WILLIAM W. MENZIES
It was only fifty years ago that Pentecostal Christianity began to grow significantly in much of the East Asia and Pacific regions. National churches have matured, building in the post-World War II era upon humble beginnings earlier in the century. The growth of Pentecostal churches in many countries in the region in the last generation has been nothing less than phenomenal. Pentecostal bodies, such as the Assemblies of God, are among the fastest -growing in many nations, rivaling in membership most of the other Christian bodies of the respective countries. The remarkable growth of the Pentecostal churches in this part of the world is not unlike that in most other regions. The result is one of the most important phenomena of this century: the rise of the Pentecostal movement world-wide. There was no such movement a century ago. Today, if one adds to the roster of traditional Pentecostal bodies the number of those identifying themselves as Charismatic, that figure now exceeds all the Reformation churches of Protestantism (Barrett 1982: 792-93).
As we approach the centennial year of the birth of the modern Pentecostal movement, one means of attempting to gain perspective for appreciating the possible trajectory of this dynamic force in Christianity is to consider the place of theology in the revival, and the challenges and opportunities confronting biblical, theological, and historical scholarship.
theology and the Pentecostal revival
The modern Pentecostal revival began among earnest students of the Bible. In the late-nineteenth century, in many parts of the world, Christian believers read their Bibles with a sense of wonderment and expectation: 'Could believers in the modern world experience the manifestations and gifts described in the Book of Acts?' Most of these Bible reading believers were not laden with much theological baggage. Many were unaware of the various rationalizations provided by most of the great churches of the day that explained why the gifts of the Spirit were not available in the modern world. So, they took the Bible story quite literally and quietly devised their own explanations. In simplicity they asked the Lord to fill them with His Spirit, empowering them so they could meet the great challenges of their day. Over a period of years, particularly among the Holiness bodies of the Church, individuals and small groups experienced a flow of the Holy Spirit not unlike that described in Acts. Until 1901, these isolated pockets of revival went largely unnoticed. Their experiences did not fit well into orthodox theological understandings. Nonetheless, these believers insisted on making a useful connection between what they had experienced and what they read in Scripture, devising a theology along the way that they felt was Spirit-led, even if it did not mesh well with prevailing religious opinions. The participants simply understood that they had had a profound encounter with God, an experience that revolutionized their lives. Almost intuitively, they sought to give expression to the meaning of these things. It was in the United States, in Topeka, Kansas, in 1901, at Bethel Bible Institute, a short-term school led by Charles F. Parham, that the theological understanding of the reported experiences emerged in a form that gave cohesion to the movement. The overwhelming experience Christians were reporting was identified as 'baptism in the Holy Spirit', a term drawn from the Gospel promises accorded to John the Baptist. When Messiah comes, He will baptize in the Spirit. This promise was declared to have been fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost. Indeed, many evangelicals by the 1880s had spoken about a baptism in the Holy Spirit, but what was new at Topeka was the proclamation that the biblical, accompanying sign of this experience was speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance (Acts 2.4; see W. Menzies 1971: 37-40). This became the single most crucial theological identification of this burgeoning new revival movement. This understanding of the Pentecostal experience is what gave theological particularity to this novel revival movement. Here it was then-all believers should earnestly pray for and expect an experience separable from New Birth, a deeper experience with God, not to be confused with sanctification, but, rather, to be understood as an endowment of power for witnessing (Acts 1.8). To be sure, more was happening among these early Pentecostals than episodes of Spirit-baptisms accompanied by tongues. They were manifesting gifts of the Spirit described by Paul in 1 Cor. 12-14. They prayed for the sick with amazing results. Their worship was enthusiastic, they were meeting God in powerful ways. They were filled with joy and lived in an environment saturated by prayer and strong faith. In their zeal to please the Lord, they sought to live lives separated from the world, marked by simplicity and sacrifice. Beyond these experiences, these early Pentecostals understood that the empowering of the Spirit was not for their enjoyment and blessing primarily, but was intended to equip them for evangelistic and missionary service. They perceived that this outpouring of the Spirit was a harbinger of the Last Days, and that before the end should come, their God-appointed task was to take the Gospel to the lost of the earth. From the beginning, the Pentecostal movement understood the missiological implications of their experience.
The Pentecostal movement is clearly a revival movement, a call to the churches of Christendom to recover the character of the Apostolic Church. As such, it challenged the beliefs, practices, and structures of traditional Christian groups. The announcement that God was pouring out His Spirit in the Latter Days, much as He had in the first Christian century, including the verbal gifts of tongues, prophecy, and the interpretation of tongues, was too much for most Christians in virtually every sector of the Church. Pentecostalism was routinely rejected by virtually all dimensions of the Christian Church. These pioneers, consciously or unconsciously, proved to be a challenge to the traditions and beliefs, not only of main line Christianity, but of other revival-oriented bodies, as well. This is certainly true of the Fundamentalist and the Wesleyan Holiness movements. Rejected by virtually all-Christian groups in the early days of the Pentecostal revival, Pentecostalism grew up largely in isolation.
At mid-century, however, this changed. Isolation gave way to interaction, particularly with evangelical Christian groups. In the period following, Pentecostals easily adopted the hermeneutics and the theological agenda of evangelical Christianity. This can be discerned readily by perusing the syllabi and textbooks in Pentecostal Bible schools. Much of Pentecostal theology was borrowed and assimilated from evangelical Christianity. One reason for this was that, being a revival movement, most early Pentecostals were content to be proclaimers, not theoreticians. Groups, such as the Assemblies of God, eschewed the thought of articulating a creedal statement when it came into being in 1914, but these believers were insistent on the core of orthodox Christian belief, nonetheless, assuming that all adherents held a high view of the authority of the Bible, of the person and work of Christ, of salvation by faith alone, and that Jesus was coming again literally. They were busy doing the work God called them to, limiting their literary production to popular tracts and periodicals. They easily borrowed from the teaching of other Christian bodies, selecting those emphases that appealed most to them, not concerned that the groups from which they borrowed theological materials rejected the Pentecostal movement quite uniformly. Hence, the Wesleyan form of Pentecostalism, including the Church of God (Cleveland, TN) and the Pentecostal Holiness denomination had roots in the Methodist tradition. Non-Wesleyan (Keswickian) Pentecostals, illustrated by the Assemblies of God, who developed a different view of the doctrine of sanctification from the Wesleyans, borrowed from the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Baptist influences can be discerned, as well. It might be observed that the early Pentecostals resonated with the orthodox, evangelical theological propositions of others, but they were not given to much systematic theological and exegetical reflection. Their original contributions centered in attempts to understand the powerful experiences with God they enjoyed, especially Baptism in the Holy Spirit. The pioneer generation of Pentecostals looked at Christianity from an experiential point of view, recognizing in the Scriptures an explanation of their personal experiences that their evangelical friends simply would not concede. The Pentecostal approach to Scripture, their hermeneutics, did not fit the evangelical model. Given to testimony better than to scholastic reflection, early Pentecostals did not display a particularly consistent theology; they lived easily with a degree of ambiguity. Sermons and testimonies authentically reflect the heart beat of the revival, but make it difficult to form a systematic theology. They did not seem to have time nor the leisure to build coherent theological structures. They were essentially proclaimers of a vivid experience with God.
This is not to say that they were not concerned with the intellectual content of Christian faith. These early Pentecostals survived episodes of fanaticism and fringe heresies by demanding that all practice and teaching must be judged by the objective standard of the Word of God. The theological formulations that emerged were in reaction to very real crises in the movement. It became evident before long that the desire to get along without a creed was not possible. The Assemblies of God, in 1916, just two years after its formation, adopted a 'Statement of Fundamental Truths', drawn largely from the work of D.W. Kerr who had been in the Christian and Missionary Alliance. This simple statement was not intended to be a complete outline of theology, but was drawn up to deal with the issues the young Assemblies of God movement was facing at that time. That this doctrinal statement has survived with little modification since then indicates that most of the people in the Assemblies of God were concerned not with the elaboration of theology, but with immediate ways of meeting the needs of church planting and missions, of practical pastoral concerns. Pentecostals increasingly relied on their evangelical friends to provide the substantive theological materials for the nourishment of Bible school students and pastors.
Yes, it should be pointed out that from early days, Pentecostals such as the Assemblies of God, recognized the need for basic Bible training for preparing pastors, missionaries, and lay leaders in the churches. They would insist that, like their evangelical counterparts, they too were 'people of the Book'. However, common in the typical training program of future ministers and missionaries was a concern for learning more than a doctrinal catalog. In the curriculum, written or unwritten, was an insistence on the cultivation of a prayer life, a communion with God in which students were encouraged to hear God speak to them in intensely personal ways. Out of this came a quality of faith that was to prove the test of pioneer life in church-planting and evangelism. Important, too, was the 'hands on' practical ministry experience students were expected to develop even while they were students. More than merely an intellectual center, then, these schools were holistic, matching a theology of the 'head' with a theology of the 'heart' and of the 'hand'. It is not without significance that these holistic learning centers, the Bible schools, became an important instrument for the spreading of the Pentecostal message throughout the world. Such schools have been successfully instituted in indigenous form in many cultures. In Asia, with the inherent love of learning and the traditional respect for religious teachers, this social instrument has been of special significance. These schools were not intended to be primarily centers of theological reflection, but were designed to equip students to proclaim the essentials of the Pentecostal message in effective ministry.
In the years since 1960, with the advent of the Charismatic movement, a new kind of problem confronted Pentecostals theologically. People from diverse Christian traditions were experiencing Pentecostal-like phenomena. They, too, reported a new joy in the Lord, new power in their lives. But, often they articulated their understanding of their experiences in unfamiliar ways that puzzled traditional Pentecostals. And, many of these Charismatics, especially the Roman Catholics, eagerly produced a substantial literature. The result has been a bewildering assortment of theological options reflecting the well-nigh universal outpouring of the Holy Spirit in recent years. Pentecostal young people and budding pastors and missionaries are not particularly well equipped to sort through this maze of material. The result of this literary effluence has been stimulating and provocative for some; confusing and bewildering for others. An important challenge for Pentecostal scholars is to provide assistance to Pentecostal students in working their way through this large body of diverse literature. We have been borrowers. In fact, the influence of Charismatic churches and leaders on Pentecostalism has been significant (Hutchinson 1998). To be sure, Pentecostal values have impacted many Charismatics, but there has been likely a stronger influence on Pentecostalism than the other way around.
It is apparent that the traditional Pentecostal movement, now approaching its first centennial, has survived, and even flourished numerically. However, as third and fourth generations appear in Pentecostal churches, theological stability and continuity appear to be under considerable stress. Not having had much rime for nor interest in theological reflection, the Pentecostal movement faces a real challenge to maintain clear direction in the next century. As we approach the new millennium and the second Pentecostal century, what are some of the theological issues that require attention?
Significant Issues What Is a Pentecostal?
In earlier years, the theological options were few: one was either a Pentecostal or was not. If one identified himself as a Pentecostal, it was assumed that this carried with it the belief that Baptism in the Spirit was accompanied by speaking in other tongues, and that one expected the intervention of God in public services with a variety of manifestations of the Holy Spirit (Williams 1990: 190-220). Virtually all other Christian believers simply rejected, for a variety of reasons, the possibility of a recurrence of Apostolic-like gifts of the Spirit and related phenomena. Pentecostals concentrated on proclaiming the reality of the renewal in the modern world of the experiences of the Early Church. However, in the last forty years, the recovery of interest in these values, which were once confined to traditional Pentecostalism, has resulted in a wide variety of attempts to incorporate Pentecostal-like phenomena into prevailing theological and ecclesiastical structures. A considerable panorama of theologies of the Spirit now confronts the student (Burgess and McGee 1988: 1-5). It is not so easy to categorize the various Charismatic understandings. In fact, it is not so easy to distinguish Pentecostalism from some forms of evangelical piety, such as Peter Wagner's 'Third Wave', for example. Indeed, the term Pentecostal must be defined in new ways because fresh interest in the work of the Holy Spirit among Christians in many traditions has blurred the edges of older definitions. Out of this rich theological ferment new questions surface that previously were not considered. For teachers in Pentecostal classrooms today, the challenge is to address thoughtfully the implications for Pentecostal identity so that students can with confidence understand their uniqueness and thus be able to interact constructively with those who express their delight in the Lord in diverse ways. It is not possible for Pentecostals to live in isolation from the larger church world. Certainly these questions confront Asians today. Additionally, it is becoming apparent that the issues that are important to Asians in Pentecostal theology are not always precisely the same as those in the West (W. Ma 1998).
Methodology
A fruitful field for reflection is the contribution of Pentecostals to the very way theology is to be undertaken. Here, certainly, Asian Pentecostal scholars will be able to offer helpful insights. In the West, Aristotelian categories and tight logical construction have shaped the form of theology. This was spun out to extravagant lengths in the post-Reformation era known as Protestant Scholasticism. The histories of both Lutheran and Calvinist traditions reflect this vividly. Out of this intellectual exercise in Europe it was not long before the ability to recite the right words in the creed became equivalent to Christian faith itself. To be sure, the clarification that Aristotelian logic provides for the theologian should not be minimized. Certainly evangelical theology, heir to the scholastic tradition, has profited from the insistence on expressing truth in clear propositions, and the requirement that the authority for all matters of faith be grounded in the inspired Scriptures. American fundamentalism is a direct descendent of post-Reformation scholasticism by way of the 'Princeton theology'. And, this of course, has been exported wholesale to Asia. But, the question arises, nonetheless, if there is not a further dimension available for appreciating how man is to relate to God. The intellectualizing of religion can become sterile, as the post-Reformation story in Europe discloses. How, then, does one bring into the picture the element of living faith, the need to know God in immediate and personal ways? Pentecostals have sought to articulate, often in halting ways, a knowledge of God made possible through experience, either vicariously through the testimonies reported in Scripture, or even through subjective personal encounters with God. There is a built-in tension between scholastically-driven evangelicalism, of which Pentecostals are heirs, and the Pentecostal attempt to make a larger place for the immediate ministry of the Holy Spirit. For example, a line of reasoning common in evangelicalism holds that narrative materials are not available for theological consideration, unless what is purported to be a primary teaching in the narrative is repeated in an overtly didactic passage of Scripture. Were one to follow this hermeneutical rule rigorously, the Book of Acts becomes virtually unavailable for theology, since it is narrative in character. It is easy to see why evangelicals usually reject Pentecostal delight in the powerful episodes of Acts as instructive for the contemporary church (Fee and Stuart 1981: 87-102). This traditional view is being challenged increasingly by some in the evangelical world, which gives encouragement to Pentecostals to champion the role of narrative in the shaping of Pentecostal theology (Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard 1993: 349-51). A Canadian scholar, James Smith, has recently attempted to make a case for a unique and valid Pentecostal hermeneutical methodology, quite distinct from that of traditional evangelicalism. He deplores the dilemma that confounds modern Pentecostalism, in which he sees the attempt to trumpet steadfast loyalty to traditional evangelicalism, and at the same time finding, alas, that slavishly following the hermeneutical agenda of evangelicalism closes off the possibility of shaping a truly Pentecostal theology (Smith 1997a, 1997b). Some Pentecostal scholars have begun to break Out of the pack and to develop a persuasive Pentecostal hermeneutic (R. Menzies 1994).
Suffering
In Sinic-based cultures, eschatology is less significant than the here-and-now. The emphasis on 'luck', common in Asia, is centered in ways of maneuvering the available deities into improving one's present fortunes. This has been capitalized on by Pentecostals with great effect in several Asian nations, demonstrating that the Gospel contains within it patterns for success, not only for the next world, but also for the present world. Most revivals 'boil up from beneath', reaching first the impoverished and the disenchanted, but in several Asian nations, such as Singapore, Malaysia, and Korea, many business and professional people have come to the Lord. And, indeed, many of them have demonstrated that God has blessed them in concrete ways. In addition, many have been convinced of the rightness of the Christian gospel because of dramatic healings. Certainly 'blessing' is an important dimension of the Christian message that Pentecostals have every right to proclaim. However, is there a need to balance this theological emphasis with the other side of the equation? How can Christian leaders prepare believers for the 'down times?' Where is the God of blessing when financial reverses come? How does one deal effectively with the problem of suffering and persecution? Is there a need to raise the horizon of 'blessing' followers to the eschatological dimension, to the coming of the Lord, to the Hereafter? Blessing theology may be a powerful way to reach into the world-view of many Asians, but does this need to be tempered with the other side of that truth, a balance that will carry believers through the waters of adversity (Cho 1987)?
Reality of the Spirit World
In Western apologetics one has the primary task of opening up the respondent to the possibility of a reality beyond the physical, the natural, the secular. In much of Asia, there is a surprising cross-current of belief that somehow meshes concern for the immediate and the practical with the notion that there is, indeed, a spiritual realm that overshadows the concrete world. Apparently most Asians already are prepared to accept the fact of spiritual reality. This has made it relatively easy for Pentecostals to reach animistic cultures. By demonstrating that the God of the Bible, the Risen Lord, has offered to intervene in the problems of life, not only for the eternal issues, but also for the immediate practical needs of health and harvest, Pentecostals have been able to get inside the felt-needs of tribal peoples. This has been ably reported by Dr Julie Ma, who catalogs the reasons the tribal peoples of Northern Luzon have responded to the Gospel (J. Ma 1996). One wonders if this incipient belief in a spirit world is not also fairly pervasive in the rapidly-growing urban centers of East Asia, as well, in spite of the rapid secularization of the culture. What opportunities are there here for articulating Pentecostal relevance?
Holiness
The origins of the modern Pentecostal movement lie largely in the yearning for a deeper life in God among holiness bodies in various parts of the world. Most of these groups fall within the classification of the Wesleyan tradition. Following the teaching of John Wesley, they believed that subsequent to new birth the believer could press on to an experience of 'entire sanctification'. This was often called a 'second blessing'. It was understood to be an interior work of grace completing the imperfect regeneration of the new birth experience. Thus, it was logically a component of soteriology. When people at the turn of the century within this tradition reported a further experience, marked by speaking in tongues, it seemed fitting that this should be called a baptism in the Spirit, a third work of grace. About 1910, largely through the influence of Baptist-Pentecostals like William Durham, a significant number of young converts to Pentecostalism felt more at home with a Reformed-based soteriology that featured positional sanctification. Hence, in-groups like the Assemblies of God, which adopted this position, sanctification was looked upon, not as a crisis experience, but rather as a life-long process of actualizing what was understood to be declared true for the believer at the moment of new birth. In either case, the first two generations of Pentecostals, at least up to mid-century, featured a great concern for personal holiness. To please God earnest believers addressed their contemporary culture and defined in concrete ways the separation that they felt was appropriate, not only for them, but for their children and others who would wish to worship with them. This led to a codification of practices that were to be eschewed. A specific form of legalism developed. Unfortunately, as culture evolved, altering the ethical environment in which these codes emerged, newer and younger adherents to Pentecostal communities felt that these strictures were increasingly irrelevant to them. A desire to keep the 'old paths' of behavioral distinctions alive led to an increasing antagonism between the worlds of the older generation (for whom these codes were truly relevant) and a younger generation, for whom these prohibitions seemed out of tune. In the last half of the century, the legalisms of earlier generations was swiftly scrapped. The question that remains, however, is what theological guidelines have been instituted to inform the ethical decision-making of newer Pentecostals? A conspicuous mark of revival movements throughout history has been a deep concern for repentance, for acknowledging with awe the Holiness of God, for a life-style distinguishable from the surrounding world. Recent Pentecostalism has probably featured more the positive dimension of Christian life than the counterpart, the addressing of sin and the need for continual repentance. It is not a surprise, therefore, to learn that dismaying ethical lapses have marked, not just laypersons, but Pentecostal leaders, as well. The culture of the present world seems to have informed the values of Pentecostal believers to a surprising degree. Since each generation must make choices appropriate to the ethical milieu in which it lives, what guidance is being provided for making good moral choices? This does not seem to be a popular topic for Pentecostal discussion, but the incidence of moral failures among Pentecostal believers serves as a persistent challenge to Pentecostal theologians and preachers. And, is not the hunger for upward-social-mobility a mark of worldliness, as much as sexual misbehavior? One could add at this point the relative lack of discussion among Pentecostals of social responsibility in a hurting world, along with the obvious need to address matters of personal morality. Currently, in Asia, there is a great interest in pastoral counseling programs, and with evident good reason. Along with this type of ministry, is there not a need for providing a theological base for Pentecostal ethics? It is evident that morality does not necessarily follow profound spiritual experience. The Pentecostal movement seems to have lost its connection with holiness origins. Who will rise to address this important question?
Church
There are several issues of significance for Pentecostals in this field of inquiry. First, the structure of the local church has taken some strange twists of late. Influenced by elements in the Charismatic world, the so-called 'Five-fold Ministry' of the church is now featured. Based on a novel understanding of Ephesians 4, some are identifying themselves, or others, as 'apostles' and 'prophets'. When one fails to make a distinction between the function and the office, it can lead to some unintended consequences. Who can challenge, after all, an apostle, or a prophet? It becomes obvious that a door has been opened to possible abuses of power, and raises the question if this teaching may, in fact, be misguided. Historical review seems to disclose that charismatic eruptions in history, when marked by this kind of authority in the church, usually fall into disarray.
Second, certainly a variety of church structures seem to be admissible in the New Testament pattern, and each cultural group should have the freedom to shape the form that best fits its needs, but are there some forms emerging in Asia that should be viewed with some caution? Is the door open in some patterns for a local leadership that lacks accountability? Is the local church really a very good mission-sending agency? At what points is cooperation with sister churches advisable? How is church discipline and the discipline of church leaders to be implemented? On what theological grounds are such decisions to be made? Is it possible that there is a need for a fresh theology of the local church: a theology that addresses matters of special significance in Asia and the Pacific?
There is another unresolved question: the relationship of Pentecostal denominations (and local churches) to Charismatic bodies. The Lord's Prayer of John 17 is an appeal for unity in the Body of Christ. Certainly a strong case can be made for the propriety of denominations within this context. But, in what way are Pentecostals to relate constructively to believers in the larger church world? It has been relatively easy to build healthy relationships with our evangelical friends with whom we share so many values. It has not been so easy to figure out a biblical way to relate to those who have been baptized in the Spirit, but are part of Christian traditions whose values are at many points in serious conflict with our own values. How are we to engage friends in this larger church world without compromising our theological integrity? For forty years this issue has been largely sidestepped by Pentecostal leaders. Sadly, the Pentecostal world and the Charismatic world have grown up in parallel, and often awkward, relationships with one another. Perhaps young Asian theologians, growing up in a vigorous environment of revival and reflection, will be able to offer wise counsel for finding better ways to see the burden of John 17 realized.*
conclusion
I am optimistic about the future. I see emerging national church bodies, and strong local churches, emerging in the Asian Pentecostal world. There is abundance of life. There is creativity and enterprise abounding on every hand. There is fervent prayer and enthusiastic worship. The Asian Pentecostal churches are capturing the missiological mandate of the Book of Acts. This is an exciting time. In the midst of dynamic growth, now seems to be an auspicious time for young Asian theologians to establish an agenda of important issues, and to stake out areas for reflection, discussion, and writing.
works cited
Barrett, D.B., ed. (1982) World Christian Encyclopedia: A Comprehensive Survey of Churches and Religions in the Modern World A.D. 1900-2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burgess, S. and Gary McGee, eds. (1988) Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Cho, P.Y. (1987) Salvation, Health, and Prosperity: Our Threefold Blessings in Christ. Altamonte Springs: Creation House.
Fee, G.D. and D. Stuart (1981) How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Hutchinson, M.P. (1998) 'The New Thing God is Doing: The Charismatic Renewal and Classical Pentecostalism', Australasian Pentecostal Studies 1: 5-21.
Klein, W., C. Blomberg and R. Hubbard (1993) Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Dallas: Word Publishing.
Ma, J.C. (1996) Ministry of the Assemblies of God among the Kankana-ey Tribe in the Northern Philippines: History of a Theological Encounter. Unpublished PhD. diss.; Pasadena: Fuller Theological Seminary.
Ma, W. (1998) 'Toward an Asian Pentecostal Theology', Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 1: 15-41.
Menzies, R.P. (1994) Empowered for Witness: The Spirit in Luke-Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Menzies, W.W. (1971) Anointed to Serve. Springfield: Gospel Publishing House.
Smith, J.K.A. (1997a) 'Scandalizing Theology: A Pentecostal Response to Noll's Scandal', Pneuma 19: 22S-238.
-(1997b) 'The Closing of the Book: Pentecostals, Evangelicals, and the Sacred Writings', Journal of Pentecostal Theology 11: 49-7 1.
Williams, J.R. (1990) Renewal Theology. Volume 2. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Notes
* For more than 25 years, an on-going dialogue between the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and unofficial representatives from various Pentecostal denominations has been in process. For a report of the results of the dialogue, see 'Evangelization, Proselytism, and Common Witness: The Report from the Fourth Phase of the International Dialogue 1990-1997 Between the Roman Catholic Church and Some Classical Pentecostal Churches and Leaders', to be published in a number of publications including Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies (with an introductory article by Cecil M. Robeck, Jr.) and Pneuma. It is significant that this dialogue has been carried on without official sponsorship by Pentecostal bodies, but with unofficial approval, nonetheless. It exhibits testimony to the ambiguous relationship that exists between Pentecostals and Charismatic groups in the larger church world.