Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
3
FOCUS: PENTECOSTAL
MISSIOLOGY
Missiological Twentieth-Century
North American
Reflections on Pentecostal Missions:
Perspectives
Byron
D. Klaus Guest Editor
Pentecostal
scholarship during
the
past
decade has focused on a variety
of themes in an effort to
gain
a more
comprehensive understanding
of the
origins
and
identity
of the
twentieth-century Pentecostal movement. One of the themes that has
emerged
from this reflection is that the Pentecostal movement is
inherently
a missions movement.
Exploration
of this missions movement theme has been spearheaded by
an
emerging group
of
field-experienced
and missiologically-trained
Pentecostals who are
taking
their
place
as the spokespersons
in
conceptualizing
the
presuppositions, purposes
and procedures
that
represent
valid
missiological self-understanding.
The Focus section of this issue of PNEUMA
provides
a forum for missiological
reflection from
representatives
of this
growing group
of Pentecostal
missiologists.
With the
exception
of Dr. Edward
Pousson, the contributors
represent
North American mission
sending agencies that are associated with classical Pentecostal denominations. This self-imposed
delimitation allows for North American
missiologists
to reflect on
nearly
a century of Pentecostal missions
activity,
to evaluate the
strengths
and weaknesses of these efforts and to
identify
the changing
mission
paradigms happening globally.
Such reflection also provides younger
churches in non-western nations with information and tools
appropriate
to the
important challenge facing
non-western Pentecostal/Charismatic churches which are now
taking
the
reigns
of leadership
in the task of the church’s
global
mission.
In the
January
1994 issue of International Bulletin
of Missionary Research
(IBMR),
veteran
English missionary
H. Dan
Beeby
reflects over his 50
years
of
missionary
service. He
suggests
that his “missionary
burden” in 1994 is neither
grounded
in nineteenth-century paternalism
associated with the infamous “white man’s burden” nor is it rooted in twentieth-century
political
correctness. In fact, he
posits
that
1
4
these modem and
postmodem presuppositions
of Western
society
have been
increasingly impacting
Western
Christianity and, by extension,
the church
planted globally by
Western mission efforts.
Beeby argues
that along
with the
gospel
the Western missionaries
preached, they unwittingly planted
churches with “western
germs”
that could inflict mortal blows to these
younger
churches. He
challenges
these non-western
churches,
now
taking
their
place
in
global
Christian leadership,
to ask whether or not
they
are aware of the cultural
changes in their own societies at the
deepest presuppositional
levels.
Further, Beeby queries
whether or not the
problem
of
declining
Western churches and the
potential
for the same in
presently thriving non-western churches
may
not
ultimately
share the same root cause. It is
exactly
at this crucial crossroad where non-western churches are assuming leadership
in
global
mission that the reflections of the North American
missiologists
in this issue become most valuable.
L. Grant
McClung,
Jr.’s lead article is a slightly revised version of his presentation
at the
“Missiological
Education for the 21st
Century” conference
sponsored by
the School of World Mission at Fuller Theological Seminary. McClung suggests
seven
perspectives
around which to build a PentecostaUCharismatic
missiology
for the
twenty-first century.
The first
perspective
is that mission is
experiential
and relational. While
acknowledging
the common
perception
that the Pentecostal/Charismatic tradition has
historically placed experience over
objective truth,
he
questions
such an
assumption.
He counters this assumption
with the claim that Pentecostals
historically
have believed that there can be no effective
missiology
that is not fueled
by
the passion
and
presence
of God which was characteristic of the first century. McClung’s
second
perspective
balances the first
by suggesting that the
primary
issues of the 1990s and
beyond
will not be methodological
but
theological, requiring
a Pentecostal/Charismatic missions
praxis
that is biblically and
theologically sturdy.
Eschatological urgency
is the third
perspective McClung
identifies in formulating
a
missiology capable
of
generating missionary
fervor. While
highlighting
the vast
global change
that has occurred since
1989, he ends this section with the observation that social time bombs will be the normative context for mission in the
twenty-first century,
“should there be one.”
A vision of wholistic mission is the fourth
perspective
which McClung
believes is necessary for an effective Pentecostal/Charismatic missiology.
While PentecostaUCharismatic mission
historically
has been focused on
evangelization
and church
planting,
he offers
support
for his argument
that Pentecostal/Charismatic mission efforts are much more socially
involved than most
casual,
and not so
casual,
observers sometimes
suppose. ,
_ ‘
2
5
Inevitable
opposition
to future mission efforts is a fifth
perspective that adds realism to a Pentecostal/Charismatic
missiology.
While acknowledging
a number of
opposing
forces to these mission
efforts, McClung
is
quite
clear that a Pentecostal/Charismatic
perspective would see
supernatural
evil forces that
oppose missionary enterprise
as the
primary
source of deterrence to mission effectiveness.
Triumphalism
and elitism are
perils
that can
plague any
movement that has
experienced
a fair amount of success. As a
consequence,
a sixth
perspective
that envisions
interdependent, cooperative
mission efforts is crucial in a Pentecostal/Charismatic
missiology. Moreover, cooperation among
various Christian traditions is a
major key
to completing
the task of world
evangelization.
Within this context of cooperative ministry, McClung clearly
differentiates between Pentecostal and Charismatic mission efforts. He identifies several
types of
rapidly growing ministry
structures that
currently
are sources of difference between Pentecostals and Charismatics. Attitudes about mega-churches,
new mission
agencies
and media ministries
represent some areas of difference which Edward Pousson will examine later in his article from a Charismatic
perspective.
Unpredictability
is another feature of the
global
context in which missionary
work is done. A
perspective
that
recognizes
that mission is unpredictable, and, therefore, strategies
need to be
adaptable,
is a seventh outlook identified
by McClung. Using
the biblical reference to Jehovah God’s influence over
global
events referred to in Habakkuk 1:5,
he also
posits
the
sovereignty
of God in all matters with a caution not to reduce
signs
and wonders to a
methodology
or curriculum. In addition to these seven
perspectives, McClung
concludes on the note that an essential
ingredient
in a Pentecostal/Charismatic
missiology
is passion.
While
McClung’s essay
identifies the broad contours of a Pentecostal/Charismatic
missiology, Doug
Petersen’s article focuses more
specifically
on the rise of Pentecostalism in Central America. Arising
out of his own
missionary
work in Central
America,
and reflecting
his current doctoral dissertation
work,
the article
attempts
to demonstrate that little external assistance or
foreign
control has been part
of the formation of
popular, national, autonomous,
Pentecostal churches in Central America. Not
only
is Pentecostalism the
region’s largest expression
of
Protestantism,
but
arguably, according
to Petersen,
it is one of Central America’s most
important
social movements.
When Central American Pentecostalism is
evaluated,
Petersen claims that the
investigation
must be free from certain
presuppositions
which seem to be
present
when Pentecostals are viewed as Protestants or Evangelicals.
Petersen notes that
contemporary scholarship
on Protestantism is committed to the
premise
that
missionary
endeavors
.
3
6
were
directly
tied to the
cultural, historical, political
and
theological positions
of Western
European
nations and the United States for the simple
reason that most Protestant missionaries to Latin America came from those nations.
Hence,
there is a built-in
assumption
that Protestantism-in all its
forms-represented foreign
control and influence.
Taking
care to affirm that Pentecostals are
certainly Evangelical
in belief,
Petersen demonstrates the
inappropriateness
of
viewing
Central American Pentecostalism
through
the lens
of Evangelicalism. Appealing to distinctive differences between
Evangelicals
and Pentecostals in Central
America, particularly
in terms of church
planting strategies, Petersen makes a
compelling
case that. Pentecostalism cannot be equated uncritically
with other
missionary
efforts in Central America. This distinction is particularly crucial in light of the
revolutionary
1980s in Central
America,
when
scathing reports
on “conservative Evangelicals”
and their
political
activities in Central America were the order of the
day. [See NACLA
18 (January/February 1984).]
Using
the Assemblies of God as a case
study,
Petersen
attempts
to demonstrate
through
narrative and statistical resources that Pentecostals in Central America derive their
recognizable
character not from
foreign
influence but from their
origins among socially marginal populations.
In
addition,
their
identity
arises from their
participation
in a social movement that enables individuals and like-minded
groups
to redress
yearnings
for
legitimacy, fulfillment, recognition
and
power.
Of
particular
interest is Petersen’s
critique
of the
taxonomy
of Latin American Pentecostal
groups
that Pentecostal scholar Manuel Gaxiola-Gaxio14 of
Mexico has
suggested. [See
PNEUMA 13
(Fall 1991).]
Petersen seeks to use statistical resources to demonstrate that
the Assemblies of
God,
the
largest
of the Pentecostal
groups
in Central America,
does not fit the
category
in Gaxiola-Gaxiola’s
taxonomy
in which the denomination has been
placed.
This
category
of
highly indigenized
churches whose
ongoing relationships
with non-Latin church bodies
compromise
Latin
autonomy
is
rejected by
Petersen as inaccurate. In
addition,
Petersen uses the work of Jose
Miguez-Bonino to
argue
that no
longer
does serious
scholarship
on Latin American Pentecostalism
appeal
to
foreign
assistance or
foreign
invasions to explain
Pentecostal
growth
in Latin America. Petersen
quotes Miguez-Bonino,
who
suggests
that such
explanations
of Pentecostal success are
generally
found in what
may
be termed
“journalistic approaches.”
The role of women in Pentecostal
missionary
work with the Assemblies of God
(AG)
is the focus of the third article
by
Barbara Cavaness. Cavaness’
essay highlights
a crucial issue in the historiography
of most mission histories. Women and their role in global
mission efforts have been
tragically
excluded from mission
4
7
studies.
Though
scholars such as R. Pierce
Beaver,
Ruth Tucker and Dana Robert have offered valuable contributions to this dearth of scholarship,
Cavaness’
essay
affirms a
necessary point. Missiological reflection done in the Pentecostal tradition must affirm the contribution of women
historically
and
missiologically
in
keeping
with a central affirmation of the
concept
of “call” which comes
sovereignly through the
Holy Spirit’s outpouring
on “all flesh.”
In her historical overview of women in missions, Cavaness notes that much information on the role of Pentecostal women in mission efforts has been lost. Even Ruth Tucker’s historical
surveys
of missions have been
lacking
in mention of Pentecostals in
general
and Pentecostal women in
particular. However,
Cavaness’ research does demonstrate the
prominent
and influential role women have
played
in missions history.
While
noting
that mission
strategists historically
have excluded women from
planning,
there has been
recognition
that the farther
away from the
sending
nation that women were the less concern
sending agencies expressed
over what kind of
missionary activity
women involved themselves in.
Thus,
women in
general,
and
single
women in particular,
are
among
the true heroes in mission
history
and have made their
greatest
ministerial
impact
in cross-cultural missions.
Cavaness chronicles the
early
involvement of women in Assemblies of God missions efforts. She notes that Alice Luce
may
well be termed the first AG
missiologist
of stature. Luce
synthesized
Roland Allen’s missionary principles
which
appeared
in 1921 in
providing
the first denominational
explanation
of the
indigenous
church
planting principles that have been used to anchor Assemblies of God mission
philosophy throughout
its
history. Noting
the official
egalitarian position
of the AG,
Cavaness does note that women in leadership in the United States were
few,
but
opportunities
were more
readily
available the farther women traveled from the American shores.
By way
of
contrast, Cavaness documents the
growing
role of Asian women in Pentecostal missionary ministry.
Non-western women are
responding
to God’s call to mission in
significant
numbers.
According
to
Cavaness,
one-half of the missionaries
being
sent out
by
the AG of
Singapore
are
women, making
them a force of 100
strong.
Although
she notes that
analysis
of the decline of women involved in AG missions from the U.S. is beyond the
scope
of this
study,
she does offer a
challenge
to examine the subtle forces that have slowed women’s
participation
in AG mission efforts worldwide. A
major contributor to such a
decline,
in Cavaness’
view,
is the lack of female role
models which
heightens
her
opening appeal
to the
concept
of call and the
necessity
to nurture that
sovereign prompting
of the
Spirit
that comes without
regard
for
gender.
A Pentecostal mission
agency executive,
John
Amstutz, provides
a window in the fourth article
through
which to view the
history
and
5
8
current
strategic thinking
of
Foursquare
Missions International. Amstutz
opens
his
essay
with a concise
history of Foursquare Missions, then
develops
a
theological
foundation for
stewardship,
and
finally, articulates seven
principles
that
guide Foursquare
Missions International’s commitment to
“doing
more with less.”
The
strategic deployment
of limited
personnel
is the first
principle
in “doing
more with less.”
Using
C. Peter
Wagner’s concept
of 360 degree
missions that
develops
a four
stage strategy
for
carrying
out the Great
Commission,
Amstutz demonstrates this
missiological concept
in the
strategic placement
of all missions
personnel
sent
by Foursquare Missions International.
Through
this
strategy,
the mission
agency
has been able to avoid
personnel experiencing
the “Peter
principle”
while deploying people
more in keeping with their
giftedness
in ministry.
Using
non-resident
personnel
in
missionary activity
is a second principle
of
exercising stewardship
over finite resources. The stewardship
motivation has
helped
with the
strategic deployment
of personnel
with the
greatest
of results. Amstutz sees this
strategy
as crucial to
Foursquare
involvement in
discerning strategic plans
for reaching
unreached
people groups existing
in the “10/40 Window.” The planting
of viable churches is a third
principle
that
expresses stewardship. Foursquare
church
planting
focuses on the
concept
of what a “viable” church is. Will the new church not
only
survive but thrive? Will these new churches take
root, grow
and
reproduce
and eventually
become “full circle churches” themselves?
Employment
of informal and non-formal in-service
leadership training provides
a fourth
principle
in “doing more with less.” Amstutz gives
much attention to this crucial
concept
of
stewardship
which has led
Foursquare
Missions to evaluate the structures and
processes by which
they
nurture
emerging
church leaders.
Relying
on informal and non-formal
processes
of
leadership development
has allowed Foursquare
Missions efforts to focus attention on leaders
arising “in-service” as
opposed
to formal
processes
that
usually require residence and thus
displacement
from local environs.
Noting
that much growth
is
occurring
without resident
missionaries,
Amstutz
again suggests
the lack of resources have demonstrated God’s sufficient wisdom, power
and resources.
Nationalization of the field as
rapidly
as
possible
is a fifth
principle governing Foursquare
Missions. Amstutz observes that the interrelationship
between
guiding principles
is made
explicit
in principle five: nationalization
really
started to take
place
almost from
day
one because non-institutional
priorities
were
encouraged by
the non-resident
missionary
teachers and trainers
who,
in many
cases,
were the
pioneers
in new
regions.
This
process
is
particularly
crucial in countries with non-Christian
majorities.
6
principle commitment to
“sending
strategy
of 360
degree
are
expended
complex
of
why
this Pentecostal triumphalism
9
to
Foursquare
Missions
churches”
to become the fourfold
Amstutz
provides
an explanation
Utilizing
national leaders to
bridge
into unreached
groups
is a sixth
of
stewardship. Again referring
360
degree missions,
Amstutz focuses his attention on the
“paradigm
shift” that
helps “receiving
churches.” This
“paradigm
shift”
completes
missions that has
guided
the
“doing
more with less”
philosophy
of Foursquare missions
strategy.
A seventh
principle
focuses on
making
sure that whatever resources
result in the church’s
capacity
to
reproduce
itself Amstutz observes that Western
methodologies frequently
tend to be so
and
costly
that
poorer
non-western
regions
cannot benefit from their introduction into non-western church life. In
identifying these seven
principles
of
stewardship,
mission
agency
has been able to resist the
that,
at
times,
has
plagued
other classical Pentecostal organizations.
fifth and final article in this Focus section is by Edward
Pousson,
the Flame
published by
Zondervan in 1992 documents the
growth
of the Charismatic missions movement. Pousson focuses on the
relationship
by
What kind of missions movement has
emerged
from the
Renewal? How has Pentecostal missions
impacted
and what lessons can Charismatic missions learn
The
whose landmark work
Spreading
Charismatic missions movements questions:
Charismatic
Charismatic missions
from Pentecostal missions? What contribution to mission
theology?
analysis. Recognizing Latourette,
of
changes
participation
between the Pentecostal and
addressing
the
following
is the
emerging
Charismatic
Scott
Renewal and missions are the themes that are central to Pousson’s
that church
historians,
such as Kenneth
have termed the nineteenth
century
as the “Great
Century”
Christian missions because of the confluence of renewal and missions,
Pousson asks on what
grounds
the twentieth
century may
be called the
“great century”
of PentecostaUCharismatic missions?
In his
comparison
of the two “Great Centuries” Pousson offers five common
dynamics
of renewal.
First, spiritual
renewal has elicited global missionary expansion. Second,
renewal has resulted in dramatic
in church
institutions, especially
the
proliferation
of new missionary
structures.
Third,
renewal
changes patterns
of
piety. Fourth, renewal
changes leadership patterns, usually increasing
the breadth of
and
breaking
an over-reliance on
professional leadership alone.
Finally,
renewal alters
theological
traditions.
Even
though
the Charismatic Renewal has created new
patterns
for
acknowledges
missions movement has been “slow” in gaining momentum.
Many early Charismatic leaders
spent
a
great
deal of their time on renewal in their
Moreover,
church and
missions,
Pousson
own local
congregations.
that the Charismatic
thousands
of
independent
7
10
agencies. theology
There
movement and the Charismatic development
Pentecostal/Charismatic evangelism
and missions. might
desire to contend
cites of a
growing missionary pioneers, have
already
started
should
naturally
some classical Pentecostals
point,
he believes that Faith Covenant
theology, restorationism,
Charismatic churches had no connection to
organized
missions
sending
The
emphasis
on
subjective spiritual guidance
and a limited
of mission
certainly
contributed to the
delayed ground
swell of Charismatic missions.
Furthermore,
Pousson notes the limited missions
exposure
that
many independent
Charismatics have had to
any kind of information about the
global
missions trends or
possibilities worldwide.
are
signs, however,
which Pousson
Charismatic missions movement. Charismatic
Charismatic
sending
churches and
sending agencies
to
appear.
The formation of Association of International Missions Services
(AIMS)
in 1985 has become a
significant catalyst
in
focusing the resources of the Charismatic renewal on world
evangelization.
The
strong experiential continuity
between the Pentecostal
movement adds
impetus
to the
of Charismatic missions. While “Charismatic
theology”
is still in its formative
stages,
Charismatic leaders
intuitively
know that
experiences
lead to
Even
though
Pousson’s
teaching, Kingdom
now
theology,
and the
prayer
and
power
movements are all
spiritual
forces
driving toward an
emerging
Pentecostal/Charismatic
missiology.
must learn from their Pentecostal
predecessors, according
to
Pousson,
but he warns
participants against viewing
these
final statement
by
a
sovereign
God
concerning
and
missionary sending.
One of the
greatest challenges facing both Pentecostal and Charismatic
movements,
in Pousson’s
view,
is to continue to
recognize
the new
ways
in which the
Kingdom
of God is
and to remain on the crest of that wave until the return of
Charismatic missions
two movements as the renewal
advancing
Jesus Christ.
It is with
pleasure
these articles on Pentecostal
The five contributors and I
journal
that I
present
missiology
to the
readership
of PNEUMA.
look forward to
reading
the critical feedback in the next issue of the
from Drs.
Gary
B.
McGee,
Jos6
Miguez Bonino, Vinay
Samuel and
Christopher Sugden.
8
