As Pentecostals historically…

As Pentecostals historically (and as a movement)

We have been looking for power when we should have been seeking after His presence

We have been looking for gifts and signs and wonders, when we should have been looking for fruits of the Spirit and of character

We have been looking for preachers and prophets to follow, when we should have been looking for God’s presence to abide in

We have been looking for prophetic words and utterance, when we should have been taking more time in personal prayer

We have been growing, when we should have been going

And going when we should have been learning in the Spirit

We have been looking for more ways to build, when we should have been looking for more ways to move and go

We have been looking for ways to influence the world, instead of looking to be uninfluenced by God

And in our desire to be leaders and influencers, we have forgotten how to be led by God

And for a long time as a movement, we have existed at the borderline, at the verge and at the danger of gaining our rightful place in human history, but loosing our royal position in the GLORY of GOD

BUT ONE THING WE DID GET RIGHT: The Baptism with the Holy Ghost  (watch the full message)

Read also: Last Days Great REVIVAL

20 recent Pentecostal articles in light of the upcoming Pentecostal Sunday celebration:

1. The Forgotten Azusa Street Mission: The Place where the First Pentecostals Met
2. Diamonds in the Rough-N-Ready Pentecostal Series (Complete)
3. 95th anniversary of the Pentecostal movement in Bulgaria
4. Toward a Pentecostal Solution to the Refugee Crises in the European Union
5. Historical and Doctrinal Formation of Holiness Teachings and Praxis among Bulgarian Pentecostals
6. Pacifism as a Social Stand for Holiness among Early Bulgarian Pentecostals
7. The Practice of Corporate Holiness within the Communion Service of Bulgarian Pentecostals
8. Sanctification and Personal Holiness among Early Bulgarian Pentecostals
9. First Pentecostal Missionaries to Bulgaria (1920)
10. Historical and Doctrinal Formation of Holiness Teachings and Praxis among Bulgarian Pentecostals
11. The Everlasting Gospel: The Significance of Eschatology in the Development of Pentecostal Thought
12. Online Pentecostal Academic Journals
13. What made us Pentecostal?
14. Pentecostalism and Post-Modern Social Transformation
15. Obama, Marxism and Pentecostal Identity
16. Why I Decided to Publish Pentecostal Primitivism?
17. Historic Pentecostal Revival Tour in Bulgaria Continues
18. The Land of Pentecostals
19. Pentecostal Theological Seminary Address
20. A Truly Pentecostal Water Baptism

When Two Cultures Collide

In general, it is believed that when any two individuals come together, in the midst there will be some sort of tension. The coming together or collision consequences in tension that is the result of differing opinions and viewpoints. One major origin of such strain or confusion is due to misinterpretation. What is said is viewed erroneously and internalized or personalized in error. Furthermore, when this phenomenon occurs with two individuals from differing cultures, there is greater opportunity for misapprehension. It has been said that whatever is perceived by an individual is the true reality for that particular person. Meaning, however one views an event, even if falsely done, is what actually took place in that individual’s personalized world. It is such concept that must be taken to heart in order to genuinely be culturally sensitive. When two cultures collide, there must be open-mindedness and understanding of another’s world view. Yet, the straightforward part is to understand this concept and the difficult part is to place such concept into actuality.

 

30 years ago in Chicago

I left Chicago on this day 30 years ago (July 30, 1995). The Bulgarian church that day held service at 1 PM with 64 Bulgarians and many other internationals in attendance. Bulgarian students from the neighboring Indiana and Wisconsin attended as well. There was even a Bulgarian family from Alaska.

It was a Sunday. I left Chicago to preach in Beloit, WI that night and then left for Washington, D.C. the following morning. While driving north with quite the speed my Carolina blue Grand National began filling with white smoke. At first, I thought the air conditioner was on its last leg in the hot Chicago summer of 1995, but the air remained strong and cold. The cloud proceeded and it was so sensible that I had to slow down and basically stop on the side of the road. In my 35 years of ministry, I have only seen this one more time – in 2011 when the Glory of God descended over a youth camp we were preaching in the Bulgarian mountains. I did finally preach in Beloit and made it to D.C. the next day, but the vision of the cloud remained with me for the next 30 years.

Meanwhile, the word of mouth had spread and the Bulgarian church in Chicago was growing among the Bulgarian diaspora. On October 7, 1995, I was able to visit the church in Chicago again and present it to the National Overseer of the Bulgarian Church of God, Pastor Pavel Ignatov who visited the Bulgarian congregation in Chicago for the first time. By that time, it has become evident that the initial structuring for growth was giving more than expected results. The church became not only the first officially registered Bulgarian Pentecostal congregation in the United States, but also an important social and educational center able to minister to the 100,000 Bulgarians that live in the Great Lake region today.

Called to another mission, I left Chicago on July 30, 1995. The church bulletin upon my departure under Farewell and Appreciation read: “Today we are saying thank you to Dony for a job well done this past summer. He has served our church faithfully, and has been a tremendous blessing to Narragansett Ministries. Immediately following worship this morning, there is a dinner in Dony’s honor in the fellowship hall. And everyone is invited to attend.” Quiescently, while writing this next book for the 30th anniversary of the Bulgarian Church in Chicago, I was able to find this last bulletin in a box with several dozen letters I had sent weekly to my parents in Bulgaria. Surprising even to myself, those letters contain pictures, documents, dates, growth charts and progression predictions that are surprising even to me today. I remember spending countless nights in prayer, contemplating and strategizing over the new Bulgarian church plant, but I had forgotten all this was carefully documented as a case study.

The church congregation presented me with a plaque that represented my efforts and work in Chicago, which I have also kept until now. Because this plaque represents the prayers and the vision of many who are continuing the work today, establishing and leading Bulgarian churches around the world to providing pastoral care for many who have left the homeland in search for a better life. To these ministers goes my personal token of appreciation and thanks, “Well done thou good and faithful!” For me personally today a quarter of a century later, this plaque represents one very simply thing – I never betrayed my dreams. And in my book, this is well done…

10 Guidelines for Effective Church Group Chat Communication

by Kathryn Donev, LPC-MHSP, NCC

Interacting in church chat groups can be a bit complex at times and a touchy topic to discuss.  Navigating in this realm requires respect and kindness to foster a healthy environment. The following are some key guidelines for virtual etiquette tailored to a church community setting.

1. Be Christ like. Use language that is kind and humble. Avoid offensive comments or being judgmental. This requires being sensitive and thinking before you shoot out a text. Debating over a chat is probably not going to be productive so it’s best just to avoid it altogether. Being misinterpreted can happen faster in a distant space where you cannot base comments on interpersonal dynamics like facial expressions, voice tone, or eye contact.
2. Stay on topic to relative events like prayer requests, encouragement or updates on church happenings. Perhaps shy away from politics and don’t disguise prayer requests as a way to share gossip or to promote your social status by being the first to share the news. Microaggression has no place in church chat groups.  Examples include, “Who let you in the group?”, “What were you thinking?”, “I can’t believe you said that?”
3. Understand that written language can be quickly misunderstood. It is a good practice to avoid all cap text which can be viewed as shouting or being demanding. Avoid phrases that are pushy like “do this now” or “you have to”.  And excessive emojis use may distract from the message and can also cause confusion. It is very important to remember that humor is relative, especially in text form. Also, avoid mentioning individuals in a way that might make them uncomfortable. This may include singling a person out or calling them an unkind name.  Something that you may think is funny or no big deal may come off as rude.  Like calling one who likes to shop economically a “Thrifting Queen” or labels like “Moncho Man” may separate a person apart from group.
4. Always respect privacy and confidentiality. Do not share personal prayer requests or sensitive information outside the group without permission. And if someone shares with you personally a concern, don’t go blast it in the group. If that person wants to share, they can do it on their own.  Boundaries are easily blurred in a chat setting, but they still must exist to avoid group tension. If unsure, privately ask before sharing other’s requests publicly in the chat.
5. Acknowledge and encourage those who are sharing. Respond to prayer requests or shared testimonies with supportive replies, such as “Praying” or “Thanks for sharing!” Ignoring messages can be viewed as abandonment or unconcern.  And be sure to not play favorites in the group by over acknowledging one person’s comments over another.  If you typically just give a thumbs up emoji, then do so across the board.  A simple acknowledgment can also squash out paranoia that a concern has not been seen or understood.
6. Be sensitive to the time of the day when you post. Avoid posting late at night or during inappropriate hours unless it’s truly an urgent prayer request.
7. Think before you send messages. Double check what you write for clarity and typos before sending to avoid mix-ups. Also, think twice whether sharing information is a good idea or not. Some things might need to be shared at a latter time after confirming details or perhaps they need to be shared at an intimate family level before with a group.
8. Try not to overload the chat. Refrain from sending multiple back-to-back messages thinking that they are not being seen. It is also a good practice to limit sharing lengthy posts that may overwhelm the group. People’s time is valuable so to overwhelm with pointless texts is disrespectful and could cause some to leave the group.  It’s also good practice not to use a church chat group just because you are bored.
9. Resolve conflicts privately.  If disagreements arise, address them respectfully outside of the group preferably in person.  If needed seek guidance from a group leader or pastor to maintain peace.
10. Perhaps the most important aspect of using church chats is to always be mindful of the dynamics associated with non-face-to-face interactions in a virtual realm. And just because you put a smiley emoji or LOL at the end of something doesn’t make an inappropriate comment acceptable. Again, humor is relative and quickly misinterpreted.

Protests in Bulgaria Continue

Protests in solidarity with accused Varna mayor Blagomir Kotsev – seen by supporters as targeted because of his political affiliation with We Continue the Change – Democratic Bulgaria – are continuing, with a large turnout in Sofia on July 18 and another protest scheduled for July 22.

The protests on July 18 in Sofia, Varna and Dobrich, the latest sparked by the actions by the anti-corruption commission and prosecutors against Kotsev and two others, were fuelled in particular by the appellate court July 17 decision to remand Kotsev in custody pending trial.

The July 18 protest, organised by WCC-DB – on whose ticket Kotsev won election as mayor in 2023, defeating incumbent Ivan Portnih from Boiko Borissov’s GERB, had the theme “You don’t have handcuffs for everyone”.

Kotsev is the latest in a series of politicians from WCC-DB to be targeted for prosecution. He and two municipal councillors are accused of participating in an organised crime group for corruption and money laundering.

On July 19, WCC-DB MP and former justice minister Atanas Slavov told Bulgarian National Television: “The case against Blagomir Kotsev is based on some form of political repression against the opposition”.

At national level, WCC-DB – the second-largest group in Parliament – is in opposition to the GERB-Bulgarian Socialist Party-ITN coalition, a ruling majority held in place by Magnitsky Act-sanctioned Delyan Peevski and his parliamentary group.

Slavov told BNT that there was a total lack of arguments for remanding Kotsev in custody. There is not a single piece of evidence pointing to corrupt action by the mayor of Varna, Slavov said.

He said that what the prosecution had presented in court did not justify this most severe measure.

“Our conclusion is clear – this is a form of political repression, selective, against the opposition,” he said.

“There is information that special intelligence means were used – the prosecution does not include these in the case, recordings are leaking about which it is not clear who made them – are they authentic, were they put together and most importantly – there is no proportionality. This is an abuse of procedural power,” Slavov said.

Kiril Petkov, former co-leader of WCC, told reporters on July 19 that at the previous night’s protest “they gave the same signal to him as he gave to them – 10 000 hearts”.

How a Small Ocoee Flower Shares a Big Story

by Kathryn DONEV

With VBS season upon us, we are always looking for inventive ways of sharing the Gospel with our little ones. We are internally motivated by the Biblical mandate of Proverbs 22:6.  When we start children off on the way they should go, even when they are old they will not turn from it. So this summer let us shift focus from the Corona Virus to the Corona Filaments of a small plant that tells a big story.

When Spanish Christian missionaries arrived in the jungle of Brazil in the 16th century, they discovered a plant with such beauty and distinctiveness unlike any they had seen before. These explores were encouraged feeling it was a good sign for their mission.  After closely observing the structure of the plant’s bloom, they called it the passion flower because to them it symbolized the passion or death of Christ.

This exotic flower (Passiflora Incarnata) grows wild in South America and the southern United States as well. Beginning around June is when you first see the vine emerge from the grown after laying dominate all winter. It is the official state wildflower of Tennessee and is sometimes know as the maypop (term given by the Powhatan Indians), wild apricot, Holy Trinity flower and the ocoee. The Cherokee were the ones to referred to the passion vine as “u-wa-go-hi” or “ocoee”. The root “oco” refers to the plant and “ee” describes location. The word “ocoee” literally means the apricot vine place. The passion flower was considered to be the most beautiful of all flowers among the Cherokee and to this day it is a revered piece of their heritage.

Here’s how a small flower turned to be the center stage of the story of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice.

The passion flower is a strong plant that is resistant to pulling and bending as was Christ who endured the horrific pain of a crucifixion. The radial corona filaments of the flower represent the woven crown of thorns which mocked Christ’s claim of authority.  This corona rests upon a cup-shaped structure that reminds of the cup of suffering and the Last Supper. The spiraled tendons of the plant are symbols of the lashes Christ endured and  the flower’s trailing tendrils are like the whips.  The central flower column receptacle is symbolic of the pillar of Christ’s scourging. The three stigmas are symbols of the nails used in the crucifixion as well as the Holy Trinity. The five anthers remind us of the five piercing wounds Christ suffered.  Together the five petals and five sepals refer to the ten disciples who did not betray or deny Jesus. The palmate leaves depict the hands of His persecutors or the Holy lance that pierced Christ’s side.  The fragrance of the flower helps us recall the spices used in the burial cloth for the body of Christ. The purple color is symbolic of royalty, the white is for purity.  The shape of its fruit is symbolic of the world that Christ saved through his suffering. Finally, because the passion flower is a vine it points to Heaven and will compete with surrounding trees to see the light.  

Bulgaria becomes 21st member to adopt euro

BRUSSELS (AFP) — EU ministers gave the final green light on Tuesday for Bulgaria to adopt the euro on Jan. 1, 2026, making it the single currency area’s 21st member.

Bulgaria’s switch from the lev to the euro comes nearly 19 years after the country of 6.4 million people joined the European Union.

“We did it!” Bulgarian Prime Minister Rossen Jeliazkov said.

“We thank all institutions, partners and everyone whose efforts made this landmark moment possible. The government remains committed to a smooth and effective transition to the euro in the interest of all citizens,” Jeliazkov said on X.

In adopting the legal texts necessary for the move, EU finance ministers officially set the euro at 1.95583 Bulgarian lev.

EU chief Ursula von der Leyen and European Central Bank head Christine Lagarde congratulated Bulgaria after the ministers’ approval.

“We are delighted to welcome you,” Lagarde said.

“The euro will strengthen Bulgaria’s economy and bring big benefits for Bulgarian people and businesses,” von der Leyen said on X.

“Joining the euro area is much more than just about replacing lev with euro. It is about building a brighter and more prosperous future for Bulgaria and its citizens at the heart of Europe,” EU economy chief Valdis Dombrovskis said.

The European Commission last month said the EU’s poorest country had fulfilled the strict conditions to adopt the euro, while the ECB also gave a positive opinion.

Mixed feelings

Bulgaria’s journey to joining the eurozone has had a stormy political backdrop with seven elections in three years — the last in October 2024.

But recent polls show Bulgarian society remains divided on the euro, with experts attributing the skepticism largely to fears of rising prices and declining purchasing power.

President Rumen Radev shocked many when he proposed holding a referendum on the matter but that was given short shrift by the Bulgarian Parliament.

Since June, protesters have gathered in Sofia to call for “keeping the Bulgarian lev.” A symbolic protest camp with several tents has been set up near the presidency and the Bulgarian National Bank in the capital.

Proponents in Bulgaria, however, insist the move will help improve the country’s economy, and reinforce its ties to the West and protect against Russia’s influence.

“The political benefits are becoming increasingly significant, as the protests against the euro seem to bear the mark of the Kremlin,” 43-year-old musician Veselin Dimitrov told AFP in Sofia.

Euro club gets bigger

The green light comes as the euro has been gaining in value against the U.S. dollar as President Donald Trump’s protectionist trade policies shake trust in the U.S. currency.

Only 12 countries were part of the single currency area — including France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Greece — when the first euro bills and coins were rolled out on Jan. 1, 2002.

It gradually widened with Slovenia joining in 2007, Cyprus and Malta in 2008, Slovakia in 2009, Estonia in 2011, Latvia in 2014 then Lithuania in 2015.

Croatia was the last country to join in 2023, bringing the total to 20.

Bulgaria wanted to adopt the euro sooner but Brussels judged its inflation was too high to meet the necessary criteria.

EU states that want to join the single currency area must demonstrate that their economy has converged with other eurozone countries and that they are focused on sound public spending.

The conditions include holding inflation to no more than 1.5 percentage points higher than the rate of the three best-performing EU countries.

Pentecostal Theology of Freedom for the Postcommunist Era

 “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith
Christ hath made us free” for “if the Son therefore
shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed”

 

This paper is intended as a part of larger research entitled Theology of the Persecuted Church. It focuses on they way freedom is understood by the underground church and its successor, the postcommunist church after the fall of the Communist regime. In this sense, the research presents the theological view of freedom from the time of postmodern transition in Eastern Europe in retrospect with the times of underground worship and in dialogue with the major modern theologians. The main purpose is to construct an authentic view of freedom in the major areas of the life and ministry of the postcommunist Pentecostal church.

Postcommunist Europe

On his first official visit to West Germany in May 1989, Mikhail Gorbachev informed Chancellor Kohl that the Brezhnev doctrine had been abandoned and Moscow was no longer willing to use force to prevent democratic transformation of its satellite states. At 6:53 p.m. on November 9, 1989, a member of the new East German government gave a press conference to inform that the new East German travel law would be implemented immediately. At the East Berlin Bornholmer Strasse, the people demanded to open the border. At 10:30 p.m. the border was opened.[1] That meant the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War.

The unification of one Germany brought the clash of two political extremes within one nation. It brought together two Europes kept apart for half-a-century, a dynamic which introduced the continent to a new set of opportunities among which was the vision for a unified Europe and its realization.

A new set of dilemmas was introduced as well. Among all economical, political, social, cultural and simply human points of diversity, religion remained central for the process through which the European Union was emerging. The official “United in Diversity” (reminding of the American E Pluribus Unum) claimed unification, without mentioning God. The new European constitution announced that Europe draws “inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe.”[2]

For us who lived in the last days of Communist Bulgarian, the fall of the wall was a miracle which the world witnessed. Coming out from the severe Communist persecution and surrounded by the Balkan religious wars, suddenly the country of Bulgaria experienced a time of liberation which gave the start of spiritual revival mobilizing Bulgarian Protestants. In the midst of extreme poverty, due to prolonged economical crisis, this revival became an answer for many. It also provided a sense of liberation, but not in the Western political understanding of democracy and freedom, but rather liberation toward the realization of the Kingdom, a world much higher, much better and in way more realistic than any human ideality. The liberation from sin then turns not only into a social movement, but as a theological conception it provides an alternative to the existing culture thus becoming a reaction against the surrounding context and proposing a new theological model and a new paradigm for life itself based on substantive faith and belief.

 

Freedom of Will

Even when approached theologically, in the Eastern European postcommunist context today, the term freedom of will carries a strong political nuance. For many Eastern European Protestants, freedom characterizes the struggle against the communism regime and the divine motivation to endure it as a calling of faith for the individual and the community.

The years before communist era were characterized with opposition against the historical monopoly of the Eastern Orthodox Church. In this context, the protestant movement in Bulgaria also struggled against spiritual dominion defending the cause of religious freedom and the right of each individual and community to believe and express beliefs.

The hundred years of Bulgarian Protestantism have been accompanied with constant struggle against oppression of conscience and will thus creating a general acceptance of free human will. This has coincided with the theology of the largest and fastest growing Evangelical movements in Bulgaria. In this context, even evangelical churches, like the Baptists, have grown to accept and practice the doctrine of free will.

Based on the political, socioeconomic and purely ecclesial factors, in postcommunist Eastern Europe, the Calvinistic paradigm of predestination and election as practiced in a Western sense are not successful. This is based partially on their new doctrinal presence within the Bulgarian reality and their untested effectiveness through under persecution. It is also natural that they are often qualified in parallel with political and religious oppression, and therefore rejected as divine attributes or actions. If human regimes are oppressive through limiting freedom and consciences, how is God to identify with such regimes and practice the same type of “horrible decree?” On the contrary, in Eastern European Protestant theology, God is seen as a Liberator of human consciences and a desire for freedom.

By no means, is this tension to be confused with a denial of the total authority of God. God remains the electing God in Jesus Christ, but how?[3] Is it through a “horrible decree” or through a personal life-changing experience defined by the Bible? Is it through an oppressive act of lawful but unconditional predetermination which God by His nature is omnipotent to implement, or through an act of supernatural transformation of humanity through divine self-sacrifice?  And does this election barricade every possible human choice? No, as it is obvious in the denial of Peter; but also as seen in his restoration, that every choice of human will is answered by God through unconditional divine love.

Therefore, we experience “the secret of predestination to blessedness,” not in a cause and effect paradigm as Augustine and the Reformers, but rather through preserving its significance by experiencing the love of God.[4] Thus, the human will is freed by the love of God to receive salvation for eternity. The human freedom then is not ignored or oppressed, but on the contrary it is “placed in the context of cosmic drama” where the real bondage is not the one by God, but the one by sin which oppresses the human will and distances it to death. The Gospel, however, proclaims the victory of Christ over these oppressors thus liberating human will to its initial creation state as a gift from God.[5] This theology comes from a concrete experience of God in real life, and the quest to serve and follow God. As theology shows that the truth about God and the truth about ourselves always go together, the experience of God is a constant tension and a dynamic process, rather than blind servanthood to rigid principles that can never fully encompass the divine will. And through this experience of liberation of the human will in order that one may be free to choose salvation through Christ, God establishes His “testament of freedom.”[6]

Freedom from Oppression

As God liberates humanity from sin, He liberates it from sin’s moral and social consequences. Thus, forgiveness of sin presupposes not only the quest for sanctification and perfection after the image of God, but also the struggle against oppression and establishment of social balance. As the above shows, the postcommunist revival in Eastern Europe cannot be explored apart from the contextual political and socioeconomic dynamics. The reason for this is that the Spirit with value before God is a social spirit that makes the expression of the divine liberation the very purpose of the existence of the church.[7]  The practice of this expression challenges the relationship between theology and practice as it questions theology’s epistemological and praxis relationship to the oppressed with whom Christ is crucified.[8]

As in such context, theology is challenged to identify with action, the church must choose between contextualizing and enforcing theology. To choose contextualization is to attempt to relate it to the existing culture thus creating a state of relativism. Such approach is observed in some Asian and Black theology. The danger is to go beyond the boundary pass which theology ceases being theology in action and becomes simply a nominal religious culture. In Eastern Europe, such approach has been long-practiced by the Eastern Orthodox and has unquestionably resulted in nominal religion. The nominality of its expression has been a factor preventing the experience of God, thus denouncing the very reason for the church’s existence. Attempts to restore the Eastern Orthodox “symphony” between church and state have altered the existence of the independent synods which claim the succession of the same historical religious institution.

The second direction, to move toward enforcement of theology after the paradigm proposed by Liberation theology, is quiet a dangerous approach often resulting in armed conflicts. Keeping in mind the historical tension on the Balkans and Bulgaria’s success in undergoing the postcommunist transition without an armed civil conflict, this approach is virtually inapplicable. Therefore, an alternative must be proposed before history itself become oppression.

In this context, a move toward a theology of freedom seems most reasonable. It must purpose to prevent political and socioeconomic oppressions which are already present in various legal and illegal forms in Bulgaria. Such paradigm must also be concerned with intrachurch oppressive tensions which are present both among and within religious denominations, striving especially against such oppressive modes that come from the desire of an oppressed mentality to oppress others.

Such working model of social transformation is presented in Paul’s Epistle to Philemon. An older interpretation of the book explains that Onesimus, a runaway slave, meets Paul in prison, becomes a Christian and is sent by Paul back to his master. A more cotemporary interpretation claims that Onesimus is a slave sent by Philemon to help care for Paul in prison where he converts to Christianity and desires to stay with Paul as a missionary associate.

Regardless of the interpretation of the story plot, the epistle carefully presents a more in-depth set of problems that deal with persecution, imperialism, slavery, mastership, classes, ownership, imprisonment and above all justice. It further makes a more aggressive mood and places the church, represented in the text not merely by masses, but by the very divine appointment of apostolic authority.

The theme of imprisonment as a direct result of persecution is clearly present through the epistle’s plot and more specifically verses 1, 9, 13 where Paul uses the expression “prisoner of Christ” to describe his present status. The expression “prisoner of Christ” carries a sense of belongingness making the phrase different than the sometimes rendered “prisoner for Christ.” While the latter wrong rendering moves the focus toward the purpose of Paul’s imprisonment, the Greek genitive in the phrase “prisoner of Christ” denotes ownership. Although imprisoned in a Roman prison and kept by a Roman guard, Paul denies the Roman Empire ownership of himself, thus claming that he is owned by Christ alone. This is also a denial of the Roman citizenship that has led to this oppressive state of persecution and the recognition of a citizenship in the divine reality of liberation.

Paul’s negation goes a step further, proposing that while the Roman Empire may be authoritative in the temporal context, by no means it is authoritative in the spiritual eternal reality. Having established the temporality of Rome and the eternity of God, Paul denies to the Roman Empire the right to pronounce judgment over social injustice and to establish social status or world order, proposing that no one but the Christian church is the agent divinely designed and supernaturally equipped for these functions. The social injustice of persecution and wrongful imprisonment, the social tensions between classes, the problems within the church and every dilemma presented in the epistle are to be judged by no one but God through his elect. The reality of the situation is that the church is experiencing severe persecuting because the Roman Empire is denying the church social space. Paul, however, denies the reality of such oppressive human system and claims that the church is the one that must deny social space for oppressive structures as the Roman Empire.

The text calls for revolution; not merely, a revolution in the physical violent sense, but a revolution of the mind where human existence and mentality are liberated through Biblical paradigm combined with divine supernatural power to participate in a new spiritual social reality where justice is set by the standard of God. Such a move calls for a new paradigm and for a theology of freedom which creates an anti-culture and an alternative culture to the existing oppressive system. Such idea challenges the church with the claim that Christianity is and should be a scandal and an offence to the world, and not merely a religion but the belief that “Jesus is the most hazardous of all hazards.”[9]

Feast of Freedom or the Bulgarian Easter

Amidst political and socioeconomic crises since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Bulgaria has experienced a rebirth of Bulgarian spirituality. Many observers have referred to this restoration process as the rebirth of the Bulgarian Easter, and even which historically has been connected with the unity and power of the Bulgarian nation.

Bulgaria accepted a Christian country in 864 AD under the reign of Kniaz Boris I. A millennium later, in the middle of the 19th century, Bulgaria found itself occupied by the Ottoman Empire and religiously restricted by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchy which dictated the religious expression of the Bulgarian church.

On April 3, 1860, during Easter Sunday service in Constantinople, the Bulgarian bishop Illarion of Makriopol expressed the will of the Bulgarian people by solemnly proclaiming the separation of the Bulgarian church from the patriarchal in Constantinople. The day commemorating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ coincided with the resuscitation of the Bulgarian people. Although, the struggle continued for another decade, under the influence of Russia, Turkey was forced to legally recognize the independence of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church. In 1870 a firman of the sultan decreed the establishment of an autonomous Bulgarian church institution.

The connection between the historical Bulgarian Easter and the contemporary rebirth of Bulgarian spirituality has been used in many aspects of the Bulgarian politics and culture at the beginning of the 21^st century. As part of the Eastern Church, Bulgarian orthodox theology pays much more attention to the resurrection rather than to the birth of Christ thus placing its eschatological hope in a future experience rather then a past one. Such dynamic is natural, as the acceptance of Christianity in Bulgaria purposes to bring hope in national politics and communal life. Thus, in an almost historical tradition, the Bulgarian Easter represents the Bulgarian eschatological hope for a supernatural national revival. It also communicates with the sense of liberation from political, economical and religious oppression and a longing for the freedom to live life.

The Bulgarian Easter then provides an alternative to the present moment of tension and straggle in the crucifixion. Similar to Moltmann’s view of the resurrection of Christ, the Bulgarian hope foresees the resurrection of the Bulgarian nation as a divine act of protest against oppression and injustice and as recognition of God’s passion for life.[10] Thus, the resurrection is an alternative not only to the present world, but also to the reality of eternal death.

Death is therefore seen not only as an agent of eternity, but also as an agent of fear, suffering and oppression in the present reality which affects life in all its economical, political, social and even religious aspects. As death diminishes the value of life, the liberating power from Easter often remains ignored. But in order for the church to continue being a church, it must speak as a witness of the resurrection which is impossible without participating in God’s divine liberation which recreates the word to its original state of creation. Thus, the hope of Easter means rebirth of the living hope.

The resurrection hope is an influential factor which directs the life dynamics of the church beyond its walls. Being liberated from sin, the believer desires the liberation of others and claims the right to serve. But true Biblical servanthood cannot exist and therefore does not tolerate oppression, thus becoming a social transformation factor in the midst of oppressive cultures. The resurrected church rebels against the destruction of life and the denial of the right of very human to live. But different than other human systems, the church does not feed off its resistance against oppression. Its source of power is the eschatological hope for the full restoration of life and its eternal continuation in eternity.

A final question must be raised about the pessimistic character of such hope, as traditional evangelical eschatology in Bulgaria has been premillennial and due to its Pentecostal majority clearly pretribulation. Such eschatological views, at large, have been considered to be pessimistic and escapist in nature due to their strong focus on the future. Yet, such determinative presupposition seems inaccurate and much limited in its observation when applied within the postcommunist context where Protestant churches have been greatly involved in the struggle against oppressive regimes and constraining politics even to the point of martyrdom.

It is then natural, that in the underground context of persecution it is unthinkable for the church to identify with the regime in anyway. Actually, such identification is vied by the believers as spiritual treason and cooperation with authority is viewed as backsliding. By no means, however, is such a premillennial eschatological view in this context pessimistic for the church. Neither does the church remain unconcerned with the present reality. On the contrary, through its very act of negation of the right of an oppressive system to dictate reality, the church establishes an alternative culture which is the Kingdom of God. Thus in the midst of persecution and oppression, the church remains in its Biblical boundaries as an agent of the Kingdom of God by providing eschatological hope.

Yes, this eschatological view is escapist, as it promotes eternal separation from the oppressive reality. What other alternative can a persecuted and underground church find to survive and relate to the Biblical image of the ecclesia and at the same time it is clearly concerned with the transformation of the present world as shown above? For while its pessimism concerns the oppressive system of the world, its optimism declares the church as an already-reality in which freedom of sin, death and oppression and eternity with God is celebrated. Therefore, the church itself remains an optimistic reality and optimistic eschatological hope. For, without this hope the tension of life toward future and even life it self will vanish.[11] Without hope for the beyond, we remain in the now for eternity.

Epilogue

Due to its relational and reactional role to historical process, Eastern European postcommunist theology is a new historical and theological event. Yet, as theology of freedom, it relates to other theological approaches internationally. This similarity is enforced by the approaching postmodern era which the Bulgarian nation seems unprepared to understand. In such context, the church and its theology become the agents providing answers to social tensions.

Postcommunist theology provides a point of departure from the oppressive system of the communist regime toward a new social and ecclesial alternative. Such dynamic is by no means new to the Protestant movement in Bulgaria, which has dealt successfully with these same issues even in more severe context of underground existence and persecution. Therefore, the church has proved its commitment to identify with the oppressed through addressing and engaging its experience through the experience of God and its adequate and substantive theological interpretation. Such approach provides an alternative to oppressive system and structures, unquestionably critiques their tools and methods, and rebukes the agents who represent and practice them, thus denying them place in history.

A further concern for developing strategies for social transformation is also strongly present including education, law, politics and economics. These dynamics employ Christians in a common task and motivate the church for further development and implementation in order to connect theology with practice and thus to fulfill the divine calling for church’s role in the processes of restoration of justice and social transformation, both now and eschatologically.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Anderson, David E. “European Union Debate on Religion in Constitution Continues”

May 26, 2004.

 

Barth, Karl (tr. E.C. Hoskyns), The Epistle to the Romans (Oxford: Oxford University

Press: n/a).

 

Ford, David F. ed., The Modern Theologians (Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 1997).

 

Geffrey B. Kelly & F. Burton Nelson, A Testament to Freedom: The Essential Writings

of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (San Francisco: Harper Publishing House, 1995).

 

Green, Clifford. Karl Barth: Theologian of Freedom (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989).

 

Grentz, Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans

Publishing Company, 1994).

 

Johnson, Ed. Associated Press, June 19, 2004.

 

Moltmann, Jürgen. The Power of the Powerless, (Norwich: SCM Press Ltd., 1983).

 

Taylor, Mark K. Paul Tillich: Theologian of the Boundaries (London: Collins, 1987).

 

[1] The Fall of the Berlin Wall,  http://www.dailysoft.com/berlinwall/history/fall-of-berlinwall.htm June 29, 2004; also Jeremy Isaacs and Taylor Downing, The Cold War, Thomas Fleming, The Berlin Wall and Wolfgang Schneider, Leipziger Demotagebuch.

[2] Ed Johnson, Associated Press, June 19, 2004 and David E. Anderson, “European Union Debate on Religion in Constitution Continues” May 26, 2004.

[3] Clifford Green, Karl Barth: Theologian of Freedom (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 184.

[4] Karl Barth, (tr. E.C. Hoskyns), The Epistle to the Romans (Oxford: Oxford University Press: n/a),  324.

[5] Stanley J. Grentz, Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), 437.

[6] Geffrey B. Kelly & F. Burton Nelson, A Testament to Freedom: The Essential Writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (San Francisco: Harper Publishing House, 1995).

[7] Green, 106.

[8] David F. Ford, ed., The Modern Theologians (Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 1997), 369.

[9] Barth, 99.

[10] Jürgen Moltmann, The Power of the Powerless, (Norwich: SCM Press Ltd., 1983).

[11] Mark K. Taylor, Paul Tillich: Theologian of the Boundaries (London: Collins, 1987), 325.

Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith

The modern call for Primitivism derives from the idea of personal experience with God. There is yet no truth for and about Pentecostalism that does not emerge from experience. Irrational in thinking and in an intimate parallel to the story of the Primitive Church, Pentecostalism combines the discomfort and weakness of the oppressed and persecuted. It is the story of one and yet many that excels through the piety of the search for holiness and the power of the supernatural experience of Pentecost. It is the call for the reclaiming and restoration of “the faith once delivered to the saints.”

Such an idea of “looking back to the church of antiquity” derives from a Puritan background and is indisputably Wesleyan. In a letter to the Vicar of Shoreham in Kent, Wesley writes that the parallel between the present reality and the past tradition must remain close. For Wesley, the primitive church was the church of the first three centuries. Equality in the community as in the primitive church was the context in which Wesley ministered. Everyone was allowed to preach, both deacons and evangelists, and even women “when under extraordinary inspiration”

Of course, for Wesley, the Primitive Church was restored with the Church of England. The Pentecostal response was quite different, “The Methodists say that John Wesley set the standard. We go beyond Wesley; we go back to Christ and the apostles, to the days of pure primitive Christianity, to the inspired Word of truth.” The main characteristic of restoration was the personal experience of God. This experience was vividly presented by the Wesleyan interpreters in the quadrilateral along with reason, tradition and scripture. Such a scheme, however, may not be fully sufficient to describe the Pentecostal identity, as well as the paradigm of the Primitive Church.

The experience of God in a Pentecostal context carries a more holistic role, which is connected with the expression of the individual’s story and identity in both personal and corporate ecclesial settings. Through the experience then, they become a collaboration of the story of the many, and at the same time remain in the boundaries of their personal identity. The experience of both the individual and the community that holistically and circularly surrounds Pentecostalism is expressed in prayer, power and praxis.

Since Pentecostalism is based on the personal experience of God, prayer as the means of spiritual communication is its beginning. Being the source of spiritual power in the individual’s life it becomes the means of existence within the community of believers. Power derives only from God through a spiritual relationship which expressed through prayer, develops as a factor of constant change. The product is a unique praxis, which in the quest for church holiness and personal morality appeals for redefinition of the original ecclesial purpose and identification with the lives of the first Christians. The triangular formula of prayer, power and praxis is then the basis for Pentecostal theology.

Pentecostals claim primitivism aplenty, conformity to the apostolic experience of Pentecost and the Book of Acts. It affirms that modern Christianity can rediscover and re-appropriate the power of the Holy Spirit, described in the New Testament and particularly in Acts of the Apostles. In a social context, it was a call against public injustice. Globally the Pentecostal movement was a powerful revival that appeared almost simultaneously in various parts of the world in the beginning of the twentieth century. In the United States it occurred during the time of spiritual search.

During the first seventy years of national life of the USA barely 1.6 million immigrants arrived. In 1861-1900 fourteen million entered the country, and it was precisely within the recorded decade of 1901-10, with 8.8 million immigrants, that the Pentecostal movement began. The mass migration was in an immediate connection with the rapid urbanization and industrialization occurring in a chronological parallel. Since first generation immigrants are usually rootless, combined with sociological changes, the context created a search for identity and roots. In America, Pentecostalism came as an answer to this search.

In parallel, the beginning of the Church of God was a call for restoration and a literal return to the Primitive Church. It was The Christian Union committed to “restore primitive Christianity.” In its early years the Church of God focused on four main characteristics of the Church from Acts: (1) great outpouring of the Spirit, (2) great “ingathering of souls,” (3) tongues of fire and (4) spread of the Gospel. Similar to the Early Church, it began in the context of persecution, presence and parousia. While heavily persecuted the Church of God constantly remains in the presence and guidance of the Holy Spirit in a firm expectancy of the return of Christ. The Genesis of the Church of God was a restoration of the Pentecostal prayer, power and praxis of the Primitive Church.

Pentecostal Praxis

My first personal experience of the Pentecostal praxis was through the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. It took place the day after I was saved, and ever since has taken a central place in my personal life, spiritual life and ministry. The liturgy I am about to describe is a typical Communion Service in the Bulgarian Church of God.  It dates back to the early 1920s when Russian immigrants to the United States were traveling back from the Azusa Street revival to Russia to preach the Good News to their people. On the way back, their ship stops for a night at the Bulgarian port of Bourgas on the Black Sea. They attended the service at the Congregational church in town, and a great number of the believers received the Spirit through their ministry. This event is considered the initiation of the Pentecostal movement in Bulgaria.

The Church of God in Bulgaria was established in the 1928 with an identical name, but independently from the Church of God (Cleveland, TN). The first link between the two churches was established in 1985. During this 65-year period, the Church of God in Bulgaria was persecuted by Orthodox and nationalistic organizations before and during the Communism Regime, and was looked upon as an extreme cult organization. Yet, during these years of underground worship, the Church of God has preserved the liturgy of the Eucharist in the grade of authenticity in which it was received.

An essential part the service is the preparation. The believers depend on the leadership of the Holy Spirit for the exact date and time of the Communion Service.  Due to the lack of scheduled services in the underground church, the believers trusted in the protection of the Holy Spirit in arranging the service.  Fasting is also a requirement on the day of the service.

The actual service usually takes place in the nighttime when everyone is free from work.  It takes place in a believer’s home.  Sometimes these services have up to fifty people in a small apartment.  Worship is quiet, because any loud noise may lead to the appearance of the police.

The physical silence, however, does not limit the presence of the Holy Spirit, and even helps the believers to be more sensitive to God’s voice, which is indescribable when taking place as a group experience. The service starts with prayer, which lasts till God reveals who among the ladies is to beak the unleavened bread for the communion.  After the chosen ladies leave to bake the bread, the minister delivers his communion message.

The altar call, given after the preaching, purposes to prepare the believers for Communion. Communion is not given to a person who is not saved, baptized in water and in the Holy Spirit. Therefore, after the sermon, a prayer is offered for the sick and the needy, a special prayer is prayed for repentance and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I have personally witnessed up to thirty people saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit in a matter of minutes.

The converts are led to the river and baptized in water. This is often done in the middle of the night, when sometimes the temperature is so low that the minister and his assistants break the ice in order to baptize the convert.

The converts are welcomed back with a special song sung by the congregation. After an extended time of self-examination and the request of each believer to be forgiven by the present members of the congregation, the pastor presents the Communion to the congregation. One unleavened cake is used as a symbol of the oneness of Christ’s body. The cup of the Communion is filled with wine. The roots of this tradition can be traced back to the teachings of the first western missionaries to Bulgaria at the end of the nineteenth century, as well as the influence of the Eastern Orthodox tradition. After communion, men and women are separated for a foot washing service. At the end of the service, all are gathered for an Agape feast, which serves as a conclusion of the Communion Service.

This communion liturgy has been strictly preserved for the past hundred years by believers who have been challenged to keep their faith even with the cost of their lives through the persecution of Communism. Apart from the official doctrinal teachings of the denomination, the experience of the sacrament has been its only protector.

It would have been easier to define and reconstruct the basic list of church practices if at least a minimal structural system, formal government or doctrinal statements existed. Both the Primitive Church and Early Pentecostalism substantively lacks all of this. It was this deficit that creatively shaped the identity of the Church and presupposed its further search for primitivism.

Although the primitive communities were not the same everywhere, three practices were common for all: sharing of possessions, baptism, and communion. They were accompanied by the early liturgical formulas such as amen, hallelujah, maranatha, etc.

The message of the Primitive Church was delivered mainly through speeches (Acts 2, 7, 17, 20, etc.) and communal discussions of examples of the Bible (Acts 7; Heb. 11). It contrasted the present experience with the former lost conditions in a before-after contextual method (Rom. 7-8) and served as a practical instruction of the Christian walk (Col. 3:5ff.).

Next Page »