Latin American Pentecostals Ecumenical And Evangelical

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

In his paper, Carmelo E. Alvarez challenges the conventional separation and often opposition between the terms “ecumenical” and “evangelical” within church circles, particularly concerning Latin American Pentecostals. Alvarez posits that for Pentecostalism in the region, a harmonious combination and complement of these two perspectives is not only crucial but would also significantly bolster the broader ecumenical movement in Latin America. He contextualizes the Pentecostal movement as a vital part of the post-nineteenth-century missionary efforts, initially emerging as a renewal force within established historic churches like Methodists and Baptists. Alvarez identifies three primary sectors of Pentecostal churches in Latin America. The “immigrant churches” originated from European ethnic groups, characterized by evangelistic fervor, social assistance, and economic self-support. Secondly, “missionary churches” predominantly stemmed from the USA, focusing on church planting, material production, evangelistic campaigns, and biblical institutes, often extending their influence through “electronic churches.” Lastly, “national churches” emerged as distinct entities, often separating from historic denominations under charismatic leaders, such as the Methodist Pentecostal Church of Chile, establishing sui generis groups and national associations. While many Pentecostal groups initially fostered a divisive environment due to exclusive lifestyles and worship practices, actively resisting ecumenical dialogue, Alvarez notes a crucial shift towards openness beginning in the 1960s. This nascent ecumenical engagement was fostered by initiatives like the Evangelical Union in Latin America (UNELAM), which invited Pentecostals to participate. Significant milestones included Pentecostal presence and active involvement in the Evangelical Conference of Churches (CELA) in 1969, and their pivotal role in the formation of the Latin American Council of Churches (CLAI). Alvarez observes that despite the inherent divisiveness often associated with Pentecostal growth, a substantial segment of these churches became consciously committed to fostering Christian unity, actively participating in and ratifying the establishment of CLAI. Alvarez highlights five exemplary Pentecostal churches that embody this dual commitment to their Pentecostal heritage and ecumenical values. These include the Union Evangelica Pentecostal Venezolana (UEPV), noted for its anti-sectarian stance, partnerships with other denominations, support for human rights, and engagement in inter-denominational theological dialogues. The Church of God in Argentina, under Dr. Gabriel O. Vaccaro, demonstrates a balance between contextual evangelization and active ecumenical participation, including shared programs and theological education at union seminaries. Similarly, the Pentecostal Church of Chile was the first of its kind to join the World Council of Churches (WCC), forming ecumenical partnerships and contributing to social action initiatives. The Christian Pentecostal Church of Cuba (ICPC) also exemplifies this trend, establishing unique partnerships and playing an active role in national and regional ecumenical councils. Ultimately, Alvarez underscores the imperative of stressing the “evangelical” dimension to allay fears that ecumenical involvement equates to a loss of evangelistic fervor or a drift towards theological liberalism. He contends that such fears are often rooted in prejudice and misinformation. Alvarez argues that there is fertile ground among Latin American Pentecostals for a new educational and theological impact, one that can demonstrate how ecumenism is not only biblical but also genuinely evangelical. He concludes by outlining three essential factors for Pentecostal ecumenical participation: it must be both pastoral (sensitive to diverse opinions) and prophetic (rooted in the Gospel), it must keep the action of the Spirit alive as its unique contribution to the broader movement, and it must cultivate a theology that is authentically ecumenical precisely because it is authentically evangelical.