African Pentecostalism and World Christianity. Группа авторов
to set issues of power encounter, prosperity, and other criticisms of African Christianity within a broader context of the reinvention of the church in Africa by Africans which takes as its paradigm the experience of the church at Pentecost. As such, Asamoah-Gyadu is able to present new theological insights from a vigorous part of world Christianity to the other parts.
In honor of Dr. Asamoah-Gyadu’s work and following its spirit, I will re-read the Pentecost narrative and the Book of Acts in a way which is informed by the study of mission and world Christianity. First, reflecting on Pentecost and its aftermath in Acts, I will offer a new model of the apostolicity of the church. Second, I will suggest that the interface of mission—sending to the ends of the earth—and world Christianity—described as from the ends of the earth—offers a new way of understanding the church’s catholicity. Both these moves contribute to a de-centering of Europe in world Christianity.
Mission in the Spirit: A New Approach to Apostolicity
Pentecost: From/to the Ends of the Earth
The annual report for 2013–2014 of the Evangelische Missionswerk in Deutschland (EMW), which brings together the Protestant churches and missions in Germany, took as its title for a study of world mission “From the Ends of the Earth.”84 It derived this title from the record of the diaspora Jews gathered in Jerusalem at Pentecost (Acts 2:5). But as we know, the Pentecost event is more readily seen as the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise to his disciples: “you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). The problem with that verse today, after more than five hundred years of Christendom, is that “To the ends of the earth” sounds suspiciously like the colonial paradigm of mission in which missionaries, along with adventurers and colonizers, went out from Europe as far as they could go. In a post-colonial world, some of the problems of this model have necessitated re-thinking it, together with its theological foundations. Much attention has already been given by David Bosch and others to the re-interpreting the “Great Commission” of Matthew 28:18–20, but the same treatment needs to be given to the rest of the New Testament.85
The book of Acts is foundational for understanding the mission of the early church. Does “to the ends of the earth” imply that Luke shared the expansionist vision of the contemporary Roman emperors or the colonial vision of the modern West?86 I think not, for several reasons.87 First, we cannot accuse Luke of imperial attitudes. The mission of the apostles is described as “witnessing to Christ” (Acts 1:8). That is, it has the same self-sacrificing character as Jesus’ mission. The apostles are vulnerable—even Paul, the Roman citizen, gets imprisoned for the faith. The early Christians were Jews, an oppressed group within the empire, and not agents of any political power. Like Jesus, the apostles rejected the adulation of the people (Paul and Barnabas, Acts 14:8–17) and did not gain materially from their missions. The apostles condemned demons but not people (with the possible exception of Elymas, Acts 13:6–11). And, most strikingly of all, the apostles did not impose their Jewish culture on Gentile converts.
Second, although the spread of the gospel according to Luke is often thought of in terms of expanding concentric circles—from Jerusalem, to Judaea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth—and was used in colonial mission histories as a prototype of expansionist history,88 this image of expansion is a misperception. There are several reasons why; first, because the call to witness is in each of those locations; second, because they do not form concentric circles. Jerusalem may be central to Judaea but not to Samaria. These first three places represent the ministry of Jesus himself, and the progress of the gospel in Acts 2:1–8:25. “The ends of the earth” is clearly the new departure, the mission to the gentiles, which we read about from Acts 8:26 onwards, mostly in connection with Paul. However, it is clear that Paul is not the only missionary to the Gentiles—there were other missions like those of Philip (Acts 8:4–40; 21:8), Barnabas (Acts 15:36–40), and Apollos (Acts 18:24–28; 1 Cor 1:12; 3:4–6, 22). But even though they went to the Gentiles, there is no record in Acts of Paul or any other apostle reaching the end of the earth.
What we hear about in Acts is mostly about a spreading of the good news within the Roman Empire. Like most empires, it dispossessed and displaced individuals and whole communities. Persecutions—like those recorded in Acts 8; 11; and 18—caused Christian communities to break up, scatter or re-locate in a random fashion. As well as such involuntary movement, the empire also facilitated mobility for some, like Paul himself, his fellow tent-makers Priscilla and Aquila, and Lydia, the business woman (Acts 16).89 But in this period, Christianity was not the imperial power; it was subject to imperial whims. The spread of the early church was not one of relentless expansion and its limited growth was not by conquering territory. Third, expansion is a misnomer because it misses half of the story. As the EMW report points out, the direction of spread was not only outwards from Jerusalem; at Pentecost there is also a movement in the opposite direction.90 Moreover, later in Acts we read that Paul himself frequently returns to Jerusalem, sometimes bringing Gentiles with him (Acts 12:25; 15:4; 18:22; 21:17).
Luke may have an agenda to lay the ground for peace between Christianity and Rome, but—and this is the third reason why he cannot be charged with imperialism—Luke is at the same time subversive of Roman power. Luke’s narrative, with its message of “good news to the poor” (Luke 4:18), has equally provided a key foundation for liberation theology. Luke may admire elements of the Roman Empire; for example, as in the Christian community, within the empire Jew-Gentile distinctions are transcended; and in Acts, Paul calls on Roman justice and experiences Roman protection. But Luke is all the while claiming supremacy for the kingdom of God, which transcends and sometimes counters Rome because Jesus is revealed as “Lord” (e.g., Acts 9:1–28).
Finally, Luke’s narrative, which follows Paul around Asia Minor, into Greece, and on to Rome, does not imply a special place for the West in Christian history. It is true that Luke does not refer to Paul’s years in Arabia (Gal 1:17; 2 Cor 11:32–33) but he does mention the spread of the gospel to Africa—Ethiopia—by a native of that place (Acts 8:27–39), and this is the implication also of the reference to diaspora representatives in Acts 2. We are meant to assume that they took they gospel back with them and that this is therefore not only the best record of the Jewish diaspora in that period but also, plausibly, a record of the location of the first churches. They extended from Pontus in the north of Asia Minor south to Egypt, from Rome in the west to Elam, which is east of Arabia.
In this connection, it is important to note that the “Macedonian call” (Acts 16:9–10) is not described by Luke as a call into Europe—that is a later European interpolation. It is true that, after his circular journeys, Paul travels from Jerusalem to Rome. However, this is not primarily because it is west but because it is the heart of empire. There is no indication in Acts that Jerusalem, or Antioch, or any of the other centers mentioned are superseded by Rome as a Christian center. The witness in the other places continues. Arguably neither Jerusalem nor Rome nor anywhere else is the center for Luke, but only heaven, where Jesus is. The book begins with Jesus’ ascension to there (Acts 1:1–11) and the most exemplary witnesses in Acts—Stephen and Paul—both have visions of heaven (Acts 7:55; 9:3; 10:11, 16).91
It is often said that Luke’s second volume, the Acts of the Apostles would be better named “the Acts of the Holy Spirit.” It is true that the Holy Spirit initiates, guides and empowers the church’s mission in Acts.92 We could also say that the filling of the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for all Christian witness—not only in the iconic case of the disciples at Pentecost but in every case. Following the first Pentecost there are repeated pentecosts in Acts. The believers in Jerusalem received the Holy Spirit a second time (4:31) but in most cases the reference is to the Spirit coming on different communities. After their baptism, the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit through the ministry of Peter and John (8:14–17). The Gentiles associated with the Roman centurion Cornelius received the Holy Spirit in the same way as the Jews had, which convinced Peter and the church in Jerusalem that the Gentiles had also gained the new life of salvation (10:44–48; 11:17–18) and contributed to their being counted as Christians on equal terms as Jews by the Jerusalem Council (15:8–9).93 The Holy Spirit came upon the Ephesians through Paul’s