When Is A Pentecostal A Pentecostal

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

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

Pneuma 28,2_f10_278-282I 9/26/06 4:42 PM Page 278

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 28, No. 2, Fall 2006

When is a Pentecostal a Pentecostal? The Global Perspective of Allan Anderson

Michael Wilkinson

In the sociology of religion there is much discussion and debate about the nature of religion in contemporary societies, if not in a global world.1 The issues are not simply about definition and whether a researcher employs a substantive or a functional strategy. These debates highlight the con- tested, if not arbitrary, boundaries of what counts as religion and who is counting. Definitions are never neutral and always problematic. Issues of power and authority are at the root of many disputes over the distinction between “official” and “popular” expressions, colonial encounters, and multicultural contexts. Western concepts of religion emerged at a partic- ular point in history and have shaped our understanding of religion. Not surprisingly, the nature of Pentecostalism and Charismatic Christianity is also hotly debated. Questions about identity, that is, who is a Pentecostal and who is not one, come to the forefront of discussion. Allan Anderson’s An Introduction to Pentecostalism is a very good example of the prob- lem of defining religion and, more specifically, Pentecostalism.2 It is also a call for substantial research on Pentecostalism from an inclusive his- torical and crosscultural context.

Anderson writes an engaging and provocative critique of worldwide Pentecostalism that attempts to understand the diversity of forms and expressions of the movement. To do so he systematically organizes the available data on Pentecostalism to tell a convincing story of a movement coming to terms with its origins, theologies, histories, social qualities, and multicultural expressions. Some theologians may not be convinced, from a sociological perspective, that Anderson is correct. Pentecostal identity, the fairly consistent pattern of thinking, feeling, and acting, is rooted in the local. However, Pentecostal identity cannot be reduced to the local, and this highlights the problem of defining Pentecostal movements world- wide. Global Pentecostalism is rightly understood by Anderson as a loosely held, contested, worldwide movement within Christianity that assumes many forms. To demonstrate his thesis, Anderson addresses the question

1

See Arthur L. Greil and David Bromley, eds., Defining Religion: Investigating the Boundaries Between the Sacred and Secular (New York: Elsivier Science Ltd., 2003).

2

Allan Anderson, An Introduction to Pentecostalism: Global Charismatic Christianity. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004).

© 2006 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden pp. 278–282

1

Pneuma 28,2_f10_278-282I 9/26/06 4:42 PM Page 279

When is a Pentecostal a Pentecostal? The Global Perspective of Allan Anderson

of Pentecostal identity, first, by rooting various expressions in their his- torical and social context and, second, by examining how the local con- text shaped theological developments.

An Introduction to Pentecostalism is an important contribution for scholars of global Pentecostalism, not because it answers all the ques- tions but because it sets out an agenda for future research. The book cov- ers a wide spectrum of sociological, historical, and theological phenomena and raises a number of points for researchers of global Pentecostalism. While it is not possible to deal with all of the questions Anderson raises, I will limit my comments to two points in relation to global Pentecostal research: methodological or conceptual questions, and theoretical issues.

Defining the field of study, including the conceptualizing of Pente- costalism, is a methodological problem that requires some attention. By methodological I am referring to the broader epistemological question and not the specific research strategies of quantitative or qualitative research. The field of study, Anderson argues, must root the local in the global. Conceptualizing Pentecostalism must be inclusive. In other words, there needs to be some thinking about the ways in which researchers study Pentecostalism and the kinds of knowledge produced by those research strategies. Anderson raises this issue very clearly when he critiques the dominant story of Pentecostalism as shaped through the lens of research from the United States and, specifically, the ways in which it is rooted in Azusa and classical Pentecostalism.

Anderson attempts to find a way out of the problem of narrowly defining Pentecostalism as a single homogeneous group. For Anderson, family resemblance does not mean that all members are identical. The challenge is to hold the many varieties of Pentecostalism loosely. Peter Beyer’s approach to a cross-cultural analysis of religion points to the kind of research that needs to be conducted in order to understand better what Anderson is saying.3 Only by thoroughly understanding the specific forms and then applying a comparative and historical perspective can scholars of global Pentecostalism come to a fuller understanding of similarities and differences among Pentecostals. Surveys of Pentecostalism only give us a taste of the diversity. Further understanding will come with detailed studies in all the regions covered. Comparison of the many cases can then be made in multiple directions to see how social context shapes local and

3

Peter Beyer, “Defining Religion in Cross-National Perspective: Identity and Difference in Official Conceptions,” in Arthur Greil and David G. Bromley, eds., Defining Religion: Investigating the Boundaries Between the Sacred and Secular (New York: Elsevier, 2003), 163–88.

279

2

Pneuma 28,2_f10_278-282I 9/26/06 4:42 PM Page 280

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 28, No. 2, Fall 2006

global reality. A global perspective does not suggest homogeneity. It should, however, consider both the universal and the particular.

Let me suggest some avenues for further research from Anderson’s book. First, and not necessarily in order of priority, there needs to be some exploration and comparison of Pentecostals between Europe, Canada, and the United States precisely because other important research has explored the location of religion in those contexts but with little reference to Pentecostalism.4 Pentecostalism should also be examined among com- monwealth countries such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to explore similarities and differences in development.5 While classical Pentecostalism is the dominant expression in these regions, it is surely shaped by the local context. Perhaps classical Pentecostalism has more in common with evangelicals in those regions or with the social location of religion in general than with other Pentecostals, and should be researched for those specificities but always with an eye on the global. At the very least, we should not assume that “classical” Pentecostalism is the same everywhere or that it is “simply” an American import/export, an idea against which Anderson adamantly argues.

Comparisons should also be made from fully developed studies between former colonies but not limited to English-speaking regions. For exam- ple, what do we know about Pentecostalism in former French colonies of Africa? How has the experience of colonialism shaped the character of Pentecostalism in French-speaking West African countries like Benin, Burkina Faso, and Côte d’Ivoire? Related to this question is our lack of knowledge about the migration of Pentecostals from Africa, Asia, and South America to Europe or North America. While the field is growing and some important research is already being conducted, further research can explore these findings in a more systematic way.6 For example, how does the migration of Pentecostals from various regions around the world transform Pentecostalism at “home” and in their new settings? What do we know about the different forms of Pentecostalism that are transplanted

4

See David Lyon and Marguerite Van Die, eds., Rethinking Church, State, and Modernity: Canada Between Europe and America (Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2000).

5

See George A. Rawlyk and Mark A. Noll, eds., Amazing Grace: Evangelicalism in Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1994).

6

See, e.g., Nicole Rodriguez Toulis, Believing Identity: Pentecostalism and the Mediation of Jamaican Ethnicity and Gender in England (Oxford, UK: Berg, 1997); Rijk A. Van Dijk, “From Camp to Encompassment: Discourses of Transsubjectivity in the Ghanian Pentecostal Diaspora,” Journal of Religion inAfrica 27, no. 2 (1997): 135–59; and Michael Wilkinson, The Spirit Said Go: Pentecostal Immigrants in Canada(New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2006).

280

3

Pneuma 28,2_f10_278-282I 9/26/06 4:42 PM Page 281

When is a Pentecostal a Pentecostal? The Global Perspective of Allan Anderson

from Ghana to Germany, Korea to Canada, Jamaica to Britain, Argentina to Spain, or China to the USA? What more can we learn about the reverse impact of migration? For example, what impact does the migration of Mexican Pentecostals in the United States have on the families and con- gregations they leave? What do we know about Pentecostalism among Sudanese refugees in Kenya or Ethiopia? What impact does ease of travel, communication, and the sending of funds “home” have socially? What about the transferring of ideas and experiences? What role does Pente- costalism play in the migration process? Do dreams and visions facilitate migration? What should scholars study: transitions, beliefs, rituals, expe- riences, communities? If we say Pentecostalism is a global culture, how so? Certainly, the social context of Pentecostalism has changed and research needs to link the data to broader theories, studies, and trends, whether they be historical, anthropological, sociological, or theological. Anderson’s book suggests many new avenues for global Pentecostal research, some of which is already under way, and much more is still to come.

Researching global Pentecostalism also requires the development of theoretical perspectives resonant with other explanations in the fields of history, anthropology, theology, and sociology.7 Pentecostal Theology need not be disconnected from theoretical questions in those areas. Anderson only alludes to this problem when he states that his study is from a mul- ticultural perspective. The problem, however, is that his viewpoint is not fully articulated and is somewhat inconsistent throughout the book as an overarching explanatory tool. It is obvious that he is influenced by Walter Hollenweger’s ideas. Yet he also makes many references to explanations from a number of other positions, including the phenomenology of Harvey Cox, the Weberian view of David Martin, and occasionally those points consistent with rational choice theory. Certainly, multiple views can and should be offered for explanation, and Anderson makes sense when he accounts for his descriptions. There are occasions when this eclectic approach could be strengthened with further reference to his multicultural viewpoint, which should be weaved throughout the book. In other words, while the story in Anderson’s book is global, it is not necessarily framed within a theoretical understanding of globalization.8

7

See James A. Beckford, Social Theory and Religion (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003), where he argues that sociology of religion needs to frame its research in the larger context of theoretical discussions in sociology. See chapter 4 for an extended discussion about globalization and religion.

8

See Peter Beyer, “Social Forms of Religion and Religions in Contemporary Global Society,” in Michele Dillon, ed., Handbook of the Sociology of Religion (Cambridge, UK:

281

4

Pneuma 28,2_f10_278-282I 9/26/06 4:42 PM Page 282

Pentecostal Theology, Volume 28, No. 2, Fall 2006

Scholars of global Pentecostalism must wrestle with the questions of globalization.9 This will not limit the many ways in which to interpret global Pentecostalism but only open the area up to new explanations. Debates have certainly intensified over Pentecostal identity, origins, and boundaries. But Pentecostals are not the only religious group to experi- ence the buffeting from globalization, and this suggests that larger social forces are at work. Worldwide transformations have social consequences for culture, politics, economics, and religion. The debate about who is and is not a Pentecostal needs to be understood in the context of global- izing changes. While Pentecostalism undergoes a transformation, the ways in which Pentecostals respond to these changes also need to be under- stood. Anderson’s book is an inspiring and thought-provoking read that offers an inclusive, historical, and crosscultural perspective. It will also be a catalyst for future research on global Pentecostalism.

Cambridge University Press, 2003), 45–60, for a discussion on the different forms of reli- gion in contemporary global society.

9

There are many viewpoints on globalization. See, e.g., Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern World System (New York: Academic Press, 1974); Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990); Roland Robertson, Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture(London, UK: Sage, 1992); and Martin Albrow, The Global Age(Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997). There is an increasing literature on global Pentecostalism, some of which deals with globaliza- tion themes better than others. See Karla Poewe, ed., Charismatic Christianity as a Global Culture (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1994); David Lehmann, Struggle for the Spirit: Religious Transformation and Popular Culture in Brazil and Latin America (Oxford, UK: Polity Press, 1996); Murray W. Dempster, Byron D. Klaus, and Douglas Petersen, eds., The Globalization of Pentecostalism: A Religion Made to Travel (Oxford, UK: Regnum Books, 1999); Simon Coleman, The Globalization of Charismatic Christianity: Spreading the Gospel of Prosperity (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000); André Corten and Ruth Marshall-Fratani, eds., Between Babel and Pentecost: Transnational Pentecostalism in Africa and Latin America (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press 2001); and David Martin, Pentecostalism: The World Their Parish(Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 2002).

282

5