Democrat Or Republican Theological Reflections On Party Loyalty

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

Pneuma 26,2_prelims 2/27/06 11:59 AM Page i

PNEUMA The Pentecostal Theology

EDITOR

Frank D. Macchia, Vanguard University of Southern California

MANAGING EDITOR

Ed Rybarczyk, Vanguard University of Southern California

BOOK REVIEW EDITOR

Amos Yong, Bethel College

BOOK REVIEW EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Sarah Jacobson, Bethel College

COPY EDITOR

Nancy de Flon

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

Edith L. Blumhofer, University of Chicago Divinity School

Donald W. Dayton, Drew Theological School

Sherry Sherrod Dupree, Santa Fe Community College

Hannah K. Harrington, Patten College

Jeff Hittenberger, Vanguard University of Southern California

Cheryl Bridges Johns, Church of God Theological Seminary

Steven J. Land, Church of God Theological Seminary

Henry I. Lederle, Oral Roberts University

Leonard Lovett, Independent Scholar

Gary B. McGee, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary

Doug Petersen, Vanguard University of Southern California Margaret M. Poloma, University of Akron, and Vanguard University of

Southern California

Cecil M. Robeck Jr., Fuller Theological Seminary

James K. Smith, Calvin College

Russell P. Spittler, Vanguard University of Southern California

Roger Stronstad, Western Pentecostal Bible College

H. Vinson Synan, Regent University

Eldin Villafañe, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary

Grant Wacker, Duke Divinity School

Everett A. Wilson, Bethany College

1

Pneuma 26,2_prelims 2/27/06 11:59 AM Page ii

2

Pneuma 26,2_prelims 2/27/06 11:59 AM Page iii

PNEUMA

The Pentecostal Theology

Volume 26, Number 2, Fall 2004

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL

Democrat or Republican? Theological Reflections

on Party Loyalty …………………………………………………………………….. 177

Frank D. Macchia

ARTICLES

Globalization, ““Marketization,”” and the Mission of Pentecostal Higher Education in Africa …………………………………………………….. 182

Jeffrey S. Hittenberger

Pentecostalism and the African Diaspora: An Examination

of the Missions Activities of the Church of Pentecost ……………… 216

Opoku Onyinah

Sharia and Islam in Nigerian Pentecostal Rhetoric,

1970–2003 ……………………………………………………………………………… 242

Ogbu U. Kalu

The Pentecostalization of Latin American

and U.S. Latino Christianity …………………………………………………… 262

Gastón Espinosa

Latin American Pentecostalism: Social Capital,

Networks, and Politics ……………………………………………………………. 293

Douglas Petersen

Pentecostals and Christian Unity: Facing the Challenge ………… 307

Cecil M. Robeck, Jr.

DIALOGUE

Are Pentecostal Seminaries a Good Idea? ……………………………… 339

Jon Mark Ruthven

3

Pneuma 26,2_prelims 2/27/06 11:59 AM Page iv

Contents

RESPONSE

Pentecostal Seminaries Are Essential to the Future Health

of the Church ………………………………………………………………………… 346

Joseph L. Castleberry

REVIEW ESSAY

John Fletcher as John Wesley’’s Vindicator and Designated

Successor? A Response to Laurence W. Wood ………………………… 355

Reviewed by Donald W. Dayton

BOOK REVIEWS

Chanta M. Haywood, Prophesying Daughters: Black Women Preachers and the World …………………………………………………………..

Reviewed by Estrelda Alexander

Todd Penner and Caroline Vander Stichele, eds., Contextualizing Acts: Lukan Narrative and Greco-Roman Discourse ………………….

Reviewed by Paul Elbert

Nancy A. Hardesty, Faith Cure: Divine Healing in the Holiness and Pentecostal Movements ……………………………………….

Reviewed by Holly Feia

Robert L. Gallagher and Paul Hertig, eds., Mission in Acts: Ancient Narratives in Contemporary Context ……………………

Reviewed by Antipas Harris

Kirsteen Kim, Mission in the Spirit: The Holy Spirit in Indian Christian Theologies ……………………………………………………..

Reviewed by Hans Hess

James R. Goff, Jr., and Grant Wacker, eds., Portraits of a Generation: Early Pentecostal Leaders ……………………………………..

Reviewed by Harold D. Hunter

Cephas N. Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism: A Study of the Development of Charismatic Renewal of the Mainline Churches in Ghana ………………………………………………………………….

Reviewed by Ogbu U. Kalu

John Christopher Thomas, He Loved Them until the End: The Farewell Materials in the Gospel according to John …………..

Reviewed by Jeffrey S. Lamp

Talmadge L. French, Our God is One: The Story of the Oneness Pentecostals ………………………………………………………………..

Reviewed by Darin D. Lenz

James H.S. Steven, Worship in the Spirit: Charismatic Worship in the Church of England …………………………………………………………….

Reviewed by Andy Lord

362

365

368

370

372

374

376

379

381

383

4

Pneuma 26,2_prelims 2/27/06 11:59 AM Page v

Contents

William J. Abraham, The Logic of Renewal ……………………………. 385

Reviewed by Bill Oliverio

French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad, eds., Life in the Spirit, New Testament Commentary …………………………………………………… 387

Reviewed by Paulson Pulikottil

Denis Edwards, Breath of Life: A Theology of the

Creator Spirit ………………………………………………………………………….. 389

Reviewed by Sally Shelton

Darrin J. Rodgers, Northern Harvest: Pentecostalism in North Dakota …………………………………………………………………………………… 392

Reviewed by Donald D. Smeeton

Jean Paillard, In Praise of the Inexpressible: Paul’’s Experience of the Divine Mystery ……………………………………………………………… 394

Reviewed by Chris M. Smith

Stanley J. Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God: The Trinity in Contemporary Theology ………………………………………………………. 396

Reviewed by Steven M. Studebaker

Raniero Cantalamessa, Come, Creator Spirit: Meditations

on the Veni Creator, trans. Denis and Marlene Barrett ……………. 398

Reviewed by Wolfgang Vondey

Looking Backward, Leaping Ahead: A Short Review Essay of ““The Complete Azusa Street Library,”” Part I …………………….. 401

Reviewed by Amos Yong

Ted Peters, Playing God? Genetic Determinism

and Human Freedom ……………………………………………………………… 406

Reviewed by Koo D. Yun

CONTRIBUTOR’’S LIST ………………………………………………………. 408

5

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 176

6

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 177

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 26, No. 2, Fall 2004

S SP

Editorial

Democrat or Republican? Theological

Reflections on Party Loyalty

Frank D. Macchia

Social Democrat, but not religious socialist! These stern words of admo- nition were penned by Karl Barth in the first edition (1919) of his famous commentary, The Epistle to the Romans (390). The first two words state, in effect, “Okay, be a Social Democrat!” They refer to the socialist Social Democratic Party, with which Barth himself was aligned. He says to his brothers and sisters in the faith that alignment with the Social Democrats can be viewed as a responsible choice. Barth’s left-leaning political align- ment with the Social Democrats, however, drew harsh disagreement from some, especially among those who felt that he was “soft” on communism. One recalls, for example, Reinhold Niebuhr’s penetrating question as to why Barth, who raised a clear voice of protest against the Nazis, was silent on the communist takeover of Hungary. Such political discussions should not be avoided among theologians and church leaders.

The quote above from Barth had to do with the possibility among indi- vidual Christians of responsible alignment with a political party. Of course, there are many different kinds of political loyalties. Representative voices in the church can speak to issues but must be careful to allow for a cer- tain amount of diversity and freedom among church members, not only on the issues, but also with regard to party involvement. Christians might join movements or organizations both within and outside of the Church that focus on a particular issue or set of issues, such as pro-life or envi- ronmental protection. Such is laudable. Many in the U.S. justifiably see the need for a broad-based political platform with which they can align

© 2004 Brill Academic Publishers, Inc., Boston pp. 177–181

7

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 178

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 26, No. 2, Fall 2004

themselves to one degree or another. They will find themselves on one side or the other in the struggle between Democrats and Republicans.

Such political alignments among individuals in the Church will create tensions and disagreements. Christians seek to realize concretely the val- ues implied in the gospel for the life of the polis, the nation, and the world. The political consequences of faith raise a host of ambiguities and difficult choices. After all, we are fallen and live in a fallen world. As Vanguard University’s Dennis McNutt stated so provocatively, politics is for “Christians and other sinners.” Christians will not always agree on the direction to take in every case. There are, indeed, times of relative moral clarity in which the Church as a whole or a significant segment of it will find itself raising one voice by way of a moral response or protest. In other cases, the situation involves a greater element of controversy and disagreement. Barth’s admonition, Social Democrat, was penned as a way of saying that individual Christians have the freedom in Christ and the grace of God to express the implications of the gospel for the polis by forming concrete alliances in the world of party politics without condemnation, even if these alliances are bound to raise serious questions among others in the faith.

This is an election year. Politics is at the forefront of the media and our consciousness. At the time of this writing, the Democratic and Republican conventions have come and gone and both sides are in the heat of battle. By the time this editorial appears, a president will have been elected. Christians have found themselves on both sides of the struggle for a new president. Questions are raised and debated. Has Bush responded wisely to the terrorist attacks of September 11? Was his invasion of Iraq morally and politically justified? Did his foreign policy unnecessarily alienate other nations? Has his voice been sensitive to both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian struggle? Has his economic policy favored the disadvantaged? On the other hand, does Kerry show promise for dealing with these and other issues wisely and justly? Many are still waiting for a substantial and detailed presentation of his vision for the future. I am sure that we will all have more clarity on these questions by the time this editorial appears. Though such questions might seem somewhat dated at this point, they still serve to illustrate the difficulty Christians face in fulfilling their role as citizens, a role that Scripture will not allow us to skirt, especially not for the sake of an apocalyptic eschatology that ignores the human affairs of the polis. In the same chapter of Romans (chapter 13) in which Paul urges Christians to be accountable to those in power, he also writes that the day is far spent and the end is near.

178

8

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 179

Editorial

The fact that Christ is at the door of history to bring it to an end does not imply for Paul anarchy or escapism with regard to worldly politics. Barth wrote in his 1922 Romans commentary concerning chapter 13 that worldly governments and politics have their place in the patience of God in history. We live out that patience responsibly and actively or in a “wait- ing in action,” as Blumhardt taught Barth so well. Barth recognized in the admonition Social Democrat the activism of faith, a committed action in which Christians will necessarily find themselves involved in political struggles for the preservation and realization of values dear to them in their attempt at loyalty to the gospel. In the process, they will find them- selves more or less leaning toward one party or agenda over another. How else can it be? If the Church believes that its gospel is to affect the bod- ily and social existence of human beings in community, political ques- tions cannot be inconsequential. Tough choices need to be made and can only be carried out by organizations with the necessary political power to do it. A voice crying in the wilderness has its place in the long term, but, in the meantime, politics must be forged in one direction or another. Christians cannot be content with functioning as mere bystanders who crit- icize others afterward with the value of hindsight.

Yet, we need guidance. It is not that the scriptures are silent on the principles that effect political life. As Walter Brueggemann has shown us in his stunning book The Prophetic Imagination, the scriptures do not tell us in detail what decisions to make politically. How can they, since such matters are contextual and changing? But the scriptures do present for us a “prophetic imagination” that is persistently on the side of the victims and disadvantaged and is never satisfied with merely managing the status quo. The priorities expressed in the Exodus story, the prophetic voices of Moses and the prophets, the decisive fulfillment of these in the liberation story of Jesus, and the proclamation of Christ in the apostolic witness point us toward a politics fashioned after the principles of justice, peace, freedom, and mercy.

But here is the rub. There is enough ambiguity in defining these terms in any given political issue that Christians will find themselves at times at odds with each other, especially over which political party is most dis- cerning in enhancing biblical values in American life. But here is where we must not become fanatical and impatient by wedding the political impli- cations of our faith uncritically with any one party. If living out the patience of God in history has a politically active side, there is also the patient side as well. If the presence of the Kingdom of God implies engagement in

179

9

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 180

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 26, No. 2, Fall 2004

the world of politics, the eschatological transcendence of the Kingdom implies patience. By patience here I refer to an eschatological reservation or a hesitance to identify any political party or agenda with the Christian position and certainly not the Kingdom of God on earth! This patience is expressed in the second part of Barth’s admonition: but not religious social- ist! Christians can participate fully in the Social Democratic Party. Be Social Democrats! But have no illusions about the significance of that party. It is not absolute but relative and fallen. It is not above question- ing and criticism and it cannot be held in such a way that one loses the freedom of faith to hear other voices from other alliances. There must even be freedom to fluctuate between the dominant parties, even if one party seems generally to appear more discerning than another in isolating the most urgent issues and acting justly on them.

In other words, there can be no simple identification of the gospel or faith and political loyalties. Be Social Democrats but not religious social- ists! To put the matter in the U.S. context, be Christian and Democrat but not Christian-Democrat! Be Christian and Republican (oh no!) but not Christian-Republican! The uncritical allegiance of certain politically engaged ministers or Christians within a certain party makes me very uncomfort- able. I cannot help but think that a serious compromise of Christian free- dom has been made. Nearly every time one hears a Democrat or Republican speak to issues in the media, the party line gets repeated like a broken record. I yearn to hear a more critical loyalty expressed, even if this can be used by the other party as a weapon against the party with which one is aligned. Certainly Christians should have the freedom of faith to express such critical loyalty now and again, even if this be misused and misun- derstood, causing politically gifted Christians to be marginalized to an extent within their party. So be it! Is this not the price to pay for Christian humility and freedom within political life? How refreshing it would be to hear Jerry Falwell question the President’s invasion of Iraq! No matter how serious politics is, it can never be held with the same grip with which we hold the gospel. Barth wrote in the 1922 edition of his Romans com- mentary that a political career or involvement “becomes possible only when it is seen to be essentially a game” (489). This is not meant as a cynical remark, even though the deceptive use of language in political rhetoric can make one cynical about the entire process. This remark is meant as a description of the temporal and penultimate nature of all polit- ical engagement. Faith finds its freedom in forging its absolute allegiance to the Kingdom of God alone.

180

10

Pneuma 26,2 f1_176-181 2/27/06 11:54 AM Page 181

Editorial

Thus, Barth writes provocatively in the 1919 edition to the Romans commentary: Let there be “strike, general strike, and street fighting if there must be, but no religious justification or glorification of it” (390). Is Barth suggesting a dualism of faith and politics? Not by any means. Our polit- ical engagements and alliances, no matter how fallen or penultimate, can and must be lived out in a way that is consistent with the gospel and in a way that forms part of faith’s vocation in the world. Though Christians do not have a corner on political wisdom or giftedness, they cannot avoid drawing consequences from the gospel for political action. Barth would say, for example, that the preacher does not preach politics but rather the Word of God. Yet, every sermon has political implications, which the peo- ple of God will exercise their freedom to discern. Such positions are penul- timate and fallen and, therefore, must always be questioned, always held in dialogue with other voices, always held in humility, even if passion- ately held. Even if moral clarity seems to demand a certain stance, even here there is room for discussion and diversity of input. Without this, even ethically responsible positions can be held in a way that seems inflexible and intolerant, unworthy of the Christian witness. There must be balm in Gilead, even for those who seem uninformed or on the wrong side of an issue. Yet, in spite of the penultimate nature of all political judgments, we hope that by the grace of God our political action can in some way bear witness to the Kingdom of God on earth. Barth used the concept of para- ble (Gleichnis) to express the relationship between political movements and the Kingdom of God in a way that avoids both an idolatrous identification and a dualism between them. As we preserve the tension of this dialectic, all Christians are to cherish above all else Jesus Christ, who is the really decisive word that “we hear and obey in life and in death.” Barth wrote this in the first article of the Barmen Declaration, which was framed on behalf of the Confessing Church in its struggle against the Nazi-influenced Deutsche Christen. It is a word quite relevant for us today.

181

11