Evangelicalism vs. Pentecostalism
Bebbington in his book Evangelicalism in Modern Britain lays out a clear history of the rise, spread, and splintering of evangelicalism in Britain. While I have studied a decent amount of church history, most of my evangelical church history that I’ve studied has been more focused on the USA. How ethnocentric of me. Bebbington shows, of course, how evangelicalism began in England and found it’s way across the Globe. This blog will focus on some of Bebbington’s more important points and will then shift to focus on his emphasis on charismatic evangelicalism since my dissertation will focus on my particular pentecostal tribe.
Bebbington’s strongest point is the one which was also his broadest stroke. That is when he gave a precise definition of evangelicalism. This is significant because it is a task that seems more difficult today than ever. These definitions are important because they will the faith community draw lines against those who might look a little like us, but are not us. We should be reminded of Jesus warning of a wolf in sheep’s clothing as more and more counterfeits are being easily broadcasted through instant access social media. As far as Bebbington’s specific list of four pillars of evangelicalism (conversionism, activism, Biblicism, and crucicentrism) it’s important to note think none one of these four are particular to just evangelicalism, but rather evangelicalism is the specific combination of these four.
Amongst the rest of this book, Bebbington went into his insights and very specific details of the british evangelical history leading up to today. And Bebbington did cover some very significant highlights of the charismatic movement in evangelical Britain. although still relevant in understanding what actual type of evangelicalism we have inherited. One particular chapter that was of particular use to me was Bebbington’s walkthrough on the rise of the charismatic movement in the 1960’s of England. The Charismatic movement along with the Pentecostal is actually one sect of Christianity that began in the USA (primarily, at least). Bringing the discussion around to Pentecostalism is important because the whole church should be a pentecostal church. That is pentecostal, lower case p, not “Pentecostal.” The early church was, after all, pentecostal. It should be our job to that early church was pentecostal and it should be the description of the whole church.
Interestingly enough, Jame K.A. White writes in this his book Thinking in Tongues about the five tenets of Pentecostalism are White’s list consisted of Radical Openness, Enchanted Theology, a non-dualistic affirmation, an affective epistemology, and an eschatological orientation.[1] I bring this up to point to the fact that some theologians, such as Smith, actually categorize Pentecostalism in a different category as evangelicalism. Smith also goes forward to present a distinctly pentecostal worldview and again clarifies that although he thinks this should be the Christian worldview, it is only the worldview of Pentecostals is actually very different than the evangelical Christian worldview, and these two should be viewed differently.
Bebbington did describe the charismatic movement is good measure and his explanation of the renewal tied with the rise of postmodernism is spot-on. Additionally, his explanation of the very difficult to understand, Nietzsche, was very clear and helpful to the conversation. Nietzsche was the one who ushered more doubt into the world perhaps than anyone else. But Bebbington wrote like the charismatic movement was evangelicalism becoming a post-modern movement. Many have credited this fact with the explosive numerical growth that Pentecostal/charismatic have experienced.
Bebbington said of the Charismatics in Britain that, “experience was likewise elevated above theology in the charismatic scale of values.”[2] It should be pointed out that Pentecostals view experience over theology in many cases, but they do not (at least good ones don’t) elevate their experience over the word of God. In line with the first tenant of Radical openness of God, we see Pentecostal very open to new experiences and to see if God was in it. This is not an absurd notion. Afterall, when the original Pentecost came, there was no precedent for what was happening! Peter and the other disciples must have been very surprised to see tongues of fire come down and hear many different languages spoken at once! Part of the DNA of pentecostals is to be open to God doing the unexpected in our midst, and then after saying… “Ok, That was God”, just as Peter did that first day. And it was this experience which brought Evangelicals into a shared community.[3] Even Catholics had charismatics within their ranks.[4] This is another way in which pentecostalism/charismaticism has forked away from mainstream evangelicalism, in that it was able to blend back with the non-protestant and even unify them.
Within this context one can see the effect evangelicalism has had, as well as some of the unqiue contributions that Pentecostalism produced. Understanding some of the core values of Pentecostals/charismatics, (like that they value experience over theology) is another factor why my particular pentecostal tribe has not valued higher education as much as other denominations. Ironically though, many pentecostals would say this is a good thing.
Works Cited
Bebbington, David W. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: a History from the 1730s to the 1980s. Routledge, 2015.
Smith, James K. A. Thinking in Tongues: Pentecostal Contributions to Christian Philosophy. Grand Rapids, MI, William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2010.
Foot Note
[1] James K. A. Smith, Thinking in Tongues: Pentecostal Contributions to Christian Philosophy (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Pub., 2010), Chap. 1.
[2] David W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (Routledge, 2015), pg. 242.
[3] Ibid. 243.
[4] Ibid. 247.
9 responses to “Evangelicalism vs. Pentecostalism”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Thanks Kyle for bringing us on your journey from traditional evangelicalism to where your church is today. As I read Bebbington, I struggled with an outsider writing on some of the history of my denomination and saw how my thoughts differed from Bebbington’s prospective. Did you find this as to be true as well? I appreciated you listing the tenets of of Charismatics (according to Smith) although I will admit that I am not sure what is included with each of the listed tenets. Thanks for wrestling with Bebbington and taking the time to consider the perceived distance from the mainline evangelicals.
Hi Kyle,
I can see how this text could be a valuable resource for your research. I appreciate the fact you recognize so many of “us” in the US are ethnocentric regarding our history of our faith. How will you be a different kind of leader in your denomination to help your colleagues and congregants have a more global perspective? Especially with Pentecostal ideology – or maybe you don’t see a need for this?
Kyle,
Happy New Year! Nice job differentiating the point that evangelicalism is the “specific combination” of the Bible, cross, conversion, and action. I like the way you compared the 4-pillars of evangelism with the 5-tenents of Pentecostalism.
I think Peter, having seen a few miracles before the tongues of fire, and once he was indwelt with the living Holy Spirit, was just acting in his new-normal when he delivered that first revival message. For me, the more God takes away from my earthly identity, the less surprised I am to see Him working in and around me. Too many labels on Christians these days. Good post, I like how you analyzed Bebbington.
Stand firm,
M. Webb
Kyle,
I appreciated your delineation of Pentecostalism within the evangelical movement. To be honest, I have not had many discussions with charismatic Christians and would enjoy a discussion to help me better understand the Pentecostal denominations. Besides the obvious, speaking in tongues, what are the other distinctives that are part of your tradition.
Jason
Hey Kyle, thank you so much. I am learning a lot about Pentecostalism from you, which is very helpful because I have not learned enough about it from either school or experience. My brother in law is a charismatic pastor in Long Beach, CA, and formerly but I’m not sure he’d still claim the term “Pentecostal.” He had a bad experience where he was abused as a young pastor under his father-in-law. So he has some scars from that. But the 5 points of Pentecostalism that you wrote sold me. Where do I sign up?! I wrote on Dan’s post how it’s interesting that Pentecostalism has been much more successful than Evangelicalism in compelling the poor, and the 5 points you mentioned brings a lot of clarity as to why Pentecostalism is so vibrant and huge and growing throughout the entire developing world. Nice work!
Happy new year Kyle.
I love it that you have introduced pentecostalism into the mix in this discussion. I was raised in a Baptist church, but while at my interdenominational seminary in Toronto was impacted by the Holy Spirit in a renewal and began exploring the supernatural graces of God at work in our midst. Then we lived in South America where just about any church is charismatic. So suffice it to say I’ve seen and experienced a lot of unusual activity by God (and probably some that was just human excess).
My theory is that evangelicalism is a response to our modern environment. The charismatic renewals are the last vestiges of responding to modernism. What will be the expression of church life as we transition to a postmodern world?
Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but it strikes me that perhaps the intense waves of charismatic renewal, especially through the 20th century, softened us up to prepare for the next expression of Christianity, one that exists and thrives within a postmodern world.
Great post Kyle. Wow…sometimes religion is just too confusing; I’ve decided to go become a circus clown instead. LOL. It frustrates me sometimes how complicated it seems that people love to make Christianity to be (not you, Bebbington). Even the constantly changing evolution that Bebbington seems to take us through involving evangelicalism to its end in pentecostalism is, and yet with limitations and considerations…nevermind…now I’m exhausted. The reality is that I still found myself lacking the personal reflection to abide by any of the stipulations for any of the religious guidelines. You expressed the variance of “experience over theology”, and all I could think about was that I was not sure how to truly separate the two. If I could connect my experience with something Godly, then I felt a spiritual connection to it…if not, then I have figured it to either be worldly or something else; but how do we take theology out of our experiences if we believe they are truly from God.
I will pose for you the question I kept seeming to ask myself through this reading: How do you think we should truly approach the nature of spiritual identity? Though a member of the church of Christ, I have actually described myself as a “scripturalist”; I feel as though I should support all of my ministry with a firm foundation of scripture.
Hey Kyle,
Thank you for this post and for making some connections and distinctions between the evangelical and pentecostal worlds. I was interested in your statement: “These definitions are important because they will the faith community draw lines against those who might look a little like us, but are not us.” It seems like this is part of a larger conversation around definitions/”brand-names” and how helpful they are. What is your sense in the end: is “Evangelical” a helpful term at this point?
[…] Theology, a non-dualistic affirmation, an effective epistemology, and an eschatological orientation.[1] I bring this up to point to the fact that some theologians, such as Smith, actually categorize […]