Rodman Williams: The Gift of the Holy Spirit Today: Means
Third, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Spirit is not limited to the apostles. As we have noted, the apostles Peter and John do minister the Spirit to the Samaritans and the Apostle Paul does the same for the Ephesians. However, it is a Christian brother, Ananias, with no claim to apostolic authority,36 who is the minister of the Holy Spirit to Saul of Tarsus. Thus, it would be a mistake to interpret the words of Acts 8:18—”The Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ [Peter and John’s] hands”—as the only way it could happen. Since Ananias, a lay brother, could minister the Holy Spirit to Saul, there is no inherent reason that Philip, the deacon-evangelist, could not have done the same for the Samaritans.37
A few words might be added about the ministry of Ananias to Saul. Though little is said about him, a few things stand out: first, he was a man of faith and prayer, the Lord speaking to him in a vision: “The Lord said to him in a vision, ‘Ananias.’ And he said, ‘Here I am, Lord'” (9:10). Second, he was a man of obedience, for though, because of Saul’s evil reputation, he first hesitated at the command of Christ—”Rise and go” (9:11)—he nonetheless went. Third, Ananias, as later described by Paul, was “a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all” (22:12), hence a man of strong character and perhaps peculiarly prepared through his devotion to the law to minister to Saul the Pharisee. Thus, it may be suggested, a combination of factors made Ananias an effective minister of the Holy Spirit, and particularly suited to exercise the role of ministering to Saul’s need.
It would seem apparent that the basic qualification for the laying on of hands is not apostolic office but other more important matters. And so it continues into our own day and generation. Countless numbers of people are receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit through the ministry of lay people. To be sure, many “official” clergy are likewise ministering the Holy Spirit with great effectiveness.38 However, what really counts is not office (not even “apostolic succession”) but attributes such as faithfulness, prayer, readiness, obedience, devoutness and boldness. The ministering of the Spirit, including the laying on of hands, is happening through such Christian people everywhere. Indeed, this ministry belongs to the whole people of God.
PR
Chapter Seven, “Context,” continues in the Winter 2004 issue.
Notes
1. This will be noted hereafter especially in connection with Acts 19.
2. Three prepositions are used: epi (Acts 2:38); eis (8:16 and 19:5), and en (10:48). They could be translated “upon,” “into,” and “in.” For all three, “in the name” is the usual English translation. This seems proper, since the Greek words do not, I believe, intend a difference.
3. The formula in Acts therefore is obviously divergent from the triune emphasis of Matthew 28:19. We shall return to this later.
4. As we use the term “water baptism” from now on, we shall ordinarily be referring to baptism in the name of Christ.
5. These verses, depicting a community of people devoted to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, prayer, community, sharing and climactically “praising God and having favor with all the people,” strongly suggest a participation in the gift of the Holy Spirit. (See Chapter 2, supra, especially on the note of praise.)
6. Another reason sometimes given for the Samaritans not receiving the Holy Spirit until after their water baptism is that the gift of the Spirit requires apostolic ministry; Philip as an evangelist could not minister the Holy Spirit, so the apostles Peter and John must come down to fulfill that function. This line of reasoning, however, seems invalid both from the perspective of the immediate context which does not intimate that Peter and John come vested with some special sacerdotal authority, and also in light of what happens later in Acts 9 when Ananias, who is a layman, ministers the Holy Spirit to Saul of Tarsus. (See below, under “laying on of hands,” for more details.)
7. F.D. Bruner, in his A Theology of the Holy Spirit, has the peculiar statement: “The Spirit is temporarily suspended from baptism here ‘only’ and precisely to teach the Church at its most prejudiced juncture, and in its strategic initial missionary move beyond Jerusalem, that suspension cannot occur (italics: Bruner), p. 178. I should think that the passage teaches exactly the opposite: that suspension may occur. Bruner’s interpretation is actually not based on the text but on a prior view (shown many times in his book) of the inseparability of water baptism and the gift of the Spirit.
8. There is some variation here. Those in the more Protestant tradition of the movement do not hesitate to recognize a gift of the Holy Spirit after water baptism; they see it in the biblical record, and they claim to have experienced it. Those in the Catholic tradition (Roman and Anglo-) of the movement sometimes express the view that the Spirit is given in baptism or confirmation, and that the “Pentecostal experience” rather than being a reception of the Spirit is a “realization” or “actualization of that gift.” See, e.g., Catholic Pentecostals which speaks of “an individual’s or community’s baptismal initiation,” being “existentially renewed and actualized” (p. 147), and Leon Joseph Cardinal Suenens’ A New Pentecost? listing of various expressions: “a release of the Spirit, a manifestation of baptism, a coming to life of the gift of the Spirit received at confirmation” (p. 81).
Followers
Fans
