 2) is nothing other than the Greek word for the Jewish festival called "Shavuot," the holiday that celebrates the Torah, the Teaching of Moses. Thus, just as Jesus Christ came as the fulfillment of the Torah, so also did the sending of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Shavuot) also signify that the very Teaching of God Himself is now Present in God's own Presence through the Holy Spirit's reminder of such teaching. The Holy Spirit is God, and as such, Who is better than God Himself to teach and remind us of God's Teaching?
What about being a Political Voice?
Does my position as both a Spirit-Filled Christian and as a Catholic, somehow "nullify" the opportunity to be heard?
Well, in former times in the United States, well, yes, it would have. Religious prejudice, especially in the 1960's and 1970's had been rampant.
Now, however, many fellow Americans, both religious and secular, want to hear my perspective on different political issues. Senator Patrick Leahy recently sought me out at an Academic Conference due to my position as a specifically religious leader (Senator Leahy is a Roman Catholic). Similarly, my good friend Chad Lupkes, a prolific On-Line Political Commentator (editor of Wikia Campaigns) is an ultra-liberal, but as a seeker after TRUTH, Chad has often come to many of the very same political conclusions as I have. Ultra-conservative (me) and Ultra-liberal (Chad) agreeing on about 80% of political issues . . . how striking.
Therefore, theologically in that the Holy Spirit is God Himself, being Pentecostal is nothing other than allowing God, and not me in my human frailty, be the One in control. "God is my co-pilot" as the bumper sticker reads. But also politically, secularists are increasingly responsive to such a religious viewpoint. Whether it is an ultra-liberal like Chad or an On-line respondent to one of the various articles I have written, people are increasingly coming to respect such religious convictions.
Thank you for your time.
God bless,
Rob J. King
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I honestly believe that the most important principle that we agree upon is the need for a solid foundation under our feet before we try to reach for the stars. And that metaphor can be applied to many different aspects of society and life. I believe that G-d is the force of life itself, and I am comfortable with that definition. I know, beyond doubt, that G-d is beyond my comprehension, and I also know that digging deep into contemplation about the nature of G-d without spending equal or sufficient time to apply the results of that contemplation to my life and my work would leave too many stones unturned and too much work undone.
We must always be willing to learn, but we must also be able to apply what we learn. When our spirits pass to the other side, whatever the nature of that passing and whatever the nature of that other side, we will add our experiences to the collection of experience and knowledge, and we will remember everything that we ever knew in this and all past incarnations. Our doubts will be erased, as will our uncertainties about the nature of the Universe.
But in all of the time we spend on the quest for more to provide to that collection at the end, we must also focus on the means to reach that end, meaning food, water and shelter for our bodies, and companionship, love and security for our hearts and minds. We must recognize our own needs for these things, and at the same time recognize the needs of our fellow travelers on the time stream. None of us are "more equal" than others, and it is our sacred duty to make sure that all of us have something to add to the collection of experience that is the beating heart of G-d and the Universe itself. And we must strive to make them all positive experiences whenever possible.
Trees do not grow in acid. Our bodies do not absorb salt water. And our hearts do not thrive in an environment of hate and falsehood. That is why I focus my attention on gaining access to Truth, rather than Fact. Facts are barren to the soul. Truth is uplifting.
Chad,
You are a bit of a transcendentalist! You sound like Thoreau . . .
Regarding the theological unpacking, I won't comment because much of what you are writing would be grouped in the Christian Mystical Tradition (technically called "Apophatic Theology" i.e. the Knowledge of God that cannot be "known" but only experienced as a type of "unknowing"--real existentialist sort of stuff).
Setting aside Apophatic Theology (i.e. Mysticism), I GREATLY appreciated our shared seeking after TRUTH. Truth is simply TRUE. This sounds self-evident, but what you are seeking is the ONE TRUTH, the ONE TRUTH of Who God is and also of the Cosmos, to include both natural and human harmony (and the true condition of disharmony unfortunately). Again, similar to the ole Moore & Parker "Critical Thinking" textbook that I used to teach out of (Logic & Critical Thinking courses), TRUTH is TRUTH and the relativist position is simply a fallacy, by its very own self-definition, relativism is illogical. Two cannot be three. Eight cannot be ten, etc. What is true must be universally true, but this truth is obviously seen through many prisms, and thus may "look" different depending upon one's angle of perception, but the actual CONTENT of the Truth cannot be relative.
Well, enough of that. You and I agree about this. Thank you again. You are a true seeker after truth . . .
Blessings in Jesus,
Rob
Post a Comment