Exploding into the 20th Century, a movement unlike anything anybody had seen for over two thousand years, Pentecostalism, leaped to center stage with 500 million adherents by curtain time for the 20th Century. Starting with one woman, Agnes Ozman, who on January 1, 1901, received her personal Pentecost,[2] Pentecostalism has succeeded in defying all odds, all opposition, all criticism, and all persecution, to become the fastest growing religious movement of all times.[3] Pentecostalism has arrived in the form of classical Pentecostals, Charismatics, neo-Pentecostals, third wavers, and renewal Christianity. However else they may be different, they do share three major tenets of faith: glossolalia (Charismatics and third wavers do expect spiritual gifts, but do not anticipate that all will participate in glossolalia), premillenial expectation of Christ’s return, and divine healing.[4] It is upon these three issues that the expanding world of Pentecostalism turns.
“The growth of Pentecostalism… has been phenomenal.”[5] This growth has caught the attention of the church world, and they have begun to ask the much-needed question, “Why?” While it is not the intention of this paper to exhaustively answer this question, it is the intention to examine the role that the Second Commandment[6] has played in the Pentecostal explosion of the 20th Century with a brief look at the Pentecostal community perspective; to examine what role, if any, the Second Commandment played in the first decade of modern Pentecostal movements; to compare Pentecostal acceptance in the 20th Century between North and South America; and to learn some lessons from the information presented.
A Pentecostal Perspective of Community
In spite of their unity on issues like premillinialism and glossolalia, there often seems to be little else upon which Pentecostals agree. For example, the Pentecostal perspectives on the Church are many. Much ecclesiological reflection was carried out in connection to the question of authority in the Church, and Pentecostals were born to rebellion against any authority but the Spirit. Therefore, the Pentecostal experience did not yield a single ecclesiological teaching, and a wide variety of traditional forms of Church government can be found among Pentecostals.[7] This lack of a universal idea of the church prevented a common perspective on what constituted the church and whether church was only praying, singing, and preaching, or could church also include feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and loving one’s neighbor? Early ecclesiology was “…an area of Christian Theology often minimized and taken for granted...”[8] and left, for the most part, to individual interpretation.
North American Pentecostals, specifically, normally think, first of all, in terms of individuals and the individual infilling of the Holy Ghost. It is only upon secondary reflection, did they acknowledge the possibility that whole communities can also be converted, and therefore outward behavior may affect acceptance.[9] North American Pentecostals of the early 20th Century were prone to consider first the spiritual well-being of the individual, while Catholics (universally at that time) were prone to consider first of all the spiritual well-being of the community [church].[10] This can attribute for much of the success of the universal Catholic Church throughout the late19th and early 20th Centuries.
The initial concern of a movement indicates where the emphasis really lies. If the movement insufficiently recognizes the prismatic significance of their point of departure, then this point of departure affects the entire theological construct, and they will inevitably de-emphasize other theological constructs.[11] In other words, the church must consider the individualistic nature of their early 20th Century North American Pentecostal roots, and, by recognizing the biblical path from which they (or their ancestors) deviated, they can find the path to Second Commandment ministry and renewal. If this analysis is correct, one would do well to engender serious theological reflection on the relationship between Ecclesiology and Soteriology, as well as a more authentic understanding of the relationship of pneumatology to Ecclesiology and Soteriology. In other words, it would behoove Pentecostals to take another look at how they do ‘church’ and what constitutes ‘church.’
Community in the First Decade of Modern Pentecostal Movements
Unfortunately, “The… extensive documentation for saints’ mundane social lives simply is not available.”[12] Herein lies a major obstacle to this vein of research, and therefore must be done with an abundance of circumstantial evidence. There is no shortage of legitimate records of the vast volume of “classical Pentecostal” church services. “Meetings followed daily and nightly… Prayer was held day and night… No one would be likely to complain about all night meetings… That meeting lasted for over three years, going on day and night without a break…”[13] “The services ran almost continuously. Seeking souls could be found under the power almost any hour, night, and day…”[14] “…she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful…”[15]
What little we can surmise from diaries, letters, and autobiographies is that Pentecostals attended church 6 or more times each week, and at least partly it was because it offered a time of rewarding fellowship.[16] So one can see, while the focus was upon individual salvation, the emphasis upon individual salvation did not preclude the services from having the added (unforeseeable to some) benefit of community, even though initially fellowship was discretely denied in regular worship meetings.[17]
It is worth noting that Wacker claimed, “The [Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[18] This will be especially important when we see the perception of Pentecostalism in South America below. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals [in Latin America] don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[19] This difference, as I will postulate below, gives rationale to the explosion and fizzle of revival throughout the first two decades of Pentecostalism in North America and the general rejection of its postulations. Wherever Parham went, he left behind people who believed that they had been transformed by a powerful encounter with the living Christ.[20] Unfortunately, he rarely left them with any sense of community or continuity in the form of a church or fellowship group. “Despite [Parham’s] heartening beginning, committed supporters were few, and within several months Parham’s ministry [once again] had disintegrated.”[21]
This is not to say there was no community at all. For wherever there are humans they will seek out community with other like-minded folk. Officially, however, fellowship and community were worldly and unnecessary. Part of this must have been secondary to the belief in the imminent return of Jesus Christ for the Church. Wacker argued that while there did not seem to be much fellowship outside of church services, it can be found if one looks behind the verbiage of the time. For example, while “baseball was out… faith homes were in.” [22] Wacker theorized that a week at a faith home replaced the recreation and fellowship once enjoyed during a week at the beach. A day spent at campmeetings in “…earnest devotion to God” was often spent enjoying and consuming “…baskets containing the fat of the land.”[23]
Few ever stopped to think about the effect this stifling of community, and consequently upon Second Commandment[24] ministry, could have on the Pentecostal movement around the country. Kurt Berend, with the benefit of 100 years of hindsight, offers the following example of the effect of community involvement and acceptance. He researched two churches and the towns in which they were built (Canaan, New Hampshire, and Jefferson, New Hampshire) from the Harvester (Pentecostal) movement, that was only found in the Northeastern part of the United States. Berend’s opening point in this dialogue is, “Several factors other than tongues speaking proved to be significant in determining what type of reception the Harvesters received.”[25]
Both churches were founded in rural New Hampshire farming towns in the year of 1907. There was little difference that could be noted other than Jefferson seemed to have more established churches and secret societies than Canaan did. What can be established is that a different approach was utilized by the founders. In Canaan the first family to be converted, who would become the backbone of the church, was George Barney and his family. He and his family had been long-time residents in the area, active in all aspects of community life, and their name was well established in the countryside. The immediate and extended family of George Barney was active in the local economy and government.[26] In 1956 the beautiful brick uptown church, founded by Barney, joined the Assemblies of God and changed its name to the Canaan Assembly of God, as it remains to this day. [27] “Instead of criticizing the [Pentecostal Church], the paper [Canaan Reporter] praised it, noting, ‘The work… is progressing rapidly towards completion… for this little church which means so much for this society (emphasis added).’”[28]
Not far away in Jefferson another church was also founded by the Harvesters and was pastored by a man named Wright. “Throughout much of his ministry Wright [Jefferson’s founding (and only) pastor] exhibited a proclivity for confrontation.” The Jefferson Times and the Jefferson Democrat both noted the violent attacks Wright made on the establishment (denominational religion and other town societies).[29] Furthermore, and probably because of his violent attacks, Wright was unable to attract prominent community members into his fold. Less than one year after its humble beginning, around 1 AM on December 8, 1908, somebody(ies) threw several sticks of dynamite through the newly-built church window and blew the church level with the ground. That was the end of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, New Hampshire. [30]
One of the fundamental differences between Canaan and Jefferson was the Barney family. “Their social respectability and community involvement offered credibility to the fledging Pentecostal movement in Canaan.” While in fact many did disagree with the Pentecostalism of the Barney’s, they accepted Pentecostalism because the Barneys were “hard-working contributors to the welfare of the community (emphasis added).”[31] “Their [the Barneys] involvement in Second Commandment ministries, more than anything or anyone else, proved to be the decisive variable in the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters and their message. Their role in the daily life of the community led to the region’s open-armed welcome to the Harvesters... (emphasis added).”[32] It is important to note that it was not speaking in tongues that caused the rejection of Pentecostalism in Jefferson, but rather the constant attacks led by Wright were both annoying and offensive to the people they wanted to win.[33]
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in North America
“Since the Pentecostals so completely rejected society, it is not surprising that society rejected the Pentecostals. This period of rejection lasted roughly from 1906 to 1923, when Aimee Semple McPherson with her Foursquare Gospel movement gave Pentecostalism its… first taste of acceptance by the public.”[34] Although much negative can be, and has been, said about McPherson, her vision of what the church should be set the pace for the next twenty years. With a price tag of 1.5 million dollars, McPherson built the Angelus Temple in Los Angeles in 1923 that sat 5,300 people,[35] and for twenty years the temple was filled to capacity every time service was held, with thousands being turned away at the door. “In the beginning, she personally conducted twenty-one services per week for the faithful… popular demand quickly overwhelmed her. People stood in line for hours for seats.” [36]
McPherson’s talent was the ability to present the Gospel in a package that both individuals and communities could palate. Her key was showing her followers how to love God by loving others. “Sister’s most notable public achievement in the 1930s was a social program… In 1926 the Angelus Temple Commissary was opened to feed the hungry and clothe the naked (80,000 meals were served in the first two months). When the great Depression hit the nation after 1929, the temple fed and clothed more than 1.5 million needy people in the LA area. Because of her love for the poor, Sister Aimee won the everlasting love and devotion of the down-and-outers…”[37] The Angelus Temple was known because “…ambitious programs to feed the hungry and respond to natural disasters gained goodwill.”[38] Miracle healers like McPherson found that the public would be more receptive to the message they desired to deliver if they used a sense of community involvement within which to present and live the Gospel. “The advent of Aimee Semple McPherson marked a turning point in the history of the Pentecostal movement in the United States… she did much to add interest and toleration to a religion that had been considered of interest only to the lowest levels of society.”[39]
When one considers the eulogies of Pentecost’s “successful” pioneers, this common theme of loving one’s neighbor is easily discernable, “… if there was a need, [Albert Abbey] helped… [Harry] Branding was always very thoughtful and respectful of the elderly… [William H. Ring] liked visiting the hospital and won many friends during his lifetime… [J. W. Wallace] always [was] a doer…”[40] “[Winfred Black] loved people and people sensed that love, for it was not just demonstrated from the pulpit, but was part of his everyday life… [Paul Box] a friend of the missionaries… had ninety dollars and wanted to designate it to some [mission] need… suddenly he passed away that evening… [Arnold H. Browning] had always been active in working and doing things with his hands… in home missions churches… [and] on Indian Mission projects… [Roy D. Gibson] is affectionately referred to as ‘Popsy’, and is loved by the young as well as the elderly… [W. M. Greer was] kind, considerate and gentle with those who needed help… [Frank Martin’s] joints were stiff and his hearing almost gone, but he could still outwork men half his age… through [M. J. Wolf’s] love, I realized what the love of God must be like.”[41] Over the last 100 years Pentecostalism has found success, not because it has rejected the basic tenets of orthodoxy, but rather because it has coupled truth with community, and the multitudes have been won.
Pentecost Finds Acceptance in South America
If the growth of Pentecostalism has been great and miraculous in North America, “The growth of Pentecostalism among Spanish and Portuguese-speaking people of North and South America has been phenomenal.”[42] “Assemblies of God efforts among Spanish-speaking Americans are as old as the denomination and have been the most successful ethnic-directed efforts the denomination has pursued.”[43]
There is little doubt that this success is attributed to the social aspect of Pentecostalism in South American cultures. “Jeffery Gros, a Roman Catholic ecumenist… commented that ‘Pentecostals don’t have social programs, they are a social program.’”[45] As was contrasted earlier, consider this up against what Wacker claims about early Pentecostal movements in the United States, “The [early Pentecostal] revival never had much of a social program…”[46] It should be no surprise, that while the outpouring of the Pentecostal message originated in North America, in seventy-five years it was surpassed by the Pentecostal movement in South America.
“Wacker notes that the social change brought about by Pentecostals in Latin America is significant.”[47] It has been argued that Pentecostalism is more adaptable to the Latin culture. “Much has been written about the Latin American character, whose traits include innate warmth and hospitality…”[48] However, this is no defense to those that lack this Second Commandment nature, the very nature of Christ. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”[49] Latin American pastors, although they may have been influenced by the Liberation Theology of the Catholic Church, were still following the example of Christ. Latin American pastors serve as more than just a spiritual advisor; they often act as public representatives of the unemployed and dispossessed.[50] “David Martin refers to [Pentecostalism] as a protective social capsule that renews the broken ties of family, community, and religion in an atmosphere of hope and anticipation.”[51]
Gamaliel L. Morales, an early modern Pentecostal missionary to Venezuela, offered the following example of Pentecostal success in South America. G. F. Bender arrived in Venezuela on the 25th of February, 1914, and founded an independent Pentecostal movement there. While he was only the first of many to preach the Pentecostal message, he is considered both the father and the most successful proponent of the Pentecostal message in Venezuela. Morales attributes this to, “…his concern for orphans and the needy… his desire to help with primary education for those who had no opportunity to go to secular schools.”[52]
In Latin America, Pentecostals are “…responding to the vital needs of marginalized populations…”[53] “Hunger, misery, marginalization, poverty, injustice, repression, loneliness, and exploitation typically describes the situation prevailing among the impoverished masses of Latin America.”[54] Instead of being overwhelmed, missionaries have looked on the field that is white unto harvest,[55] rolled up their sleeves, got down in the dirt beside the downtrodden, picked up their burdens, and took them to Jesus. “In the practice of Pentecostalism the neglected sectors and the poorest members of the population find a type of participation denied them by the dominant society… the Pentecostal movement in Latin America… has shown a concern for such people.”[56] Therefore, Pentecostals will continue to grow in numbers and influence in Latin America, because they have proven themselves capable of responding to the immediate concerns of their neighbors.[57]
Community and Church Growth
For a long time researchers of church growth were willing to denounce Pentecostalism; however, due to the phenomenal growth in Latin America (and other areas) they have begun serious consideration of the cause and social effect of this aberration.[58] “Had the Pentecostals been just another isolated sect emphasizing controversial doctrines… their existence could have probably been ignored. The inconvenient reality of Pentecostalism was its pervasive expansion and presence around the world.”[59] Five hundred million Pentecostals, 1/12 of the earth’s population, has turned the heads of the scoffers and doubters. While Pentecostals must never forget the truths poured out in the first decade of the last century, it is important to understand that growth has come, in a large part, to those that have learned, either biblically or culturally, the importance of the Second Commandment.
“The God of the Bible is a God who loves the poor. It is true that He loves all people, including the rich; but, if we take the Bible seriously, we know that He has a special bias for the poor… God raised up the Holiness/Pentecostal movement to minister to the poor once again… Check it out… This is one of the strongest characteristics of Pentecostal growth.”[60] Remember the words Jesus cried out in the synagogue that day, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.”[61]
Lessons Learned From Early Pentecostal Movements
If one were to synthesize all the lessons that could be learned from this research into the causes of the massive Pentecostal advent of the 20th Century, they would be capsulated in the First and Second Commandments.[62] “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”[63] God’s true church must equip itself with gifts and ministries that will fulfill the redemption of all people everywhere, focusing especially upon those who are enslaved by sin, victims of acts of violence, and those who live in degrading and unjust systems.[64] Churches that failed to provide Second Commandment ministry, they have stagnated and not grown, while other churches, started in parks twenty years ago, like Saddleback,[65] have exploded to 20,000 members while providing Second Commandment ministry to its community. While it cannot be said that Saddleback’s growth can be solely responsible to Second Commandment ministry, it is a major contributing factor.
“[Pentecostal Churches] are generally made up of women, peasants, blacks, indigenous people, young people, workers, students, taxi drivers, etc. We are calling on the vital forces in… Pentecostalism to take up with renewed urgency the historic role we must fulfill for the church…”[66] It is there among the poor, the downtrodden, and common people that the Pentecostal church, with its tremendous emphasis upon God’s Spirit acting right now in Society, is needed.[67] Pentecostalism’s spirituality should, by being involved in Second Commandment ministry, convey to everyone in the community, “…this is the way that we live” and should “…challenge all persons to be morally responsible for both the way they live in community and for the ways by which they influence the lives of others.”[68] The mission of the church must be to construct a reality in the daily lives of humanity that is according to God’s will in both the community of faith (the church) and the world (everything outside the church).[69] The world must not only hear of God’s love, but must see God’s love in the Second Commandment ministries of Pentecostals today.
The Pentecostal explosion will, by most expectations, march on through the 21st Century. If so, 1/6 to 1/3 of our earth’s population will be claiming a Pentecostal experience by the year 2100. The amount of growth will be determined by how closely we embrace the principles outlined in the First and Second Commandments. What South America has demonstrated culturally is possible and must be endorsed biblically throughout the world. North America has attempted to demonstrate her individuality, even within the ranks of the church. This individuality has cost her the revival that South America, Africa, and China have enjoyed. This individuality and absence of Second Commandment ministry keeps the world out of the church and away from the salvific preaching of Godly men and women. This trajectory must be corrected, unless one wants to miss the goal intended by Christ. The story of the Good Samaritan is calling to the North American Pentecostal movement across 2000 years of proven validity; the social-spiritual matrix of the church must be “…permeated by the ideals, values and ethics of the kingdom of God… [ie.] love, justice, and compassion.”[70]
Bibliography/Footnotes
[1] For a summary of the Second Commandment see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[2] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001), 44.
[3] Downloaded from Adherents.com on April 28, 2005, which is a statistic gathering organization that focuses on church growth. ( http://adherents.com/Na/Na_508.html).
[4] Donald W Dayton, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 15-28.
[5] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[6] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[7] Huibert Zegwarrt, “Christian Experience in Community,” Cyberjournal for Pentecostal Charismatic Research (May 2001): 22-23.
[8] Ibid, 22.
[9] Ibid, 1.
[10] Ibid, 19.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2003), 197.
[13] Frank J. Ewart, The Phenomenon of Pentecost (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1947). 1-62, 77.
[14] Talmadge L. French, Our God is One; the Story of the Oneness Pentecostals (Indianapolis, Indian: Voice and Vision Publication, 1999), 47.
[15] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[16] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 135.
[17] Ibid, 135.
[18] Ibid, 136.
[19] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[20] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture (Chicago Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1993), 43.
[21] Ibid, 53.
[22] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 134.
[23] Ibid.
[24] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[25] Kurt O. Berends, “Social Variables and Community Response,” Flowers Heritage Center (31261, 20-10), Date Unknown, Retrieved January 9, 2004: 72.
[26] Ibid, 72-77.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibid, 76.
[29] Ibid, 82.
[30] Ibid, 72-77.
[31] Ibid, 83.
[32] Ibid, 72-77.
[33] Ibid, 84.
[34] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), 190-191.
[35] Ibid, 198.
[36] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 135, 251.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid, 250.
[39] Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States, 200.
[40] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume I (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1983), 18, 36, 194, 268.
[41] Mary H. Wallace, Profiles of Pentecostal Preachers, Volume II (Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1984), 41-42, 76, 91-92, 177, 265, 396.
[42] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 293.
[43] Edith L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith; The Assemblies of God, Pentecostalism, and American Culture, 244.
[44] This graph was extrapolated from data in Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 389.
[45] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 294.
[46] Grant Wacker, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture, 136.
[47] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century (South Plainfield, New Jersey: Bridge Publishing House, 1986), 153.
[48] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 315.
[49] John 15:13.
[50] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 316.
[51] Ibid, 293-294.
[52] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000983609, 2003, 505.
[53] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects” [Cited February 19, 2004]. Online: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, ATLA0000982752, 1998, 335.
[54] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 510.
[55] John 4:35.
[56] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement”, 511.
[57] Vinson Synan, The Century of The Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal, 322.
[58] Jean Pierre Bastian, “The New Religious Map of Latin America: Causes and Social Effects”, 330.
[59] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 110.
[60] Ibid, 129.
[61] Luke 4:18.
[62] For a summary of the Second Commandment Theology see Post entitled Second Commandment.
[63] Matthew 22:37-40.
[64] Gamaliel Lugo Morales, “Moving Forward with the Latin American Pentecostal Movement.” 512.
[65] Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), Introduction.
[66] Ibid, 511.
[67] L. Grant McClung Jr., Azusa Street and Beyond; Pentecostal Missions and Church Growth in the Twentieth Century, 112.
[68] R. Jerome Boone. “Community and Worship: The Key Components of Pentecostal Christian Formation,” Flowers Heritage Center 24379, 16-10, 199, 4-5.
[69] Ibid. Page 5.
[70] Ibid, 6.
No comments:
Post a Comment