What's 'Global' about Global Pentecostalism?

Journal of Pentecostal Th eology 17 (2008) 1–13

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2008 DOI XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

www.brill .nl/pent

What’s ‘Global’ about Global Pentecostalism? *

Michael Wilkinson PhD, Associate Professor of Sociology Director, Religion in Canada Institute Trinity Western University 7600 Glover Rd, Langley, British Columbia, Canada V2Y 1Y1

[email protected]

Abstract Th ere is much confusion over what is meant by globalization generally and specifi cally as it is applied to the study of Pentecostalism. In this article I show how the diff erent usages of globali-zation are applied to several areas of Pentecostal research demonstrating that what is ‘global’ is mostly linked with the modernization and secularization debates. Another view of globalization is then presented with application to Pentecostalism. Specifi cally, I show how Pentecostalism is shaped by the globalization of religion(s) and heightens theologizing as it pertains to orthodoxy, orthopraxy, authenticity, and authority. Finally, North American scholars of Pentecostalism need to examine further how their own theologizing is shaped by globalizing trends.

Keywords

Introduction

In spite of the growing number of references made to all things global, including global Pentecostalism, there still is a great deal of confusion over what is meant by globalization. 1 Much ‘global talk’ gives the impression that the future of our world is in great jeopardy unless we do something about globalization. If globalization is defi ned as Westernization and specifi cally as

* A version of this article was presented at Southeastern University, Florida to faculty and students in 2007. Th e seminar on ‘Globalization and Pentecostalism’ was organized by Peter Althouse and sponsored by the College of Christian Ministries and Religion.

1 Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), pp. 1-2; 50-59.

Au1

0000847174.INDD 10000847174.INDD 1 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM

2 M. Wilkinson / Journal of Pentecostal Th eology 17 (2008) 1–13

Americanization, then the call is made by those with anti-Western or anti-American sentiments to fi ght against the globalization of the world. Westernization is a particular kind of universalization—a view that the world is becoming the same; a homogeneous world without cultural uniqueness. Globalization for some refers to liberalization in economic terms which means fewer borders and more free trade for multinational corporations. Much of the response to this kind of globalization depends on your view of capitalism and free trade. For those who want the freedom to expand business opportu-nities into developing countries, open borders is a good thing. For many the culture of capitalism is a threat and requires stronger state policies to protect local initiatives including fair trade and fair wages. 2 Some view globalization as the spread of modern structures and culture throughout the world. Th e spread of all things modern but especially urbanization, industrialization, individualization and rationalization is viewed as a process that transforms traditional agricultural societies into those that look more like Europe and North America. 3 Any protests against the modernization process, however, are viewed as some sort of ‘fundamentalism’—a religious or political refusal to enter into the new global age. 4

Unfortunately, much scholarship on globalization ignores religion or is interpreted through unclear theoretical positions. 5 Pentecostalism is also shaped by these theoretical inadequacies. Th e purpose of this article is to illustrate how scholarship on global Pentecostalism needs to think seriously about the globalization debates and move forward with a research agenda that makes sense of current global realities. In order to proceed, I will illustrate how some global Pentecostal research is shaped by inadequate assumptions of globalization. I will then show how a globalization perspec-tive can help us make sense of some important globalizing trends for Pentecostalism in North America.

Framework of Analysis

Roland Robertson is one of the most important theorists of globalization writing major works on the topic since the 1960s. Robertson defi nes globalization as

2 Richard Robbins, Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2002).

3 Anthony Giddens, Th e Consequences of Modernity (Stanford: Stanford University, 1990).4 John Boli and Frank Lechner, World Culture: Origins and Consequences (Oxford: Blackwell,

2005).5 James A. Beckford, Social Th eory & Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2003), 103.

0000847174.INDD 20000847174.INDD 2 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM

M. Wilkinson / Journal of Pentecostal Th eology 17 (2008) 1–13 3

the increasing socio-cultural interconnectedness of the world and our growing awareness of the world as a single place. 6 Robertson views globalization as a long historical process that is over 500 years old which has brought us to a modern world. But the contemporary global world is not simply a ‘modern’ world. Globalization theory encapsulates much of the debates of moderniza-tion and postmodernization. Unlike Giddens, Robertson is not persuaded that globalization is a consequence of modernity. Rather, modernity is a con-sequence of globalization. Further, globalization theory must account for the particularization of social change as well as its universalization. Robertson relies on two important concepts. First, is globality, which refers to the specifi c historical conditions of globalization. For example, globality has unique fea-tures in the late twentieth century compared to the nineteenth century. Each historical period must be examined on its own merits for the specifi cities of globalization. Robertson also uses the concept glocal to talk about the rela-tionship between the global and the local. His view is that they intersect each other so that what is local is global and what is global is also local. Accounts of globalization must take seriously that relationship. What becomes a very important question for Robertson then is how do religions respond to glo-bality? In what ways do they provide accounts that are glocal (i.e. rooted in the local with an eye on the global or vice versa)?

According to Scholte the nature of social space has changed. 7 His view of globalization also captures the idea that globalization is a long historical process. Contemporary social life is characterized by globality or the unique conditions of globalization. Globalization captures the idea of the world as a single place. It is increasingly interconnected through vast social networks with implications for all social relations including economics, politics, culture and knowledge. Further, the world is characterized by instantaneity and simul-taneity whereby social relations occur anywhere across the planet in no time. Further, these relations are characterized by hybridity and pluralisation. Globalization therefore, calls our attention to understand social relations based on non-territorialized assumptions. Scholte’s work draws our attention to the way in which social relations including the religious are characterized by dense worldwide networks and the ways in which religious behaviour is hybridized.

6 Roland Robertson, Globalization: Social Th eory and Global Culture (London: Sage, 1992); idem, ‘Globalization Th eory 2000+: Major Problematics’ in (eds.) George Ritzer and Barry Smart, Handbook of Social Th eory (London: Sage, 2001), pp. 458-471; idem, ‘Globality’ in (eds.) Jan Aart Scholte and Roland Robertson, Encyclopedia of Globalization (New York: Routledge, 2007), II: p. 524-526.

7 Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), pp. 60-64.

0000847174.INDD 30000847174.INDD 3 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


While Scholte focuses on the nature of social relations, Niklas Luhmann applies a systems perspective arguing that the entire planet is structuring along the lines of diff erentiation and specialization. 8 Luhmann’s neofunctional view assumes that the entire planet is a single system with the development of multiple subsystems like economics, politics, etc. Th e key contribution from Luhmann is his view that all subsystems are self-contained yet interconnected with other subsystems through communication and refl exivity. Th is idea of refl exivity is an important concept for understanding the structuring of global society, religion as system and the role of particular religions in a systematized world. 9

Peter Beyer has written extensively on religion and globalization. His fi rst book, Religion and Globalization 10 wrestled with the questions about the public role of religion in global society. Beyer’s analysis revolves around two important concepts which are function and performance. He argues that reli-gion, in general, is diff erentiated from other spheres of social life like econom-ics and politics but is not reduced to a private function as in the modernization viewpoints of the twentieth century sociologists like Parsons. Rather, religion has a specialized function which may address the issues of other spheres through ‘performance’ (i.e. address issues of economic injustice not through specifi cally religious channels but through the acceptable communication code of economics). Religion is a powerful resource and motivator for addressing these concerns. But, these concerns while given theological ration-ale must be translated into the language of other domains for communication purposes. Th e responses of religions to societal issues range from ‘liberal’ to ‘ conservative’ with liberal responses viewed as prosystemic and conservative responses as antisystemic. Th ese ideas are important for understanding the mode of action of religions in a globalized world that is increasingly specialized, diff erentiated and systematized.

One other important idea from Beyer is his view that the entire globe is transformed into a single society with specialized domains for economics, poli-tics and other subsystems. 11 Religion is also structured as a subsystem with all religions sorting through their relationship with a globalization process that does three things: diff erentiates religion as a structural sphere from other social spheres hence the sense that there is a category called religion which all religions

8 Niklas Luhmann, Th e Diff erentiation of Society (New York: Columbia Universiyt Press, 1982); idem, Social Systems (Stanford: Stanford University, 1995).

9 Peter Beyer, Religions in Global Society (New York: Routledge, 2006).10 Peter Beyer, Religion and Globalization (London: Sage, 1994).11 Beyer, Global Society, pp. 34-49.

0000847174.INDD 40000847174.INDD 4 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


are part of; diff erentiates religions from one another through a process of specialization so that all the worlds religions interact with each other; and third, an internal process within each religion which attempts to account for their beliefs, practices and relationships with other religions and the world as a whole including other societal spheres like economics and politics.

Together, these ideas form a framework for my analysis of Pentecostalism in global society. It is something of an eclectic approach but it points to some important aspects of religion in global society including social networks, the transformation of religions in global society and the response of religions to globality. Th ese assumptions help focus a number of research questions not addressed in the literature on global Pentecostalism.

Global Pentecostalism: A Brief Review of Some Literature

Harvey Cox is often quoted and referred to by scholars of global Pentecostalism. His appeal is partly his accessible writing style, but for many Pentecostals it did not hurt to have an academic from Harvard University, a non-Pentecostal, write so favourably about the movement. 12 Th e book was also benefi cial for those who questioned secularization as Cox off ered something of a confession for his inaccurate view of religion and the process of secularization. Cox asks why he got it wrong when writing in the 1960s about the end of religion. Why did so many miss the worldwide growth of a particular kind of Christianity that was experiential with representatives in every culture? Secu-larization, often referenced by sociologists, is the twin sister of modernization. With modernization, early sociologists thought if religion did not decline and disappear it would certainly lose societal authority. 13 Much of the work of scholars in the twentieth century then, was to chronicle this change as tradi-tional life was replaced with the values of science and rationality. By the time Cox writes Fire from Heaven there was already a growing literature among sociologists attempting to come to terms with the relationship between modernization and secularization. 14 Some argued that secularization still made sense and religions like Islam and Pentecostalism were survivals of a traditional world, fi ghting the inexorable process of modernization as it was globalized.

12 Harvey Cox, Fire From Heaven: Th e Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshaping of Religion in the Twenty-fi rst Century (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1995).

13 Peter L. Berger, Th e Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Th eory of Religion (New York: Anchor Books, 1967).

14 Phillip E. Hammond (ed.), Th e Sacred in a Secular Age (Berkeley: University of California, 1985).

0000847174.INDD 50000847174.INDD 5 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


Others reframed secularization to include notions of deprivatization or desecularization or resacralization. 15 Peter Berger 16 and David Martin 17 , two notable secularization theorists adapted their viewpoints to account for Islam and Pentecostalism. I will return to Martin later. Cox’s attempt to explain what is global about Pentecostalism is however, largely an extension of adapt-ing the modernization viewpoint. Cox’s overall argument rests on the idea that the global spread of a modern viewpoint will not be embraced by all. Pentecostals are the quintessential example. Why? Because at the core of all human beings is a religious sensibility. For Pentecostals this primal human experience enables them to navigate through the modernization of the world with their emphasis on primal religion—primal speech, primal piety and pri-mal hope. Th is sort of universal quality of religion fi ts well his modernization perspective. Yet, it totally fails to wrestle with the qualities of globalization which in turn does not adequately account for global Pentecostalism.

David Martin’s work is also a good example that illustrates the problem of defi ning religion in relationship to modernization and secularization. 18 Martin’s view is that secularization, characteristic of modern societies, is not inevitable. Modernization will lead some religions (but not all) to decline and disappear. Hence, Pentecostalism becomes a prime example of a religion that emerges during the modernization process to replace those religions that fail. It is a religion that is designed to meet the needs of the global spirit. Pentecostalism is a global phenomenon. It is a religion that has thrived under modernization and spread throughout the world. Like the Calvinists in Weber’s Protestant Ethic thesis, Pentecostals act as a catalyst to spread a modern and Western form of economics throughout the world. Hence, Pentecostals are also globalizers. Latin America becomes Martin’s example of choice. 19 He writes much about the new economics of Latin America and how Pentecostals are now the new capitalists. But his analysis is still largely shaped by the assumptions of modernization, the failure to adequately account

15 José Casanova, Public Religions in the Modern World (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994); Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (Berkeley: University of California, 2000).

16 Peter L. Berger (ed.), Th e Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).

17 David Martin, On Secularization: Towards a Revised General Th eory (London: Ashgate, 2005).18 David Martin, Pentecostalism: Th e World Th eir Parish (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002); idem,

On Secularization.19 David Martin, Tongues of Fire: Th e Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America (Oxford:

Blackwell, 1990).

0000847174.INDD 60000847174.INDD 6 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


for secularization and the equating of globalization with the spread of modern structures and social institutions throughout the world.

One fi nal example will illustrate how global Pentecostalism is largely defi ned by the theoretical concerns of modernization and not globalization. Th e recent book Global Pentecostalism: Th e New Face of Christian Social Engagement 20 argues that Christianity has shifted to the developing world and it is largely Pentecostal Christianity. What is unique about these Pentecostals is their pas-sion for social justice and social services. Th is emerging and growing Pentecostalism is characterized by a holistic approach to ministry. What is of importance here is the underlying assumption about what is ‘global’. Th e bot-tom line is that global refers to the world wide spread of Pentecostalism and a particular kind of Pentecostalism that speaks out on behalf of those who are oppressed by injustice. Further, where Liberation theology has failed, Pentecostals have picked up. Th us, when ‘Liberation theology opted for the poor, the poor opted for Pentecostalism’. 21 Th ese progressive Pentecostals are the new inheri-tors of social action following in the steps of the social gospel movement and liberation theologians. Yet, what makes Pentecostalism a world wide force is its ability to counter the secularization process illustrating a role for religion in a thoroughly modern world. As Miller and Yamamori say: ‘In our view, the emergence of Progressive Pentecostals is simply one more nail in the coffi n of secularization theory’. 22 A new theoretical paradigm is needed to account for the growth of religion, particularly Pentecostalism. Th at model is shaped not by globalization theory but by rational choice theory which views secularization in relation to religious markets where the demand for religion is always high although the providers of religious services will change. 23 Th us, with the decline of Methodists comes the rise of Pentecostals to take their place. Again, the prob-lem here is not so much the theoretical redefi nition of secularization in relation-ship to modernity. It’s referring to these changes interchangeably with globalization. What is needed, however, is a thorough understanding of globali-zation which does not confuse it with modernization while at the same time accounting for its historical relationship.

20 Donald E. Miller and Tetsunao Yamamori, Global Pentecostalism: New Face of Christian Social Engagement (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007).

21 Miller and Yamamori, Global Pentecostalism, p. 12. Cf. Richard Shaull and Waldo A. Cesar, Pentecostalism and the Future of the Christian Churches: Promises, Limitations and Challenges (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000).

22 Miller and Yamamori, Global Pentecostalism, p. 37.23 See Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith.

0000847174.INDD 70000847174.INDD 7 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


Th ere are a number of questions raised by this literature that need to be explored. If, for example, the entire planet is globalizing, then we ought to see the relationship between globalization and Pentecostalism in North America. For the remainder of this paper, I address a number of issues and debates that have implications for understanding Pentecostalism in North America. Th ese current issues in North America must be interpreted from a globalization per-spective to show that globalization is not just about the spread of Pentecostalism from the West to the rest of the world. Rather, North American Pentecostalism is also shaped by globalizing forces. In other words, Pentecostalism is not just a ‘religion made to travel’ the roads of modernity. 24 Pentecostalism also returns to North America and its not always recognized. Pentecostalism in this case is also globalized and North America, therefore, is a good example.

Substantive Debates

Th ere are a number of debates among Pentecostal theologians in North America that illustrate well the process of globalization—that is, the process that speaks of the interconnectedness of the world, our awareness of this condition and worldwide transformation. Th ey include debates over Spirit baptism, the relationship between Pentecostals and the world’s religions and Pentecostal diversity. Th e recent literature by Pentecostals on these topics calls for a rethinking of classical positions. My argument is that Pentecostal theologizing can be explained beyond simple internal debates with one another and certainly cannot be limited to wrestling with the questions of modernization and secularization. Rather, they illustrate well the workings of globalization and its relationship to Pentecostalism. Th e three authors I will review are Frank Macchia, Amos Yong and Allan Anderson. I will make reference to my own work on the diversity of Pentecostalism in North America later. While Macchia, Yong and Anderson are not explicitly writing on globalization, they illustrate well the process of rethinking Pentecostalism which I argue must be understood in relation to globalization.

Pentecostal Th eologizing

Pentecostal theologizing provides a very interesting example of how religions are wrestling with worldwide socio-cultural change. Th e degree to which

24 Murray W. Dempster, Byron D. Klaus and Douglas Petersen (eds.), Th e Globalization of Pentecostalism: A Religion Made to Travel (Oxford: Regnum, 1999).

0000847174.INDD 80000847174.INDD 8 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


Pentecostals make ‘globalization’ an explicit theme varies. For some like Frank Macchia globalization is never defi ned with reference to the growing transdis-ciplinary scholarship. 25 But this does not mean that his work is not shaped by globalizing forces. Macchia is aware that the world is a diff erent place and for him this awareness also leads to the recognition that Pentecostalism is rooted throughout the world in many diff erent cultures. Th ere is something univer-sal about Pentecostalism but it is also particularized. Hence, ‘global’ in the subtitle says Macchia, is ‘meant as an invitation for others to converse with me from contexts very diff erent from my own’. 26

Th e key assumption in Macchia’s theologizing is that there must be some movement toward theological unity on Spirit baptism (not ecclesiological). It is an ecumenical challenge for Pentecostals, especially North American Pentecostals to hear the diff erent voices on Spirit baptism and to wrestle with the breadth of the Spirit’s work beyond the notion of empowerment. While Pentecostals worldwide acknowledge the centrality of Spirit baptism there is much diff erence over its meaning. Th e global conversation, however, is not just for Pentecostals. It must also occur with other Christians and in order to avoid marginalization. Pentecostals must have something to say about their claims of pneumatological distinctiveness. Th eologians need to critique the fi ner details of his argument, especially his view of Spirit baptism as a meta-phor that includes Paul’s notion of initiation/salvation with Luke’s idea of empowerment. Of importance here is the social implications of the kind of theologizing Macchia attempts to do. Further, of interest, is that this kind of theologizing can occur with little interference from offi cial denominational authorities. Th e question, then, is why now? Why are these debates about the nature of Spirit baptism increasing? How can we begin to explain this theolo-gizing process among Pentecostals worldwide and specifi cally in North America? I will return to these questions later.

Pentecostals and Religions

Secondly, not only are Pentecostals wrestling with their own theology and its relation to other theologies, they are also working through their relationship with other religions. Th is too is a consequence of globalization. Th e work of Amos Yong is richly shaped by an awareness of global society. His own story of

25 Frank D. Macchia, Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal Th eology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006).

26 Macchia, Baptized in the Spirit, p. 17.

0000847174.INDD 90000847174.INDD 9 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


his family’s conversion to Christianity from Confucianism and their migration from Malaysia to the United States is insightful for understanding the kinds of issues he is researching. 27 Scholarship is never in a vacuum but always shaped by social, philosophical and biographical contexts. 28 Interreligious dialogue is shaped, he admits, by the limitations of his experience in the Assemblies of God and his encounter with those from other forms of Christianity and reli-gious traditions. It is also an attempt to come to terms with what it means to have a Confucian ancestry as a Chinese American and a Pentecostal. But it is also illustrative of a global process whereby all religions are attempting to make sense of global changes and the role of religions in the world.

Globalization is a process whereby the world is systematized into diff erenti-ated and specialized domains including the development of a ‘religion’ sub-system whereby all religions are wrestling with their relationship to each other and to other specialized domains of the ‘world system’. 29 Not surprisingly, Yong’s work 30 is a very good example of a Pentecostal response to the systema-tization and globalization of the entire planet. It illustrates well how Pentecostal theologians are attempting to come to terms with the role of reli-gion in global society as well as the relationship between all religions. Yong’s view is not a ‘conservative’ approach which rejects other religions. It is illus-trative of a ‘liberal’ approach which focuses on ecumenism, dialogue and engagement. 31 It is a response based in a pneumatological interpretation of the role of the Spirit, a ‘Universal’ view but one that must be particularized in Christianity and the Trinity. Hence, Yong’s view is still something of a traditional view. He does not claim that all religions are the same. What he does attempt to do is articulate the uniqueness of Pentecostalism within the larger category of ‘religion’. Th is too is a consequence of globalization. 32

Pentecostals and Multiculturality

Finally, Allan Anderson provides for us an excellent example of a shift in Pentecostal theologizing with his emphasis on a multicultural view of the

27 Amos Yong, Beyond the Impasse: Toward a Pneumatological Th eology of Religions (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), p. 9.

28 John L. Wengle, Ethnographers in the Field: Th e Psychology of Research (Alabama: University of Alabama, 1988); Donald N. Levine, Visions of the Sociological Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago , 1995).

29 Luhmann, Social Systems; Beyer, Global Society, p. 89.30 See Amos Yong, Th e Spirit Poured out on All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the Possibility of Global

Th eology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005).31 Beyer, Globalization, pp. 86-94.32 Beyer, Global Society, pp. 103-106.

0000847174.INDD 100000847174.INDD 10 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


movement worldwide. 33 Anderson’s work attempts to deal with the question of how globalization is a homogenizing process. He critiques this view by showing how Pentecostalism is diverse and that there is no single form of Pentecostalism. Rather, what one observes phenomenologically are many diverse forms of Pentecostalism. In other words, Pentecostalism is not just about the exporting of an American version throughout the world. Rather, Pentecostalism exists throughout the world without any American infl uence. Anderson makes it clear that family resemblance does not mean all the sib-lings, cousins and other relatives are identical. One must hold the many varieties of Pentecostalism loosely so that the particularities of Pentecostalism are not lost through the universalizing viewpoints. Globalization, for Anderson, is about locality, diversity, identity and ethnicity. 34

A multicultural perspective privileges the margins. It challenges notions of hegemony and traditional histories that focus on the origins, growth and expansion of Pentecostalism from one centre—the United States. Anderson’s argument especially raises questions about authenticity, that is, who are the ‘real’ Pentecostals? Why do we refuse to listen to the stories of Pentecostals outside of North America? Why can we not see the signifi cant theological con-tribution they have made to the worldwide movement including North America? Anderson raises all kinds of questions that are meant to deconstruct the idea of Azusa as the ‘Jerusalem’ of Pentecostalism. His global awareness sharply focuses our attention toward a number of important questions that ask what it means to be a Pentecostal in a globalized world. 35 Anderson’s work is also refl ective of a heightened phase in globalization, beginning in the 1960s with increased tension in the 1990s over such things as polyethnicity and mul-ticulturality. 36 Of importance here, is locating Anderson’s work in the context of globalization and more specifi cally the conditions of this current phase. 37

Discussion

Th e globalization of the world points to all kinds of issues and debates regard-ing defi nition, history and explanation. Th is too is true when one tries to

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

34 Arjun Appardurai, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 1996); Michael Wilkinson, ‘Religion and Global Flows’ in (eds.) Peter Beyer and Lori Beaman, Religion, Globalization, and Culture (Leiden: Brill, 2007), pp. 375-89.

35 Michael Wilkinson, ‘When is a Pentecostal a Pentecostal? Th e Global Perspective of Allan Anderson’, Pneuma 28.2 (Fall, 2006), pp. 278-82.

36 Robertson, Globalization, p. 59.37 Robertson, ‘Globalization Th eory 2000+’; idem, ‘Globality’.

0000847174.INDD 110000847174.INDD 11 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


make sense of the reconfi guration of not only the world but also ‘religion’ and ‘religions’ in global society. Th eological debates among Pentecostals are not limited to Pentecostals. Th ere are all kinds of debates about religion(s) which raise questions about power, cohesion, orthodoxy, orthopraxy, heresy, etc. Th ey also raise questions about the particular way global society is developing and the various subsystems especially the emergence and development of a ‘religion’ system. According to Beyer, 38 the various debates among religions refl ect this process through the ways the diff erent religions reject the systema-tization of the world or by the way they embrace it. In this article I could have focused on those responses among Pentecostals that illustrate a kind of world rejecting position. But this is how Pentecostals have often been portrayed. Rather, my approach was to show how in important ways Pentecostals are embracing the globalization of the world, if not in fact, contributing to global society as globalizers. It is also about the way religions are going to operate in global society. In one way the debates are about the nature of the ‘religion’ system itself and its relationship to other domains of global society like eco-nomics and politics. Second, it is about the way in which the various religions are going to relate to each other as religions within a specialized domain. Th is too is up for negotiation. Th irdly, the systematization of the world also raises questions for the particular religions themselves especially over orthodoxy (beliefs), orthopraxy (practices), authenticity (who are the real Pentecostals) and authority (how Pentecostalism operates in global society). Much debate among religions today has to do with questions about the constitution of their religion. Th is too is a consequence of globalization.

Th e globalization of the world, however, points to other issues, specifi cally, hybridization. 39 Th is is the view that what is emerging through the interaction of Pentecostals worldwide is another kind of ‘Pentecostalism’. Sociology maintains that religions adapt and change as context also changes. Increasingly, global society is the context through which all social interaction occurs. Th is too means that Pentecostalism is changing. It would be naïve to assume that Pentecostalism today is the same as experienced by those who called themselves Pentecostals in the early twentieth century. I am sure they would not recognize what is Pentecostal about Pentecostalism today. Hybridization points to the ways in which Pentecostalism is reshaped and refashioned through globaliza-tion. It also calls our attention to the kinds of research that needs to develop as it examines the transformation of Pentecostalism in global society.

38 Beyer, Global Society, pp. 79-97.39 Jan Nederveen Pieterse, Globalization & Culture: Global Mélange (Lanham: Rowman &

Littlefi eld, 2004), pp. 59-84; Wilkinson, ‘Global Flows’, p. 384.

0000847174.INDD 120000847174.INDD 12 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM


For example, I have made the case that Pentecostalism in North America is being transformed by the migration of Pentecostals from Africa, Asia, Central and South America. 40 While theories of assimilation focus on the adaptation of new immigrants and pluralism and how they maintain ethnic identities, both views miss the ‘deterritorialized’ relations they maintain through dense social networks. Korean Pentecostals, for example, are deeply interconnected through-out the world through the development of a global network facilitated through the ministry of Yonggi Cho. Spanish speaking Pentecostals travel regularly to their ‘home’ countries engaging in mission work that often is missed by offi cial denominational mission programs. Ethiopian Pentecostals maintain North American social links as well as strong ties with Pentecostals in Northern Africa. Yet the view of denominational leaders is that new immigrants are sources of evangelism. Th e reality is Pentecostalism through migration is transforming theologically, culturally and organizationally.

Conclusion

Research on global Pentecostalism needs to establish an agenda that explores these issues theologically, that includes the responses of Pentecostals to global change, the adaptation of Pentecostalism to global society, the contributions of Pentecostalism to global society, the transformation of Pentecostalism through migration and interaction and the reconfi guration of Pentecostalism into new hybrid forms. 41 Th ere is some important work already on global Pentecostalism exploring these issues. 42 Much of the dialogue has occurred among European scholars who are aware of these global challenges for understanding Pentecostalism especially in Europe. 43 Now is the time for North American scholars to rethink their understanding of Pentecostalism and make substantial contributions to our understanding of one of the most signifi cant transformations in Christianity.

40 Michael Wilkinson, Th e Spirit Said Go: Pentecostal Immigrants in Canada (New York: Peter Lang, 2006).

41 Wilkinson, ‘Global Flows’, pp. 385-88.42 E.g., see Simon Coleman, Th e Globalisation of Charismatic Christianity (Cambridge:

Cambridge University, 2000); André Drooger, ‘Globalisation and Pentecostal Success’ in (eds.) André Corten and Ruth Marshall-Fratani, Between Babel and Pentecost (Bloomington: Indianapolis University, 2001), pp. 41-61; Rijk Van Dijk, ‘From Camp to Encompassment: Discourses of Transsubjectivity in the Ghanian Pentecostal Diaspora’, Journal of Religion in Africa 27 (1997), pp. 135-59.

43 See www.glopent.net.

0000847174.INDD 130000847174.INDD 13 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM

Author Query:

Au1: Please provide keywords.

0000847174.INDD 140000847174.INDD 14 6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM6/30/2008 2:57:49 PM

What's 'Global' about Global Pentecostalism?

Documents

Transcript of What's 'Global' about Global Pentecostalism?