Church and war: A change in hermeneutical stance among Pentecostals

Marius Nel

doi:10.4102/ve.v38i1.1749

Abstract

At its inception and for the first 40 years of its existence, Pentecostalism was a pacifist movement preaching non-violence and non-retaliation. At the end of the Second World War, the movement changed its stance, in many instances without officially taking a decision at formal platforms, because of the changes that occurred when its members became socially and economically mobile and the movement strove to be accepted in society. The article argues that the changes were, however, essentially because of a change in its hermeneutical viewpoint that introduced a new climate within the movement, accompanied by various changes in viewpoint and practice. After the 1970s, several theologians within the Pentecostal movement formulated a hermeneutics that concurred to a large degree with the way early Pentecostals viewed and interpreted the Bible. This new hermeneutics allows Pentecostals to rethink their non-pacifist stance and the article argues the case for such a reconsideration.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: While the classical Pentecostal movement supported pacifism for the first 30 years of its existence, it changed its stance at the end of the Second World War because of new hermeneutical choices. Recent changes in hermeneutical viewpoint within (a part of) the movement require that the ethical issue of pacifism be rethought if it does not want its witness about Jesus Christ as the source of peace to be compromised.

Highlights

A case studyThe early Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa (AFM), one of the classical Pentecostal denominations in southern Africa, did not at first find it necessary to take a stand about Christians’ participation in the armed forces and war.1 Everybody implicitly accepted that Pentecostal Christians do not participate in any violence, including war operations.2 in 1914 the president of the church, Pieter Louis le Roux, took the initiative and requested the Executive Council to discuss the issue and formulate a viewpoint
16.Absolute pacifists among early Pentecostals used several arguments to justify their pacifism: believers have the moral requirement to separate from the dominant values and practices of human culture and express the moral value that God places on all human beings; in the light of its restorationist understanding of the history of the church militarism is seen to have entered the church’s life when the church backslid and forged a political alliance with the Roman state; pacifism was the normative position on military service within the early church; Christians were heavenly citizens and pilgrims on earth with no allegiance to civil authorities; and to live completely separated unto God a position of separation from nationalism is required
Pentecostalism changed after 30 years of existence from a nonpacifist movement to a collaborator in the nations’ wars

Summary

Introduction

A case studyThe early Apostolic Faith Mission of South Africa (AFM), one of the classical Pentecostal denominations in southern Africa, did not at first find it necessary to take a stand about Christians’ participation in the armed forces and war.1 Everybody implicitly accepted that Pentecostal Christians do not participate in any violence, including war operations.2 in 1914 the president of the church, Pieter Louis le Roux, took the initiative and requested the Executive Council to discuss the issue and formulate a viewpoint.

Results

Conclusion