Pentecostal Philosophy as Pragmatic Digression: A Response to ‘Pentecostalism and the Three Ages of the Church’

An initial reading of ‘Pentecostalism and the Three Ages of the Church’ proves to be disconcerting. It is not immediately obvious why we should take advice on the nature of global Pentecostalism from Franz Rosenweig’s peculiar blend of Hegelian and Joachimite historical teleologies.¹ Clearly, Rosenweig’s writing involves a philosophical reading of history rather than a history per se however this renders him twice removed from many Pentecostal endeavours. Pentecostals are by and large ahistorical and fideistic in their conceptions of faith – hardly a conducive starting point for situated reflection on ultimate questions. Further, it appears farcical to suggest that the mode of German philosophy, with its passion for system and logic, is an obvious choice for interpreting a movement infamous for its fragmentation and flamboyant rhetoric. Yet, despite these initial reservations, Rosenweig proves an inspired choice; he comes to operate as an incisive and prescient spokesperson for the Pentecostal ethos and his writings capture something of emergent Pentecostal self-understanding.

To understand why this is so, it proves useful to turn to an observation provided by the philosopher William James who, in his lecture titled ‘What Pragmatism Means’, states that for the pragmatist:

*Any idea upon which we can ride, so to speak; any idea that will carry us prosperously from any one part of our experience to any other part, linking things satisfactorily, working securely, simplifying, saving labor; is true for just so much, true in so far forth, true instrumentally. ² *

The notion of ideas as instrumental, as proving ‘true’ according to their capacity to promote or retard the momentum, cohesion and acuity of our thinking about experience, is a notion that resonates with many Pentecostals. In my observation, there exists a consensus among Australian Pentecostal church leaders that ideas are valuable insofar as they produce results. This is not to say that Pentecostals endorse an entire pragmatist theory of truth (although they may at times appear to practice one). Rather, James’ suggestion alerts us to a fundamental process of creative cognition. In making sense of our world, we can select ideas that seem to offer us a means to reconcile and understand our diverse experiences such that we come to value ideas as true to the extent that they enable insight.

In light of this, ‘Pentecostalism and the Three Ages of the Church’ can be understood to both present and demonstrate what Pentecostal philosophical reflections can entail. In the insights of Rosenweig’s Star of Redemption concerning the Pauline, Petrine and Johannine churches we uncover an idea we can ‘ride’, so to speak. We engage with a historical schema that strives to identify the best and worst in Catholic, Reformed and Pentecostal frames of reference. Of course this schema is not to be taken literally – to assume the end of history coincides precisely with our coming of age is a histrionic mistake best left to angst-ridden teenagers and suchlike. But taken figuratively, the schema furnishes Australian Pentecostals with a rationale for our institutional irreverence, our insistence on the real and ongoing presence and activity of the Spirit, our emphasis on hope (especially in the context of the local church), and finally our love of all things new. It also provides a potential basis for ecumenical dialogue by insisting we move beyond our condemning of, or cringing before, other parties – in short, by insisting we recognise both distinction and unity in the Body.

I know of few Pentecostals who would not be prepared to echo Rosenweig when he writes that, at its best, "To be a Christian does not mean to have accepted any dogmas; but to live one’s life under the rule of another life, the life of Christ and, once this has happened, then to live one’s life solely in the effect of the power flowing from there." ³ What some may overlook is that it is precisely in living one’s life from such examination that we uncover one of the founding definitions of the philosophical life.

So, the ‘three ages of the church’ motif will carry us but its trajectory should not terminate in more abstracted thinking but rather more attentive living. In recognising that theory must service practice, we return (as we must always return) to an understanding of philosophy that was proposed by the ‘pagans’ of Ancient Greece and Rome. Pierre Hadot, in writing on ancient philosophy in contrast to its modern deformations, wrote that for the ancient schools philosophical discourse was always at the service of a prior existential choice, a choice made in the context of a like-minded community. This existential choice implied a vision of the world (a way of seeing and being in the word) whereby "the task of philosophical discourse will therefore be to reveal and rationally justify this existential option, as well as this representation of the world." ⁴

Recognising this, the interpretive power of Rosenweig’s suggestive writings proves to be in their provision of one such philosophical discourse. As Pentecostals, we begin from faith, presupposing God disclosed fully in the person of Christ and in the on-going life of the community of faith and the cosmos, and our theological and philosophical efforts are ideally this faith seeking understanding. We have often tended to assert faith over and against understanding yet Rosenweig corrects this, restoring the pole of understanding without jeopardising our valuing of effectiveness. The kind of understanding we can achieve is always partly exegetical, meaning originality is to be eschewed and sacred truths are to be presented with minimal intrusion – faith comes by hearing. But, as any student of hermeneutics knows, innovation is not absent from this process because in presenting sacred truths with fidelity we are at once re-iterating and re-contextualising such truth in media res – we know in part.

Thus, in Rosenweig’s thought we discover a useful idea, an idea that permits an emphasis on revelation as having priority over history, an acknowledgement of the pagan sense of philosophy as an urgently needed return of the repressed and an opportunity for hermeneutics as the proper mode of a post-metaphysical philosophy. His thought is not the only avenue for Pentecostal philosophising but it is a fruitful one and in this consists the success of the main thesis of ‘Pentecostalism and the Three Ages of the Church’. It remains to be seen where and how far this movement of thought will take us but I am convinced that it will be worth the ride.

---

Endnotes

• Dreu Harrison [BA/BCom (University of Auckland), MDiv (cand.) (SCD)] is Administrator for the SCC Graduate School and is also editor of Taking Point SCC Leadership Review.

---