The remainder of this dissertation will, therefore, further
investigate Pentecostal uniqueness and growth—particularly that of Oneness
Pentecostalism—by examining two aspects of the movement's internal dynamics. First,
the growth of the Oneness movement will be traced by its institutional
development through a period of undifferentiated expansion during the early
revivalism and the earliest organizational efforts to a period of more diversified
ministries in the movement's maturity. Second, gleaning from Peter Berger's
notions of religion as "world construction" and "world
maintenance" and Arthur Paris' study of the religious
"worldview" of black Pentecostals, the unique ethos of Oneness
Pentecostal life and practice will be discussed—that is, the centrality of the
divine "epiphany" in ritual worship, the theoretical framework which
rises from the act of worship and in turn reshapes the content and
interpretation of this act, the role of the Oneness community (congregation) as
an inclusive, independent social world, and the crisis of the Oneness community
in the larger context of American society.21
The "undifferentiated growth"/"analytical proliferation"
model of Pentecostal development—first applied in William Menzies' Anointed To Serve: The Story of the Assemblies
of God—encapsulates the dynamics of changing policies and structures in the
history of the Oneness movement.22 The early years of Oneness
expansion were lived in institutional isolation apart from the struggles of the
mainline American churches. In this time of revival efforts, Oneness
Pentecostalism grew in a rather undifferentiated pattern, showing only a limited
ministry strategy or organization. But with the emergence and development of
the major Oneness, or Apostolic, organizations, the movement witnessed the formation
of a clear-cut missions strategy, the specialization of organizational and
administrative structures, the appearance of diversified service agencies, and
the blooming of educational concerns. The appearance of the Pentecostal Church,
Incorporated in 1932 and the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ in 1931
(and their later merger into the United Pentecostal Church in 1945) and the return
of most black Apostolics to the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World in 1937
marked the beginning of this maturation process as the Oneness bodies sought to
harness the energies of the movement in concerted efforts to meet the changing
needs of their constituencies.
Before dealing directly with this institutional maturation
process (in the next three chapters), the dynamics of this growth should be
examined. Luther Gerlach and Virginia Hine of the University of Minnesota have observed
five factors crucial in the growth and spread of American Pentecostalism. While
these factors are not presented as the "necessary conditions" for the
rise and advance of the movement, they are "operationally significant"
and provide a sound, meaningful basis for describing the movement's growth
dynamics. Although formulated from Gerlach and Hine's studies of Pentecostalism—both
classical and neo-Pentecostal—in the 1960's, the five factors well describe the
rapid growth of early classical, Oneness, and neo-Pentecostalism and the decline
in these growth patterns as these groups became more institutionally and
administratively complex. These five factors are
1. A segmented, usually
polycephalous, cellular organization composed of units reticulated by various
personal, structural, and ideological ties.
2. Face-to-face recruitment by
committed individuals using their own pre-existing, significant social
relationships.
3. Personal commitment
generated by an act or an experience which separates a convert in some significant
way from the established order (or his previous place in it), identifies him
with a new set of values, and commits him to changed patterns of behavior.
4. An ideology which codifies
values and goals, provides a conceptual framework by which all experiences or
events relative to these goals may be interpreted, motivates and provides
rationale for envisioned changes, defines the opposition, and forms the basis
for conceptual unification of a segmented network of groups.
5. Real or perceived opposition
from the society at large or from that segment of the established order within
which the movement has risen.23
The essentially "headless" quality of Pentecostal organization
is often obscured by the fact that most Pentecostals belong to established
denominations practicing one of the traditional organizational polities. But
the notion of individual access to the spiritual source of authority, when
seriously considered, prevents true organizational solidarity and centralized
control. The factional, schismatic tendencies of Pentecostals are especially apparent
in the growth of new congregations and organizations through fission. The rise
of a gifted leader more often results in a break from his parent church to establish
an independent congregation than in the elevation of this new leader within the
existing structure. The proliferation of congregations through fission,
although decried by Pentecostal leaders, continues as the growing edge of the
movement.24
But Pentecostal organization is not only "headless,"
it is also "segmented," that is, it demonstrates strong patterns of
personal interrelationships and group linkages. Personal association,
leadership exchanges, and networks of travelling evangelists create this
"infrastructure" of the movement. Each individual Pentecostal has a
personal network of fellow Pentecostals linked together in varying degrees of
closeness. Likewise, many Pentecostals "crossover" to worship in
churches other than their own. This creates fluctuating rather than static
memberships in local Pentecostal groups. The association and friendship of
ministers who frequently visit each other's churches also promotes this
blending of congregations. Networks of traveling evangelists also unite mixed
congregations in periodic revival meetings. Beyond these, several internal
dynamics contribute to strengthen of the social networking within the Pentecostal
movement. A "grapevine" communication system collects and distributes
information of importance throughout the movement. The provision of prayer and
financial support to individuals and congregations serves to link organizationally
distinct groups. Most importantly, the shared ideological commitment to the
experience of Spirit baptism and the authority of a non-human leader insures
interaction within the diverse ranks. Joined by these central beliefs, Pentecostals
quickly unite when faced with real or perceived opposition.25
Face-to-face recruitment along lines of pre- existing social
relationships also facilitates the spread of Pentecostalism. Gerlach and Hine's
studies reveal that fifty-two percent of Pentecostal converts were recruited by
family members and twenty-nine percent by close friends. Other significant
recruiting relationships include those between neighbors, business associates,
fellow students, employer-employee, and teacher-student.26 The
growth potential of any given congregation matches the number of available recruits
among friends, relatives, and associates of the original core. This is
especially evident when socio-economic distinctions are superimposed upon the
differences in recruiting relationships. For those at the lower end of the
economic scale, kinship ties are most significant in recruiting; whereas many
non-kin associations are significant among those at the upper end. While
experiences of economic deprivation and social dislocation might predispose
people to embrace Pentecostalism, the committed witness of a "significant
other" almost always leads to these conversions.27
A third crucial factor in the dynamics of Pentecostal growth is
the act, or experience, of commitment. Such commitments result in cognitive
restructuring, feelings of certitude, and effortless behavioral changes as the
new movement and its value system are embraced.
Charisma, that quality
traditionally ascribed by sociologists and anthropologists only to magnetic leaders
of emergent movements, flows freely through the ranks of Pentecostalism. The
fact [is] that less extraordinary individuals can be led through a social
process into an experience of commitment, with all its personal and social
ramifications, and can influence others in turn.28
Pentecostal commitments involve not only a highly motivating
religious experience, but also an objectively observable act of
"bridge-burning." This act which sets the believer apart from old
behavior patterns and associations and identifies him within the new community
of beliefs and behavior symbolizes effective participation in the movement. In
Pentecostalism in general, glossolalia functions as this
"bridge-burning" commitment experience. For Oneness Pentecostals this
commitment extends to the act of baptism (or quite often rebaptism) in the name
of Jesus.
The shared Pentecostal ideology, the fourth factor in
Pentecostal growth, not only links the movement with a common value system, but
also functions as a pattern for personal and social change. Gerlach and Hine
find in the Pentecostal ideology a dogmatic quality, a call for serious
involvement, and a "positive fatalism" of divine guidance. The
dogmatism of the Pentecostal ideology, with its accompanying in-group/out-group
understanding of opposition, offers a clear, simple focus for action and behavior.
Dean Kelly, in his influential Why
Conservative Churches Are Growing, argues that the growth of conservative,
including Pentecostal, churches has outpaced that of more liberal churches due
to the clear sense of life purpose offered in the conservative groups.30
Pentecostals reject the philosophical acceptance of the gap between social
ideals and real behavioral norms which underlies the stability of the status
quo. Rather these "true believers" accentuate the enabling power of
the baptism of the Spirit which allows the realization of the otherwise
impossible demands of the Christian ethic. The individual Pentecostal
approaches his ideology with seriousness and spends many hours in study of its tenets
and applications. This involvement, in turn, functions as a "mechanism for
renewal of commitment" and increased involvement within the larger
community. Above all, the Pentecostal ideology motivates believers to action, insuring
them of divine guidance and ultimate triumph. Such "fatalism," rather
than creating a passive retreat from hardships, encourages struggle and work to
overcome obstacles. Even difficulties become perceived, not as failures, but as
redirection given by God or times of temporary testing of devotion. Hence, the
ability of the movement to persevere is almost limitless.31
The importance of real or perceived opposition from society at
large is the final factor in Gerlach and Hine's evaluation of Pentecostal
growth. Pentecostals possess a "psychology of persecution" often
rising from real experiences of ridicule or rejection by mainline denominations
in the case of both classical and neo-Pentecostalism. At other times, when no
real external opposition is present, Pentecostals, nonetheless, spend much time
and effort describing the outside threat and their need to isolate from it.
(The Oneness Pentecostal rejection of the neo-Pentecostal movement exhibits
notions of perceived rather than real opposition.) The fact remains, intense
opposition, if less than total suppression, tends to unify local congregations
provides a basis for identification between groups. Opposition builds and
reinforces the links in the segmented network of the movement.32
While Gerlach and Hine's studies concern the whole of the
Pentecostal movement, their conclusions are quite pertinent in the study of
Oneness institutional development from undifferentiated growth to mature diversified
ministries. These dynamic factors fuel the self- conscious Oneness effort to
recapture the pristine fervor and immediacy of the Azusa revival and
demonstrate the patterns of attendant Oneness growth. The shift toward administrative
efficiency and multiplied service agencies, depicted in the following three
chapters, reveals two seemingly contradictory levels of Oneness Pentecostal growth:
the vertical growth of an increasingly complex centralized organization and the
horizontal growth of factional, diffuse congregations linked most strongly by networks
of personal associations and external opposition.
___________________
9Ibid., p. 235.
10Ibid., p. 185. Anderson bases this conclusion on the overall
racial makeup of Oneness Pentecostalism with its higher percentage of
"impoverished and socially ostracized" blacks. This fails to note the
early racial separation (1924 in the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World) which
divided Oneness believers along the "color line." White Oneness
believers shared approximately the same economic and social standing as other
white Pentecostals. More intense deprivation cannot explain the continued
emphasis upon ecstasy in this group.
16Arthur E. Paris, Black
Pentecostalism: Southern Religion in an Urban World (Amherst, Mass.:
University of Massachusetts Press, 1982), p. 83.
17Virginia H. Hine, "Non-Pathological Pentecostal Glossolalia:
A Summary of Relevant Psychological Literature," Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 8 (1969). Anderson
discredits this study for rather oblique reasons, see Vision, p. 286.
21Part III of this dissertation will address the issue of the
Oneness Pentecostal worldview and religious framework.
22See William W. Menzies, Anointed to Serve: The Story of the Assemblies of God (Springfield, Mo.:
Gospel Publishing House, 1971).
23Gerlach and Hine, People,
p. xvii.
24Gerlach and Hine, "Five Factors," pp. 26-30.
25Gerlach and Hine, People,
pp. 33-78.
26Gerlach and Hine, "Five Factors," p. 30.
27Gerlach and Hine, People,
pp. 79-97.
28Gerlach and Hine, "Five Factors," p. 32.
29See Virginia H. Hine, "Pentecostal Glossolalia: Toward a
Functional Interpretation," Journal
for the Scientific Study of Religion 8 (1968).
30Note the central thesis of Dean M. Kelley's Why Conservative Churches Are Growing (New York: Harper and Row,
1972).
31Gerlach and Hine, People,
pp. 159-182 and "Five Factors," pp. 33-37.
32Gerlach
and Hine, People, pp. 183-97 and
"Five Factors," pp. 36-37.