I was right there in the middle of it, at the Anaheim Vineyard, in about 1994-1995. What are charismatic ‘phenomena’ (sometimes called ‘manifestations’)? Are they biblical? It’s time for me to make sense of the whole thing.
As far as I can determine from John Wimber’s pastoral letters (see below), Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) was the first to label these odd physical responses ‘phenomena.’
The ‘phenomena’ made observers question them. People roared like lions, barked like dogs, howled like coyotes, clucked like chickens (but mostly the roaring), got into laughing fits, and writhed around the floor (but this latter response was not often).
I was never in leadership at the Vineyard. So I was never at a staff meeting or an executive board retreat. But I was on the prayer team for a few months. I saw all these strange phenomena with my own eyes, but I never participated in the excesses. Things quieted down by about 1996 to 1997 (or so I believe). It was a passing fad.
Eventually I left the Vineyard in 2018.
This post is a short overview of how Vineyard leadership pastored the people through the phenomena, and then I offer a conclusion.
I depend on the anthology of (mostly) John Wimber’s letters, conveniently compiled and edited by Derek Morphew: John Wimber’s Pastoral Letters (Vineyard International Publishing, 2019). They are primary sources.
September / October 1994 (pp. 110-21)
Pastor Wimber had a cautious approach to the phenomena. He wanted the Vineyard not to be known for them, but for teaching the word of God, administering ordinances, pastoring people in the normal ups and downs of life, equipping the saints for ministry, worship, doing the work of an evangelist (pp. 113-14).
But on the other hand, Vineyardites must not quench the Spirit (1 Thess. 5:19), or as the NIV says, “Do not put out the Spirit’s fire.” So how do they not quench the Spirit? Three ways: experiencing the baptism of the Spirit, actualizing the gifts of the Spirit, and doing the great commission (p. 116). Then Wimber does a standard study of the Book of Acts and the Spirit moving on people with tongues and prophecy and healings and deliverances and other miracles (pp. 116-19).
In his article, however, Wimber does not draw the conclusion that nowhere in the Book of Acts does Luke describe the phenomena.
September / October 1994 (pp. 131-37)
The Association of Vineyard Churches Board Report (summarized by Todd Hunter)
Before we begin this section, Todd Hunter is now a bishop in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). He is into quiet, contemplative church services.
Now let’s return to the analysis.
Evidently the board met and attempted to administer and pastor the phenomena.
In the first section the conclusion seems to be that if Scripture is silent about the phenomena, but if they edify people, then the phenomena should be allowed. “The absence of a proof-text, however, does not disallow an experience” (p. 121). Don’t defend the phenomena with Bible verses, but don’t prevent them, either. Each phenomenon must be discerned individually. “The ultimate test of the phenomena should be the long-term fruit” (p. 132). The board was not prepared to bar the phenomena entirely.
Other bulleted points encourage pastors not to focus on the phenomena but on the work of evangelism and the word, and so on.
The next section is about 1 Corinthians 14, and here the board appeared confused. They acknowledge the principle of “you are out of your mind” (14:24). If a phenomenon leads to this conclusion from a newcomer or inquirer, then the phenomenon should be rejected or shut down. “The majority of the board were content to judge each manifestation on its own merits” (p. 134).
The other subsections on 1 Corinthians 14 are solid. Everything should be done for edification, a word that appears seven times in 1 Corinthians 14, either as a verb or noun. But what should the pastor or leader of the church or group do if an “extra-biblical or exotic” phenomenon happens? He should explain it and make it intelligible to the people, if it has a prophetic value. This solution comes under the heading of not speaking in tongues when no interpreters is at the meeting, who can explain it or make it intelligible.
The board’s report has a brief section on what the Vineyard churches should focus on: passion for Christ, intimacy with God with fervent worship, compassion for others, new reality of the Father’s love, empowering and refreshing for kingdom service, Isaiah 55: “come and drink!” renewal of godly character, and effective discipleship (p. 136).
One item missing from the list: Renewed study of Scripture.
The absence of the Scripture item reflects the development of the Vineyard since about 1985, when Wimber held his conference and taught the people from his lecture notes, which he delivered at Fuller School of Missions. I saw most of the youtube videos recently, and in nearly every one, he put down theology and doctrine and opened the door to new experiences. I cannot find the word “bibliolatry” in those lectures, but I heard him use the term from the pulpit several times. The term means that we must not treat the Bible as an idol. This is true on the surface because the Bible points to God; it is not god itself. But I never heard him draw the line between bibliolatry and a high respect for Scripture. In some of his other letters, he does say the Vineyard is built on the word of God, but when does this reliance on Scripture drift over into bibliolatry? I don’t know (and I doubt he could explain where to draw the line, either).
In my experience and reports about the Vineyard, a huge number of pastors short-change the Bible and focus on experience and modern ideas circulating through society, though there are a few “Bible guys” around.
Undated Excerpt: John Wimber Responds to the Phenomena. (pp. 138-41)
Sorry to say, but Pastor Wimber is confused in his response. He zigzags back and forth at key moments, using words like “however” and “on the other hand.” He leaves the question of phenomena in the category of “pondering / I don’t know” (p. 140). He does say to keep “the main and plain things” of Scripture, focus on outreach to the needy, and not to focus on the phenomena at church (pp. 140-41).
He makes a startling statement at the end that some phenomena required the expulsion of demons, while others do not (p. 141). This shows me that sometimes the phenomena are demonic in origins. Beware of them. Don’t let them run amok.
One associate pastor whom I knew (and still know), who was on staff at Anaheim Vineyard at the time, told me that he wanted to stop the excesses, but Wimber told him that he was glad to attend a church where people could experiment. And now I recall that this pastor got into the laughing fits at least once.
So in a practical sense, regardless of his pastoral letters, Wimber did allow and even endorsed the excesses. It seems his policy was to let them play out.
Conclusion
The Vineyard board offered sound advice in some sections, but the leaders refused to bar all animal noises and laughing fits, though it appears some members of the board wanted to ban them.
In my opinion, the decisions at the board meeting did not go far enough. The board should have banned all animal noises and the laughing fits. In the last chapter reviewed here (third section). Wimber seemed confused: “On the other hand” and “however.” Clear and firm leadership was missing. He zigzagged too much.
The leaders wanted to bless what the Father was doing (a famous Vineyard maxim or precept), but how do we know what the Father is really doing apart from Scripture? I don’t follow this maxim or precept, unless the teaching or ministry practice or bodily reactions are scriptural. The board did not completely follow through with the order and peace and decorum found in 1 Corinthians 14.
As I see things, the flaw in Wimber’s church at Anaheim was too much experimentation. He was a church growth consultant and claims he could look over a church’s deficiencies and tell them how to fix them, and his recommendations worked. Churches grew. I don’t doubt this. But I for one do not accept experimentation. Maybe there are legitimate church growth principles here and there, but they can also lead to unbiblical innovations, like the phenomena.
So, all in all, Vineyard leaders fell a little short in pastoring their churches through the phenomena.
RELATED
Observations on the Early Vineyard Movement
Sixteen Characteristics of a Healthy Church
Sixteen Characteristics of an Unhealthy Church
Review of Sam Storms’ Book ‘The Rise and Fall of the Kansas City Prophets’
Mike Bickle and His Team v. John Wimber and His Team
What 1 Corinthians 14 Really Teaches
Observations on New Apostolic Reformation and Christian Nationalism
Calling Leaders by Name to Repent
I am a Christian ‘Kingdomist,’ Not a Christian Nationalist
New Testament Restricts Authority of Modern Prophets
Dr. Jim's Essential Bible Teaching 