jepta 2001 21 - European Pentecostal Theological Association

The Journal of the European Pentecostal Theological Association, Vol. XXI, 2001
Pentecostalism, Past, Present and Future
Interview with Walter Hollenweger by Neil Hudson
In a sense, Pentecostalism is a postmodern movement. It has democratised
theology and liturgy. By doing so, it has contributed to an erosion of the so-called
Christian West. This Christian West was mainly based on a feudal structure, both
in the Catholic and the Protestant church. When this feudal structure collapsed,
the established churches were in trouble. They tried to replace the feudal structure
by a structure of theological propositions. That was always certain to fail.
If Pentecostalism is to survive in Western Europe, it should stop aping the
established churches by seeking refuge in a so-called kernel of propositional
faith. On the contrary, it should strengthen its own means of coherence, that is the
story of Jesus in its many forms and shapes, since the New Testament has at least
five stories of Jesus (the Gospels and Paul). All attempts at systematising these
different stories, without the help of authoritarian church structures, have so far
failed.
Early Pentecostals were characterised by an overwhelming emphasis upon an
imminent eschatology. This has now diminished. Is this significant for the
ongoing development of Pentecostalism or will it be able to recapture this early
Adventist enthusiasm
Early Pent,ecostals published periodicals for twenty or thirty years with titles such
as "The Bridal Call", "I am Coming Soon", "The Last Trumpet".
Understandably, these titles have disappeared together with the underlying
emphasis upon an imminent eschatology. We find a similar development in the
New Testament. Jesus himself expected the kingdom of God during his lifetime
or shortly thereafter. He was disappointed and had to face the cross. Paul and his
friends also expected the parousia to be "around the corner" during their lifetime.
When these hopes proved to be wrong, the synoptic gospels postponed the
kingdom of God but did not give it up. John, the evangelist, changed the
emphasis. For him, the kingdom of God was not mainly in the future but in the
present time. Those who believe already have "life eternal". Those who do not
believe are missing not only "life eternal" but life altogether. However, during a
cruel persecution, Revelation rekindled the hope of an imminent kingdom of God
that would put an end to the brutal regime of the Romans.
What can we learn from this It is my conviction that no church and no theology
can survive without eschatology. Early Pentecostal eschatology was based on the
naive understanding that the biblical texts, in particular, Revelation were written
for us. Even a casual reading of the biblical texts shows us that this is not the
case. Revelation, for instance, was written for seven congregations in distress in
Asia Minor, as the address of the book clearly shows. Also, the other biblical
texts were not written for us. None of the biblical authors ever expected their
writings to be read by an English speaking readership. English did not even exist
at that time. So the question remains: what is the eschatology of middle-class
Western European Pentecostals I believe that there is such an eschatology. But
it is not a timetable drawn from Revelation and Daniel. Such an eschatology ends
in a sterile time-table eschatology with no spiritual content. This can be clearly
shown by the eschatologies of Seventh Day Adventists or of the Jehovah's
Witnesses. Reading many of the interpretations of Revelation produced during
the last war or during the Stalin era makes one realise that they were not only
slightly mistaken but were actually fbndamentally wrong.
The alternative is not to dismiss eschatology. We need an eschatology which
believes that God will not give up on his creation or his church. We need to
believe that, in his time, God will put right what men and women have put
wrong; that he will not allow creation and his plan of salvation to go bust with, or
without, our co-operation.
Many Classical Pentecostals are attempting to reassess Pentecostal doctrine
and its potential benefit for future generations. To what extent do you think
that this is significant In your writings, you seem to place more emphasis
upon Pentecostal spiritualiw. Is Pentecostal spirituality likely to be sufficiently
robust to survive without the "protection" of doctrinal formulation
Doctrinal formulations have never protected spirituality from withering. If that be
the case, the Roman Catholic Church or even Jehovah's Witnesses would be the
most spiritual churches. The contrary is the case. Doctrine is emphasised when
spirituality begins to die. All churches have experienced that and it has never
worked. It was because of this approach that the Pentecostal revival at the
beginning of last century was thrown out of the churches. Another example
would be the fact that as more Catholic believers depart from Vatican theological
positions, the Pope emphasises doctrine to an even greater extent.
Theological statements must be rooted in lived spirituality. If that is not the case,
theology becomes idle. I have always believed that Pentecostals could develop a
kind of theological thinking which is not mainly based on the propositions of the
past but on the life experience of the church universal (not just my own
individual experience).
Propositional formulations within a logical system were an invention of Thomas
of Aquinas. He used the methodology of a pagan philosopher (Aristotle) to
articulate the Christian faith. That was a form of syncretism and a stroke of
genius at that time. However, it only works within a philosophical framework
that is acceptable to all. Since that time is now over and since the bible is not of a
logical nature, we have to do systematic or doctrinal theology in another form, for
example, by showing the varieties of possible articulations of Christian faith.
Perhaps the doctrinal questions of the future will be more of a series of intelligent
questions. The doctrinal debate will perhaps no longer be fixated on the possible
answers but on what are the central and vital questions. The propositions of the