McCall Macchia Review
I first must state that I consider this book almost sacred. Allow me to elaborate: as I first approached this book in the Spring of 2006 preparing for my first residency, I knew little about Baptism in the Spirit (& some would claim, myself included, that I still know little!). However, as I read this book, so many windows opened to me that had theretofore been closed. I realized how REAL the Holy Spirit was to the people in Acts, for example, as well as to the early Church Fathers. I found much value in Macchia’s analysis of the distinctions between Pauline (soteriological) and Lukan (charismatic) emphases of the Baptism in the Spirit. I moreover found comfort and extension of thought, bluntly, in applying Spirit Baptism to the Already/Not Yet aspect of salvation, as presented by Macchia. Being rather new also to Pentecostal/Charismatic studies, I found it to be informative that Spirit Baptism was/is a distinctive (but not THE chief, note) of said group of God-worshippers. Being trained in Southern Baptist circles at the onset of my preliminary Theological Degree, I counted the reception of the Spirit to be solely at Salvation. It therefore ‘rocked’ my thinking to come to theological viewpoint of accepting a ‘second blessing’/‘continual blessing’ type theology of Spirit Baptism. However, the assertion that Spirit Baptism is participatory was a delight to encounter and cogitate about. I also found much satisfaction with Macchia agreeing with Jack Hayford that tongues is not necessarily the evidence of Spirit Baptism (b/c, note, I have never spoke in tongues!). Macchia’s redefinition of Spirit Baptism in light of sanctification and eschatology was refreshing for me to behold. Macchia’s citing and references to Wesleyan theology throughout made me exceedingly glad, I must also state.
I agreed heartily with Professor’s understanding of how to reconcile Luke’s presentation of the Holy Spirit’s activity with Paul’s presentation of the same (first introduced on page 16). I was particularly pleased by the amount of development that an additional theme regarding the eschatological reality of Spirit Baptism is developed throughout the book as well. Further, I was taken aback by the realization of how significant Spirit Baptism was for Pentecostal as historically defined. I would have enjoyed, however, fuller practical application regarding the already-not yet aspect of our Spirit Baptism to our daily walk in this era.
Macchia Baptized in the Spirit Summary:
Frank Macchia takes Pentecostal scholarship to new heights, while remaining faithful to the defining “Spirit-Baptism” distinctives of the movement. But he also moves beyond Robert Menzies emphasis on prophetic/tongues and Roger Stronstad’s emphasis on charismatic signs, to establish a broad, systematic view of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, to include
“Spirit Baptism Eschatology” expanding the importance of restoration of Spirit-baptism in the fulfillment of the end-times and great commission.
“Spirit Baptism in Trinitarian Perspective” examination of OT perspectives on annointing and Ruach.
“Spirit Baptism as Justification” noting the differences between Luke (who emphasizes empowerment) and Paul (who emphasizes the Spirit’s role in soteriology).
“Spirit Baptism as Sanctification” noting John Fletcher’s emphasis on subsequent crisis experience of receiving the Holy Spirit to complete a work of sanctification.
“Spirit Baptized Ecclesiology” noting the communion of the saints largely depends on God’s Spirit moving in and through us…(I especially appreciated his criticism of the heretic of pluralism, John Hick)
“Spirit Baptism and Preaching/Sacraments” bringing a fuller application to the mission and worship of the church
“Baptized in Love” examining the necessity of fruit, not just tongues.
Others notes on Macchia:
Macchia’s book is not about glossolalia; it is not even about Spirit-Baptism. It really is about the prospect of developing a global theology from the perspective of a singular doctrine. The importance of the book for Pentecostals lies in its focus on Spirit-Baptism. The ecumenical importance of the book lies in its rejection of glossolalia as a universally qualified initial evidence. The importance for systematic theology, however, lies in the efforts to overcome the theoretical divisions of doctrine by representing them through the lens of the practical work of God’s Spirit. For Macchia, theology is what God does. “Spirit-Baptism” becomes a metaphor for the principle of theological construction. From Pentecostals, that perspective requires a giving up of the idea that Spirit baptism is a doctrine to be preserved. From the ecumenical world, that perspective requires an openness to Spirit Baptism as a theological possbility. It is not simply a matter of experiencing Spirit Baptism (the Pentecostal idea) but of understanding, communicating, and integrating the experience into the whole theological system. Macchia, of course, recostructs the entire system to fit his ordering principle. That is likely to encounter deaf ears to those who hold firm to a theological system without any reference to the Spirit’s work.
Frank Macchia’s Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal Theology advocates a centering of theology around the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (BHS) defined with a broader framework. The Holy Spirit is a person, Macchia says, not a fragmented set of works and experiences. To this book I owe a personal debt for taking Pentecostalism beyond discussions of sequence and initial evidence and opening my own perspective to further richness. His great insight is that the BHS is the fulfillment of the eschatological promise of God coming down: i.e., “I will be your God…I will make my dwelling place with you and among you,” and now, we discover, “in you.” In Macchia’s words, this is “…an eschatological gift, an outpouring of divine love.” Thus, the BHS “…brings the reign of the Father, the reign of the crucified and risen Christ, and the reign of divine life to all of creation through the indwelling of the Spirit.” (89) It is in eschatological tension, the now and the not-yet of this experience, that this book unpacks systematics.
Deeply respectful of his own Pentecostal roots, Macchia advocates a wider pneumatology as the moving force of theology. It is inevitable that this and like efforts (Yong) are pendulum swings, very needed, that will be opposed by the roots, and then brought to proper equilibrium in several generations. In spite of potential conflict, it is important that this project occur. If Faupel and others are correct that eschatology is the leading distinctive of Pentecostalism, then time is running out on Azusa Street as presently constituted. Historically, what happens if this is not the terminal generation? And what will be the situation if NT life in the Spirit is a continuous affair, unlike what is implied by revivalism?
Another insight related by Macchia is a recognition that the BHS as an experience of power can not be separated from regeneration, sanctification and initiation. As one who does not bifurcate justification and sanctification, this is something logically obvious. “Justification in the light of Spirit baptism reveals the overlap between justification and sanctification as metaphors of the renewal of creation into the dwelling place of God.” (129) Again, eschatological. Thus, there is a BHS – theosis connection which means that the presence of God among us is transformative as this grace is responded to unto love.
Of course, there are questions. Are global cultures, including world religions, providentially guided ways to groping after God (187) or fallen substitutes overruled for good by a loving God? Does his discussion of the marks of the church show an evolution or a detailed enhancement; unless they say Spirit, is He not affirmed? And lastly, can there be a genuine embracing of immediate Spirit experience along with that which is mediated, such as in the sacraments? All told, this book points a valid way ahead.