Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Book Reviews / Pneuma 35 (2013) 87-156
149
Philip D. Wingeier-Rayo, Where are the Poor? A Comparison of Ecclesial Base Communities and Pentecostalism — A Case Study in Cuernavaca, Mexico (Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publi- cations, 2011), xi + 163 pp., $20.00 paperback.
This slender-yet-substantive book examines comparatively two vibrant ecclesial and pasto- ral experiences among the poor in Latin America — Catholic base communities (CEBs) and Pentecostalism — highlighting the theological, liturgical, and organizational dimensions that make each of the movements attractive to different sectors of the population. The fruit- ful comparison dispels stereotypes about these movements: CEBs are hyper-politicized par- allel churches, which put class analysis and social action ahead of religious engagement and, by contrast, Pentecostalism is an apolitical, thoroughly spiritualistic, other-worldly, and individualistic movement. Wingeier-Rayo draws from an in-depth ethnographic study in Cuernavaca, Mexico, where he spent a year doing participant observation, collecting oral histories, and conducting interviews and surveys in a CEB and a Pentecostal church in a poor neighborhood. He concludes that both movements empower poor people by giving them a strong sense of dignity and self-worth.
Wingeier-Rayo notes that there are significant differences between the CEB and the Pen- tecostal church studied in terms of the composition of the membership, leadership styles, liturgy, and type of social and political involvement. For example, he found that members of the CEB tended to be “older, better-established, owned their homes and had higher income . . . than the participants in the Pentecostal church” (143). Pentecostals included more economically marginalized sectors of the poor, and had a centralized view of author- ity, with the charismatic pastor dominating the life of the congregation. In spite of this cen- tralization of power, “members [of the Pentecostal church] were young, involved, and felt a sense of ownership and meaningful participation in the life of the church” (145). In a similar way, CEB leaders “felt ownership of their movement, although they were not as young and enthusiastic as the Pentecostal leaders” (ibid.).
Wingeier-Rayo also observed that CEBs meetings “were more intellectual, programmed, and rational than the worship of the Pentecostal church” (143), which was more focused on the “spiritual/emotional encounter with the divine,” culminating with the altar call (144). Again, there are important similarities within the differences: CEBs have now added a moment of celebration (singing, prayer, and liturgy) to their consciousness-raising method of see-judge-act, and Pentecostals also encourage the close study of the Bible. In that sense, both movements entail a certain degree of rationalization: “they contribute to self-disci- pline, individual initiative, and participatory decision-making” (149).
Perhaps the most striking similarity between the two movements is on the range and impact of their social actions. Despite the well-deserved reputation that CEBs earned in Central America during the civil war as spaces of resistance against repressive military regimes or in Brazil as incubators of the transition to civilian democratic rule, Wingeier- Rayo notes that in Cuernavaca, CEB meetings “only occasionally result in action” (110); often, this action was in the form of “benevolent acts of kindness with little systematic analysis” (111). In addition, CEBs members who responded to Wingeier-Rayo’s questionnaire did not indicate that “politics was one of the areas that they had learned the most through their
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI: 10.1163/15700747-12341306
1
150
Book Reviews / Pneuma 35 (2013) 87-156
participation in the CEBs” (107). Only 10 percent of those surveyed responded affirmatively when asked whether the Church should be involved in politics.
While Pentecostals expressed a “lack of interest and involvement in public politics” (137), they showed, like CEB members, a strong focus on local issues, contributing to a food basket to be distributed among needy families and the elderly in the neighborhood and providing space in the church for adults to complete their elementary and secondary education. Wingeier-Rayo demonstrates that Pentecostalism’s impact is more micro-social, operating at the infra-structural level of civic life. The Pentecostals he interviewed “felt that it was their duty as Christians to help others in need.” CEBs might be more explicit about working for social justice, a work that is limited by a variety of factors ranging from lack of support from the hierarchy to their focus on more established sectors of the poor. In the long term, how- ever, Pentecostalism contributes as much as CEBs to the “pluralization, democratization and modernization of the Mexican society” (4).
In the end, Wingeier-Rayo rightly concludes that CEBs and Pentecostalism are diverse and dynamic movements that do not “fit the preconceived stereotypes. They are neither contradictory, nor are they different flavors of the same essence” (150). As such, they not only deserve our respect but call scholars to undertake careful, empirically-grounded research that can show meaningful differences as well as similarities.
Given its thoughtful and balanced approach, Where are the Poor? is an excellent introduc- tion to the literature on base communities and Pentecostalism in Latin America. The focus on Mexico is also a welcome addition to a literature that has concentrated primarily on Central America and Brazil. Because the book is rather short, those interested in a more sustained discussion of the rise, development, and socio-political impact of CEBs and Pen- tecostalism in Latin America will do well to supplement it with the works of scholars such as Andrew Chesnut, Paul Freston, Anthony Gill, Rowan Ireland, Daniel Levine, Anna Peterson, and Brian Smith, who have studied these movements in-depth and often comparatively but are not cited by Wingeier-Rayo. Furthermore, Wingeier-Rayo does not discuss more recent transformations in the Catholic Church and Pentecostalism, such as the expansion of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement beyond its initial stronghold among the Latin American middle classes and of “Neo-Pentecostalism,” a diverse movement that advances multiple versions of prosperity theology. Both of these movements have had a powerful appeal among the poor, competing and cross-fertilizing with CEBs and more classical forms of Pentecostalism. They also complicate the question of socio-political impact.
Despite these limitations, by productively combining rich and self-reflexive ethnographic work with a capable review of literature, Wingeier-Rayo has produced a valuable model of how to assess on the ground the impact of pastoral and ecclesial initiatives among the poor.
Reviewed byManuel A. Vásquez
Professor, Religion Department, University of Florida Gainesville, Florida
2
