One of my objectives is to further refine my understanding of what is meant by "global" for researching Pentecostalism. There are several options that I will mention at this point. Perhaps there are more to be discovered. For now, there are three important ways in which scholars understand globalization. First, there are those like Anthony Giddens and Niklas Luhmann who take a systems or structural perspective. Society is understood to be a dynamic social system that includes boundaries, structure, institutions, and a range of interactions that illustrate how the system is constructed and operates. Second, there are those who understand globalization as the field of post-colonial critique and civilizational clash. Huntington's clash of civilizations thesis is referred to here. Global society is constructed and negotiated among those civilizations that compete with one another often characterized by tension, debate, and violence. Third, there is also the view of global society that focuses on cultural awareness and social change. Roland Robertson argues that global culture is rooted in our conceptions of the world as a single space where sameness and difference coincide.
The implications of each of these views for studying Pentecostalism lead to different observations. I take a more strategic if not pragmatic approach to defining here. If you want to observe the ways in which Pentecostals engage social institutions like politics and economics then a systems/structure approach may be a good choice. If on the other hand you want to examine the tensions and conflicts between Pentecostals and Muslims in Africa then a post-colonial approach may be a good choice. Finally, if you want to understand how Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity resembles a culture characterized by sameness and difference, that is local and global, then a cultural approach may be a good choice. Perhaps there are other ways of conceptualizing what is meant by "global" that will have implications for research. For now, the three I briefly propose need to be taken up by scholars of Pentecostalism in a more systematic way if we are to move beyond a simple understanding of globalization meaning "everywhere" or another view of Pentecostalism that mistakenly understands it as beginning in one place and diffusing throughout the world without recognition of how it is also "global" right here in North America.
The implications of each of these views for studying Pentecostalism lead to different observations. I take a more strategic if not pragmatic approach to defining here. If you want to observe the ways in which Pentecostals engage social institutions like politics and economics then a systems/structure approach may be a good choice. If on the other hand you want to examine the tensions and conflicts between Pentecostals and Muslims in Africa then a post-colonial approach may be a good choice. Finally, if you want to understand how Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity resembles a culture characterized by sameness and difference, that is local and global, then a cultural approach may be a good choice. Perhaps there are other ways of conceptualizing what is meant by "global" that will have implications for research. For now, the three I briefly propose need to be taken up by scholars of Pentecostalism in a more systematic way if we are to move beyond a simple understanding of globalization meaning "everywhere" or another view of Pentecostalism that mistakenly understands it as beginning in one place and diffusing throughout the world without recognition of how it is also "global" right here in North America.
Comments