Pastor Derek Vreeland gives a brief introduction to an important early church father.

Early Life

Irenaeus, from the Church of St. Irenaeus, Lyon, France.
Image: Wikimedia Commons

Little is known about the early life of Irenaeus (c. 130-202). He was born into a Christian home in Asia Minor in modern-day Turkey. Most Catholic histories claim that he was born in Smyrna. (The dates of his birth and death have been debated.)

As a boy he sat under the teaching of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Polycarp was martyred in 156 AD. The death of Polycarp is legendary. It is recorded that Polycarp was tied to a stake and asked to renounce his faith in Christ. He replied, “For 86 years I have been His servant and he has never done me wrong. How can I blaspheme my King and my Savior?” Polycarp was sentence to be burned at the stake by the Roman government. According to tradition, when the fire was lit, Polycarp was not consumed by the flames. A Roman guard stabbed him in the side and according to one eyewitness a dove flew out. So much blood poured out from his side that it put the fire out.

As a young man, Irenaeus was quite influenced by Polycarp. Irenaeus wrote,

I can tell the very place in which the blessed Polycarp used to sit when he preached his sermons, how he came in and went out, the manner of his life, what he looked like, the sermons he delivered to the people, and how he used to report his association with John and the others who had seen the Lord, how he would relate their words, and the things concerning the Lord he had heard from them, about His miracles, and teachings. Polycarp had received all this from eyewitnesses of the Word of life, and related all these things in accordance with the Scriptures. I listened eagerly to these things at the time, by God’s mercy which was bestowed on me, and I made notes of them not on paper, but in my heart, and constantly by the grace of God I mediate on them faithfully.[i]

His connection to Polycarp puts Irenaeus in a special category. Irenaeus was discipled by Polycarp who was discipled by John who was discipled by Jesus himself.

At sometime during Irenaeus’ early years he moved to Lyons in South France. Lyons was the capital of the Roman occupied France. It was a booming city known for its many merchants. The church in Lyons was planted by missionaries from Asia Minor. So for Irenaeus the church in South France was a kindred spirit with the church in Asia Minor.

Days of ministry

Location of Lugdunum in Gaul, renamed Lyons in the Medieval Period.

The Bishop of the church in Lyons was Pothinus, a native of Asia Minor. At sometime during the early 170s, Irenaeus became a presbyter at the church in Lyons. In 177, Pothinus sent Irenaeus on a mission trip to Rome. This was during the brutal persecution of the Stoic emperor Marcus Aurelius. The emperor was infuriated by the confidence and faith of Christians who had a greater peace than that of his Stoic mentors. Often Aurelius would crucify Christians along the roadsides through the Roman Empire. On one occasion, he surrounded his palace garden with crucified Christians and lit them on fire to light the garden at night.

Pothinus was martyred during 177 or 178 AD during a time of persecution in Lyons. Irenaeus was spared while he was away. When he returned in 178, he was installed as the second bishop of Lyons. From there he taught and wrote until his death sometime between 200 and 206 A.D.) As bishop, Irenaeus had that heart of a pastor. He was also a unifier. He was often called upon as a moderator when debates broke out in the Church. For example, there was a debate over whether Easter should be celebrated on Nisan 14 according to the Jewish Passover or on a Sunday, the day of the resurrection. Irenaeus continually submitted that the dates of religious holidays where not more important than maintaining the bond of love and unity in the Church.

Pastor Vreeland offers a defense, analysis, and refinement of the theology of the Word of Faith Movement.

“O, when it comes to faith, what a living, creative, active, powerful thing it is. It cannot do other than good at all times. It never waits to ask whether there is some good work to do…”

 Martin Luther, Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans [1]

The Debate over Word of Faith Theology

The independent charismatic movement has struggled to form an ecclesiastic identity amid its mosaic of churches, ministries, theological systems, and points of biblical emphasis. It surged onto the Pentecostal landscape in the fury of post World War II healing revivalism under the leadership of spiritual enthusiasts who were dissatisfied with established denominational Pentecostalism. They received the loose classification “independent charismatics” to distinguish them from the denominational charismatics or neo-Pentecostals of the late 20^th century charismatic renewal. Their self-imposed isolation from traditional denominational structures created an opportunity for theological innovations. This freedom has also allowed an array of voices to rise up and speak to the issue of theology often with less than accurate methodologies and piece meal constructs that in part have hindered the work of the Holy Spirit. No other movement has been more pervasive in the independent charismatic tradition than the word of faith movement[2] and none other has been as persuasive.

Researchers and Pentecostal historians have difficulty finding any independent charismatic church or ministry that has not been exposed to the word of faith movement to some degree. Tenants of word of faith theology, such as positive confession and prosperity, have become the caricatures of the entire independent charismatic tradition. The spread of the word of faith movement over the last 25 years has not been without opposition. Critics have spoken out from reformed, evangelical, classic Pentecostal backgrounds and from within the independent charismatic tradition itself. Some critics decry the movement as cultic and the theology as heresy.[3] Much to the detriment of the word of faith movement, this has been a rather one-sided debate. Many of the predominate word of faith proponents choose not to respond to the critics in an attempt to heed the Pauline warning to not “quarrel about words.”[4] While some substantial books have been published in response to some of the critical extremes[5], a thorough reconstruction of word of faith theology has not been attempted. A reconstruction of word of faith theology requires redeeming the word of faith movement from the “heresy junk pile” that it has been heaped on by answering the question, “Do the theological weaknesses within word of faith doctrines constitute an anathemaic condemnation or is there sufficient orthodoxy in word of faith theology to apply correction?” This will be a partial response to D. R. McConnell and other word of faith critics. The remaining process of reconstruction includes an explanation of four distinctives of word of faith theology – the nature of faith, positive confession, healing and prosperity. The final step to reconstruction will be to refine those tenants by answering the question, “Can each word of faith distinctive be reconstructed on a solid theological foundation and still retain its word of faith identity?”

Condemnation or Correction?

The integrity of the gospel is a primary concern in the Pauline letters. However, Paul’s injunctions do not fall into rigid categories, but differ depending upon the context. To the Galatians, he writes,

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel — which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned![6]

Paul emphatically states that the response to those who preach a different gospel is anathema esto. The verb esto is a third person singular, present active imperative form of eimi implying a command. This command becomes weightier as Paul repeats his instructions in verse 9. Anathema refers to a person or thing that is consecrated and devoted to God for destruction in that it is alienated from God spiritually by sin.[7] If word of faith theology breaks the boundaries of orthodoxy and is indeed preaching a different gospel, then we should apply the Pauline injunction to declare it anathema. This has been the direction taken by some word of faith critics. In his summary remarks, McConnell concludes,

This analysis of the Faith movement has characterized the Faith theology as “a different gospel.”…Is the charge justified that the Faith theology constitutes a different gospel? I think that it is, for three reasons: (1) its historical origins; (2) its heretical doctrines; and (3) its cultic practices.[8]

Christian Research Institute President Hank Hanegraaff writes, “The Faith movement has systematically subverted the very essence of Christianity so as to present us with a counterfeit Christ and a counterfeit Christianity. Therefore standing against the theology of the Faith movement does not divide; rather, it unites believers.”[9] In 1980, Charles Farah brought the debate to the Society for Pentecostal Studies where he concludes, “The (Faith) movement uses Gnostic hermeneutical principles and displaces contextual scientific exegesis. It shares many of the goals of present day humanism, particularly in regards to the creaturely comforts. It is in fact, a burgeoning heresy.”[10] Nearly ten years later, H. Terris Neuman adds to the debate upon the SPS platform. He writes, “…this paper is a call to the wider evangelical community also to engage in an apologetic that will distinguish the gospel of Jesus Christ from those who indeed propagate a “different gospel”[11] (i.e. the proponents of word of faith theology). However, anathema is not the only option.

The Pentecostal movement and Pentecostal theology has been known for a ministry of divine healing. Donald Dayton lists four cornerstones doctrines in Pentecostal theology. Among them is the doctrine of divine healing.¹ The practice of divine healing did not enter into the ministry of Pentecostals by some emotional meeting under a canvas tent. Historically, it did not arrive suddenly from heaven as a “new revelation.” Rather, healing by divine agency came from a biblically based theological system. John Alexander Dowie and others spread the doctrine of divine healing throughout the late 19th century and the beginning of the early 20th century. Although he was often known for his flamboyant style and bold presence, his message of divine healing was rooted in such a theological system. Dowie’s theology of divine healing can be expressed in a two-fold scheme: one, the continual ministry of Christ, and two, the evil of sickness.

Historically, Dowie is an important figure in the divine healing movement of the last two centuries. David Harrell, who chronicled the healing revivals in America, calls Dowie “the father of healing revivalism in America.”² This title does not imply that Dowie was the sole originator of the modern healing revival, but rather that his influence was so widespread that he is deserving of the title “father.” Dayton acknowledges that Dowie was a major source of Pentecostal doctrines of healing and that these doctrines grew out of the already existent Holiness teaching yet “being restated in a more distinctly Pentecostal vein.”³ While the Holiness teachings on healing from Charles Cullis, Boardman, A. B. Simpson, Gordon, and Andrew Murray played a role in the Pentecostal ministry of healing, none had quite the same effect as Dowie. Those who were influenced by Dowie include: F. F. Bosworth, John G. Lake, Charles Parham, and Lilian B. Yeomans, as well as various missionaries who went around the world with Dowie’s theological perspective on healing. Bosworth, Lake, and others later joined the Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles. Walter Hollenweger estimates that Dowie “exercised a considerable influence to the early Pentecostal movement.”⁴

First – That ‘Jesus, the Christ, is the same yesterday, to-day [sic] and forever,’ and being so, He is unchanged in power and in will. … Second – That Disease, like Sin, is God’s enemy, and the devil’s work, and can never be God’s will. Peter said in the household of the Centurion Cornelius, Acts 10:38: ‘God anointed Jesus Christ with the Holy Ghost and with power; who went about doing good and HEALING ALL THAT WERE OPPRESSED OF THE DEVIL, for God was with Him.’ ⁷

These two doctrines are the foundation of Dowie’s theology of divine healing.

I have heard it said that motivation can be generated in people by offering to meet an unmet need. This maxim is true. On a recent rafting trip with our church youth group, I fell out of our raft into a set of class 4 rapids. As the current spun me around and flipped me end over end, I quickly became motivated for air! It is only when we become aware of our unmet needs that we sense any degree of motivation. I have the same thoughts about Relevant, a new magazine published by Cameron Strang, the son of Steve Strang, founder and publisher of Charisma. It is meeting an unmeet need among twenty-somethings. Relevant is a popular, Christian magazine targeting 18-34 year-olds that have grown up in a postmodern culture. It is quickly becoming the magazine of the “Emerging Church.” Just as Christianity Today or Charisma serves the over 40 generation, Relevant has the potential to be the main periodical for twenty-somethings of both an evangelical and charismatic persuasion. The first issue was released in March 2003. It is published on a bi-monthly basis. The cover price is $3.98US/$5.98CAN.

www.relevantmediagroup.com

The four word bi-line expresses the primary focus of Relevant—“God. Life. Progressive Culture.” Each issue is full of topics important to “postmodern” Christians. First and foremost, the articles circle around theological themes with articles entitled “The Greatest of These is Safety” and “Enjoying God as His Favorite.” As well as articles related to spirituality, such as “Real Hunger: How Fasting Connects the Body, the Soul and the Divine,” “The Quest for Contentment: Finding Fulfillment in a Restless Society,” and “Worship as Lifestyle: What a Relationship with God Looks Like the Other Six Days a Week.” The articles and “statements,” as shorter articles are referred to, weave together thoughts about God and church with everyday life. Issues of Relevant are also peppered with “slices,” which are short blurbs on popular culture from movie/music reviews to product reviews and trivial facts. Other articles discuss relationship issues in the lives of twenty-somethings and review Christian books and CDs.

At age 29, I am a prime member of the magazine’s target demographic and I am enthusiastic about this new publication. While I am an avid reader of Charisma, Ministries Today, and Christian History, I feel somewhat disconnected from these periodicals, like an outsider peering into to the worlds they create. I have found solace in some online communities that touch on postmodern issues from a Christian perspective such as www.theooze.com. But let’s face the facts; you can’t curl up with a laptop on the couch with a cup of coffee on a cold winter day. Relevant has filled that periodically void for my generation. The articles challenge traditional (even “contemporary”) ideas about the Christian faith. What makes it appealing is that many of the articles make new connections out of old ideas. For example, one article on fasting spoke about the ancient spiritual practice in terms that make sense in a “hamburger and fries” world. Relevant is a doorway into the world of maybe the most under-reached segment of the American population. If the Church wants to continue to be culturally relevant, this age group can no longer be ignored. Michael Slaughter, Chief Dreamer and “pastor,” of Ginghamsburg Church writes, “If we continue to copy the models of the 1980s and 1990s, we’re going to miss the next generation. I’m now learning to take my cues from the age group that’s under thirty-five.”¹ I would recommend Relevant to church leaders who are looking to take cues from and understand the mind of the under thirty-five Christian thinker. More information about Relevant can be found at www.relevantmagazine.com.

Reviewed by Derek Vreeland

¹ Michael Slaughter, Unlearning Church, (Loveland, CO: Group Publishing, 2002), 22.

The restoration of the power of the Holy Spirit has come to fruition in the 21^st century. The charismatic renewal has touched nearly every segment of the Church around the world. It is exciting to be part of a spiritual movement that has affected literally hundreds of millions of people. Yet this restoration of Pentecostal power did not come about without a countless number of willing servants—pastors, evangelists, theologians and writers—who sacrificed much to proclaim the Word of God in its charismatic fullness. Many of their stories have been told; many have not. Pentecostal pioneers such as William Seymour, John G. Lake & Smith Wigglesworth have been celebrated in books, journal articles and publications. Pre-Pentecostal voices such as A. B. Simpson, R. A. Torrey, A. J. Gordon, Andrew Murray and others have been documented and many of their writings are still in circulation. But there is one story that still remains in the shadows. It is the story of Edward Irving. He lived a life of controversy and spiritual awakening. He was a pastor, leader, theologian and author. The noted British poet, Samuel Coleridge said of Irving, “I hold that Edward Irving possesses more of the spirit and purpose of the first Reformers, that he has more of the Head and Heart, the Life, the Unction, and the genial power of Martin Luther, than any man now alive…”¹ Edward Irving was a reformer. He called the Church to reclaim apostolic charismatic power, the power of the Holy Spirit.

Early Years

Edward Irving (1792-1834), circa 1823.
Image: Wikimedia Commons

Edward Irving was born on August 4, 1792 in Annan, Scotland, the second son of Gavin and Mary Irving. Edward was baptized at the Annan Parish Church, a local Presbyterian congregation. As a child he attended a school led by Adam Hope, who often led Irving and others to the nearby village of Ecclefechan on Sunday morning. They attended a Seceder Church, which met in a thatched meeting-house with no roof.² At age ten or eleven, Irving walked with Hope and other men to the church and was intrigued by their conversations about philosophy and theology. As a child, Irving sensed a call to serve the Lord in full time ministry.

At age thirteen, Irving entered the University at Edinburgh to undertake a course of study in liberal arts. After four years of sacrifice, dedication and tireless study, Irving graduated with a Master of Arts degree at the age of seventeen. Within the next year, Irving received a teaching position in Haddington, which gave him financial support to pursue a part-time course of study in Divinity at the University in Edinburgh. By age twenty, Irving was promoted to schoolmaster of a new school in Kirkcaldy. Irving was extremely popular among the students there.³ Irving continued his theological studies and completed his Divinity degree in six years. His degree was accompanied by a license to preach. This was not ordination from the Church of Scotland, but a license that allowed him to speak from the pulpit when invited by a minister. Irving continually developed his preaching style during this time, which consisted of polished oratory and sophisticated sounding phrases. He preached with quite a flamboyant style that somewhat annoyed the people of Kirkcaldy and excited others.

Ministry in Glasgow

In 1819, Irving received the call to serve as the assistant of Dr. Thomas Chalmers at St. John’s Church in Glasgow. As an assistant to Chalmers, Irving was responsible for visiting the poor and sharing the preaching duties. The two men preached in completely different styles. Each appealed to different groups in the church. Some detested Irving’s flamboyant preaching to the degree that if they would find that he was preaching on a Sunday morning, they would walk out. Often Irving passed scores of people walking out of the church, while he was walking in to preach.⁴ He faithfully administered his duties, but never felt fully satisfied. In 1822, Irving was invited to fill the pulpit at The Caledonian Chapel in London for a few Sundays. The church officials were looking for a pastor and after hearing Irving preach, they unanimously called him to serve as their full time minister. He accepted. After receiving ordination from the Church of Scotland at his home church in Annan, he took on the pastorate of The Caledonian Chapel in London in July of 1822 at the age of thirty.