jepta 2001 21 - European Pentecostal Theological Association

The Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association, Vol. XXI, 2001
those between the races.' Perhaps it was the reality of American society of the
second decade of the last Century that suggested to the pragmatic policy-makers
that founded the first Pentecostal denominations that these bamers should for
purely practical reasons be reinstated.' The fact is that the formation of the
Pentecostal denominations that were formed in that period were all organized
along racial lines. No doubt this did not happen out of some sinful principle (the
supposed superiority of the white race), but because they felt that interracial ties
hampered the purpose of spreading the Gospel in an American society which was
dominated by white people. Whatever the motivation, it led to the reinstatement
of a huge dividing wall, and it constituted a break with the original vision of the
Azusa Street Mission revival. This barrier - like all other such bamers - resisted
demolition for many decades.
A last aspect to be considered at is the stress on the priesthood of all believers,
which is dear to all Protestants. This notion harmonizes well with the Pentecostal
stress on individual salvation and with the conception of the Church as an
assembly of true believers. This in turn squares well with the egalitarian note of
the baptism of the Holy Spirit as an equipping of the saints for living a Christian
life in the present world.
A curious antithesis may be observed here. The egalitarian character of so many
aspects of the Pentecostal conception of the Church stands in stark contrast to the
rather high degree of clericalization of many Pentecostal denominations. To be
eligible for many functions in Pentecostal denominations, recognition as a (lay)
minister is required. In that sense, many Pentecostal denominations are closer to
the authority structure of the Roman Catholic Church.' This tension between
theory and practice, I believe, should set Pentecostal theologians to thinking
about what the Church is.
CONCLUDING REMARKS: ROOM FOR CONVERGENCE
Catholics and Pentecostals differ radically in their conception of the Church, so
much so that one Catholic delegate once confided to me outside of the plenary
' See D.T. Irvin, "'Drawing all Together in One Bond of Love': The Ecumenical Vision of
William J. Seymour and the Azusa Street Revival", in Journal ofPentecostal Theology 6 April
1995,25-53.
' Robeck, "Pentecostals and Ecumenism", 7. From the text of the "Preamble and Resolution of
Constitution" in the Minutes of the General Council of the Assemblies of God in the United
States ofAmerica, Canado and Foreign Lank held at Hot Springs, Arkansas, April 2-12, 1914
(in: W.W. Menzies, Anointed to Serve, Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 1971, 99-loo), it
is clear that pragmatic consideration played a major role in the formation of the Assemblies of
God.
This is also noted by Hunter, "'Wij zijn de kerk"', 22-23.
The Place of the Church in the Economy of Salvation. Roman Catholic and
Pentecostal Perspectives: Room for Rapprochement Huibert Zegwaart
Dialogue session that Pentecostals really have no idea as to what the Church
really is. If this judgment is correct, it would be a sad comment. Hocken, in his
article on the "Theology of the Church is much milder in his assessment. He
notes developments that indicate an increasing readiness among Pentecostals to
work out an authentic doctrine of the Church.' This, it would seem, is imperative
also for the consolidation of the growth of the past decades. The Catholic-
Pentecostal Dialogue, as well as the Dialogue with the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches (WARC) that started in 1995, provides ample opportunity to
do so.
But is there - in view of the enormous differences - any room for rapprochement
It would seem so! Serious theological reflection on the Church in relation to other
areas of Pentecostal theological reflection is still in its infancy. This means that
Pentecostals will have to put up a sustained effort to develop an ecclesiology
which is faithful to the biblical record, to the various theological traditions within
Christianity, to the experience of the Spirit in the lives of individual believers and
in the people of God, and - not least - to the original vision of the Founding
Fathers of the Movement. It may be clear that this calls for a concerted effort, not
of one or two ecclesiologists, but of a whole group of Pentecostal theologians in
various denominations, who interact with each other intensively.
Harold Hunter lays down what he feels should be the basic tenets of such a
Pentecostal ecclesiology. These sound surprisingly Catholic. A reliable
ecclesiology, he thinks, must be in line with the characteristics laid down by the
councils of Nicea and Chalcedon, which saw the Church as One, Catholic, Holy
and ~postolic.'
This brings the International Roman Catholic-Pentecostal Dialogue within view
once more.' Precisely because the Roman Catholic Church is so strong in the area
of ecclesiology, Pentecostals,despite the fact that the overriding theological
categories stem from soteriology, can listen critically to what Catholics have to
say about this matter and learn from them. Not that I would want Pentecostals to
swallow the whole of Catholic ecclesiology. On the contrary, they have to have
their own theological criteria for what is worth incorporating and what may better
be left aside. However, these criteria, I am convinced, will turn out to be
primarily shaped by soteriological categories in conjunction with categories that
' One of the developments, he singles out, that contributes to a raised consciousness of the need
to reflect on the theology of the Church is the Catholic Pentecostal Dialogue.
' Hunter, "' Wij zijn de kerk"', 26.
It would seem to me that the International Roman Catholic-Pentecostal Dialogue would benefit
from a separate round on the place of the Church in the economy of salvation, as it will provide
a good context for articulating some of our most fundamental differences.