Today we introduce a new feature. This blog is a project of the United Methodist Professors of Mission, and it is important to engage with each other's scholarship. Thus, below are links to and abstracts for two recent missiological articles written by United Methodist Professors of Mission. Both are available for public access, though Dana Robert's article will only be so for a limited time.
William Price Payne, "Folk Religion and the Pentecostalism Surge in Latin America," The Asbury Journal 71 no. 1 (2016), 145-174.
Abstract: "Latino Pentecostalism and the Roman Catholic Charismatic Movement have experienced massive numerical growth since becoming viable options for the masses in the late 1960s. Contextualization theory suggests that they have experienced exponential growth because they have become indigenous faith systems that mesh with Hispanic cultures and give folk practitioners functionally equivalent alternatives to the syncretistic practices associated with popular religion. Specifically, as a native religion that engages all aspects of the Latino worldview, Latino Pentecostalism operates at the level of a popular religion without being inherently syncretistic. In this regard, it can be described as 'folk Christianity.'"
Dana L. Robert, "One Christ--Many Witnesses: Visions of Mission and Unity, Edinburgh and Beyond," Transformation 33 no. 4 (2016), 270-281.
Abstract: "This paper surveys the relationship between mission and Christian unity from the Edinburgh 1910 conference to the present. It then identifies several factors that cohere in recent missiological reflection, and concludes with a scriptural model for our contemporary pilgrimage together."
Other United Methodist Professors of Mission with recently published scholarly articles are invited to send information about such articles to the blogmaster, David Scott. Such information will be collated on this blog approximately once a quarter.
Dedicated to fostering conversations about the global nature of The United Methodist Church
Showing posts with label pentecostalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pentecostalism. Show all posts
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Arun Jones: How Pentecostals can be a global church
This blog post is the second in a two-part series by Arun Jones, Dan and Lillian Hankey Associate Professor of World Evangelism at Candler School of Theology. In these two pieces, Dr. Jones examines how other Christian traditions
function as global churches for the sake of making comparisons with The United Methodist Church.
Several months ago I offered some suggestions about how Roman Catholicism is able to hold together as a global Christian body in today’s world, and said that the other Christian tradition (perhaps “stream” is a better word) that accomplishes this well is Pentecostalism. As in the case of Roman Catholicism, my observations do not come from an in-depth study of Pentecostals, but from personal experiences in various parts of Asia, Africa and North America.
To be clear, I do not think Catholics and Pentecostals understand “church” in the same way (they have very different ecclesiologies). The contrast between Catholicism and Pentecostalism is instructive, and shows us that there is no one sure way to be a global church. Paradoxically however, I think that often their different ways of being “church” accomplish similar ends when it comes to being global.
First of all, what is it that unites Pentecostals? I would venture to say that whereas the Roman Catholic Church is held together by an organization and regularized liturgies, Pentecostalism is held together by personal relationships. Certainly there are important international Pentecostal denominational bodies, such as the Assemblies of God, but personal relationships are the real glue that binds together Pentecostals worldwide. Networking is what makes for the global nature of Pentecostalism. So Pentecostals who are part of a world-wide connections get along with each other, and are generally of the same theological/ecclesial disposition. If things don’t work out on a personal level, they leave the network and join/form another one. Roman Catholicism, held together by organization and liturgy, can embrace people who really don’t agree (or at times even like!) each other.
Secondly, both Catholics and Pentecostals have a counterweight to the authority of Scripture, and this counterweight can provide for much needed flexibility. For Catholics, it is Christian tradition; for Pentecostals, it is the work of the Holy Spirit who can lead us into new and uncharted territory (as the scriptures attest). So Pentecostals can improvise as they form new global connective bonds. This is not to say that Scripture is unimportant for Pentecostals: quite the opposite is true. Yet Scripture always needs to be interpreted, and Pentecostals can quite rapidly give fresh interpretations of Scripture, based on their understanding of what the Holy Spirit is calling them to do in new situations.
Thirdly, I have been surprised at the amount of English used in Pentecostal services (both in the singing and speaking) I have attended in non-English speaking parts of the world. I think that many (certainly not all) Pentecostals who are part of thriving global networks do not simply use English for convenience sake, but the language is a sign of connection to American evangelical Christianity. In other words, contemporary American evangelicalism is a mythic vision of church that helps to bind together Pentecostals around the world. This binding occurs first at the level of ideas (“that vision is what we aspire to”) and then at personal and material levels (“let us meet others who aspire to that vision, let us imitate the American evangelical lifestyle in some way”). The worldwide popularity of the prosperity gospel is, I believe, another manifestation of the connection that the mythic vision of American evangelicalism provides. It seems to me that this mythic vision functions like the idea of “Rome” for Roman Catholics – the vast majority of whom have never been to that city, but revere it all the same.
Finally, Pentecostalism takes seriously the claim that spiritual forces are not merely existing but are active all around us, and within us. This give Pentecostals a theological language and certain religious practices that are simultaneously easily understood and shared around the world, but also are open to thoroughly local interpretation. In ways that are analogous to Roman Catholicism, Pentecostalism has developed language and gestures that are common and shared, but can mean very different things in different places and cultures.
For at least these four reasons, it seems to me, Pentecostals are at the forefront of creating worldwide Christianity, albeit through a multiplicity of organizations and fellowships. Pentecostalism provides a radically different alternative to Roman Catholicism to be a global church. (The Catholic charismatic movement, interestingly, draws on both traditions.) However, the different alternatives respond in their own way to some common requirements, which I have hinted at above, for a truly global Christianity.
Several months ago I offered some suggestions about how Roman Catholicism is able to hold together as a global Christian body in today’s world, and said that the other Christian tradition (perhaps “stream” is a better word) that accomplishes this well is Pentecostalism. As in the case of Roman Catholicism, my observations do not come from an in-depth study of Pentecostals, but from personal experiences in various parts of Asia, Africa and North America.
To be clear, I do not think Catholics and Pentecostals understand “church” in the same way (they have very different ecclesiologies). The contrast between Catholicism and Pentecostalism is instructive, and shows us that there is no one sure way to be a global church. Paradoxically however, I think that often their different ways of being “church” accomplish similar ends when it comes to being global.
First of all, what is it that unites Pentecostals? I would venture to say that whereas the Roman Catholic Church is held together by an organization and regularized liturgies, Pentecostalism is held together by personal relationships. Certainly there are important international Pentecostal denominational bodies, such as the Assemblies of God, but personal relationships are the real glue that binds together Pentecostals worldwide. Networking is what makes for the global nature of Pentecostalism. So Pentecostals who are part of a world-wide connections get along with each other, and are generally of the same theological/ecclesial disposition. If things don’t work out on a personal level, they leave the network and join/form another one. Roman Catholicism, held together by organization and liturgy, can embrace people who really don’t agree (or at times even like!) each other.
Secondly, both Catholics and Pentecostals have a counterweight to the authority of Scripture, and this counterweight can provide for much needed flexibility. For Catholics, it is Christian tradition; for Pentecostals, it is the work of the Holy Spirit who can lead us into new and uncharted territory (as the scriptures attest). So Pentecostals can improvise as they form new global connective bonds. This is not to say that Scripture is unimportant for Pentecostals: quite the opposite is true. Yet Scripture always needs to be interpreted, and Pentecostals can quite rapidly give fresh interpretations of Scripture, based on their understanding of what the Holy Spirit is calling them to do in new situations.
Thirdly, I have been surprised at the amount of English used in Pentecostal services (both in the singing and speaking) I have attended in non-English speaking parts of the world. I think that many (certainly not all) Pentecostals who are part of thriving global networks do not simply use English for convenience sake, but the language is a sign of connection to American evangelical Christianity. In other words, contemporary American evangelicalism is a mythic vision of church that helps to bind together Pentecostals around the world. This binding occurs first at the level of ideas (“that vision is what we aspire to”) and then at personal and material levels (“let us meet others who aspire to that vision, let us imitate the American evangelical lifestyle in some way”). The worldwide popularity of the prosperity gospel is, I believe, another manifestation of the connection that the mythic vision of American evangelicalism provides. It seems to me that this mythic vision functions like the idea of “Rome” for Roman Catholics – the vast majority of whom have never been to that city, but revere it all the same.
Finally, Pentecostalism takes seriously the claim that spiritual forces are not merely existing but are active all around us, and within us. This give Pentecostals a theological language and certain religious practices that are simultaneously easily understood and shared around the world, but also are open to thoroughly local interpretation. In ways that are analogous to Roman Catholicism, Pentecostalism has developed language and gestures that are common and shared, but can mean very different things in different places and cultures.
For at least these four reasons, it seems to me, Pentecostals are at the forefront of creating worldwide Christianity, albeit through a multiplicity of organizations and fellowships. Pentecostalism provides a radically different alternative to Roman Catholicism to be a global church. (The Catholic charismatic movement, interestingly, draws on both traditions.) However, the different alternatives respond in their own way to some common requirements, which I have hinted at above, for a truly global Christianity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)