Azusa Street Sermons: The Precious Atonement
The FORGOTTEN ROOTS OF THE AZUSA STREET REVIVAL
by HAROLD HUNTER, PH.D.
Writing during the glow of the Azusa Street revival, V.P. Simmons claimed to have 42 years of personal exposure to those who spoke in tongues. Published in 1907 by Bridegroom’s Messenger and circulated as a tract, Simmons chronicled the history of Spirit baptism from Irenaeus (2nd century) up to and including a group from New England whom he personally observed manifesting tongues-speech as they continually partook of a spiritual baptism.1 Identified as Gift People or Gift Adventists, they were widely known for their involvement with spectacular charisms.Early Pentecostal periodicals reported that tongues-speech was known among these groups since the latter part of the 19th century. Some groups were said to number in the thousands.
William H. Doughty, who, by 1855, had spoken in tongues while in Maine, was counted among that number. Elder Doughty moved to Providence, Rhode Island, in 1873 and assumed leadership among those exercising the gifts of the Spirit.3 Doughty’s mantle was passed on to Elder R.B. Swan who, reacting to the Azusa Street revival, wrote a letter explaining that the Gift People in Rhode Island had experienced speaking in tongues as early as 1874–75. (See “The Work of the Spirit in Rhode Island.”) B.F. Lawrence followed Swan’s letter describing an independent account of a woman who spoke in tongues in New York, perhaps prior to 1874, a result of her contact with the Gift People.4 (See “A Wonderful Healing Among The Gift People.”)
Stanley H. Frodsham quotes Pastor Swan’s claim to having spoken in tongues in 1875. Swan speaks of great crowds drawn from five states and specifically mentions his wife — along with Amanda Doughty and an invalid hunchback who was instantly healed — among those who spoke in tongues during this time.
Simmons said that Swan’s group adopted the name “The Latter Rain” after the advent of the Pentecostal movement. Their activities extended throughout New England states, especially Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Connecticut, with the 1910 Latter Rain Convention held October 14–16 in Quakertown, Connecticut. Frank Bartleman frequently referred to joint speaking engagements with Swan, specifically recounting a 1907 tour that included a convention in Providence, Rhode Island, where he spoke 18 times.
Previously overlooked in related investigations is whether the Doughty family counted among the Gift People overlap with the Doughty who traveled with Frank Sandford. Lawrence attests that Swan’s circle included William H. Doughty’s daughter-in-law, Amanda Doughty, and her unnamed husband, an elder in the Providence congregation.8 Simmons says that William H. Doughty had two sons, the oldest, Frank, who was ordained. Could the unnamed brother of Frank be Edward Doughty, who at the end of the 19th century was part of Sandford’s entourage? So it seems.
Most of the groups named here have similar stories. For example, among the Fire-Baptized Holiness ranks was Daniel Awrey who had spoken in tongues in 1890 in Ohio. His residence was in Beniah, Tennessee, where an outbreak of speaking in tongues was reported in 1899. F.M. Britton wrote about people speaking in tongues in his Fire-Baptized revivals that predated the Azusa Street revival. Also, a revival in Cherokee County, North Carolina, in 1896, that gave the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) many of its early leaders reported an outburst of speaking in tongues among several of the adherents. Given the above accounts, there is some debate as to whether Parham first heard speaking in tongues while at Sandford’s Shiloh in Maine or while he was among Fire-Baptized enthusiasts.
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE CATHOLIC LEADERSHIP OR GROUPS RECORDED TO HAVE SPOKEN IN TONGUES:
• ST. HILDEGARD (1098-1179)
• ANTHONY OF PADUA (1195-1231)
• FRANCISCANS (1200S)
• ANGE CLARENUS (1300)
• VINCENT FERRER (1350-1419)
• STEPHEN, MISSIONARY TO GEORGIA (1400S)
• ST. COLETTE (1447)
• LOUIS BERTRAND (1526-1581)
• THE JANSENISTS (1600)
• JEANNE OF THE CROSS (1450S)
• FRANCIS XAVIER (1506-1552)
SHERRILL’S BOOK ALSO LISTS SOME INDIVIDUALS FROM THE 19TH CENTURY WHO REPORT TONGUES-SPEAKING OCCURRING:
- 1855 V.P. SIMMONS
- ROBERT BOYD (DURING MOODY’S MEETINGS)
- 1875 R.B. SWAN
- 1979 W. JETHRO WALTHALL
- MARIA GERBER
MORE BOOKS to STUDY:
- “THEY SPEAK WITH OTHER TONGUES” BY JOHN L. SHERRILL
- “GLOSSOLALIA: TONGUE SPEAKING IN BIBLICAL, HISTORICAL, AND “PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE” BY FRANK E. STAGG
- “SPEAKING IN TONGUES: A GUIDE” BY MILLS
- “SPEAKING WITH TONGUES: HISTORICALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY CONSIDERED” BY GEORGE CUTTEN.
Lucy F. Farrow: The Forgotten Apostle of Azusa

Lucy F. Farrow was born in Portsmouth, VA. Unfortunately, her origins there have not been yet fully traced. Her involvement appeared around the summer of 1905 while working as governess in Parham’s home in Houston.
While in Houston, Farrow met Charles Parham, who came there from Baxter Springs, Kansas, in October 1905 and held meetings in Bryan Hall. Parham was preaching about the earlier outpouring of the Holy Spirit that had occurred in his Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kansas, in January 1901.
Other sources claim, Lucy F. Farrow received the Holy Ghost a little bit earlier on September 6, 1905 after Parham opened up a month-long meeting in Columbus, Kansas. Along with Parham she witnessed events unfold in Zion, Illinois, where John Alexander Dowie was faltering.
Lucy Farrow was the niece of renowned black abolitionist Frederick Douglass. She was serving as pastor of a holiness church in Houston in 1905 when Charles Parham engaged her to work as a governess in his home. Farrow carried the Pentecostal embers back to Texas, on to her home state Virginia and later to Liberia. Her aptitude for igniting the supernatural gifts among others was evident at a 1906 camp meeting near Houston when some 25 seekers stood lined up in a row in front of her. When Farrow “laid hands upon them…many began to speak in tongues at once.”
Although William J. Seymour is acknowledged as the leader of the Azusa Street Revival, it was a black woman, Lucy Farrow, who provided the initial spark that ignited that revival. About the time when Seymour departed to Los Angeles in January of 1906, Lucy Farrow and J. A. Warren also arrived there independently. Other sources claim, they had been sent by Parham to help Seymour with his meetings.
Seymour began his meetings at the Santa Fe Mission on February 24, 1906 but was quickly shut down by the pastor Julia W. Hutchins on March 4, 1906 after a consultation with the South Californian Holiness Association.
The meetings then moved to 214 Bonnie Brae St., home of Richard and Ruth Asberry. As a result, Edward S. Lee was the first one was baptized in the Spirit and spoke in other tongues in the late afternoon when William J. Seymour and Lucy F. Farrow laid hands on him for healing at his house. At 7:30 p.m., the group went back to Bonnie Brae for the evening meeting and before the night was over, Jennie Evans Moore and several others joined him.
It has been said that no one associated with the prayer meeting led by Seymour had spoken in tongues until Farrow, at Seymour’s request, arrived on the scene and began laying her hands on people and seeing God fill them with the Holy Spirit as in the book of Acts. She also ministered with power across the southern United States and in Liberia in West Africa. She lived out her final years in Los Angeles, where there were reported healings and remarkable answers to prayer through her ministry.
The Forgotten Azusa Street Mission: The Place where the First Pentecostals Met
For years, the building on Azusa Street has also been an enigma. Most people are familiar with the same three or four photographs that have been published and republished through the years. They show a rectangular, boxy, wood frame structure that was 40 feet by 60 feet and desperately in need of repair. Seymour began his meetings in the Mission on April 15, 1906. A work crew set up a pulpit made from a wooden box used for shipping shoes from the manufacturer to stores. The pulpit sat in the center of the room. A piece of cotton cloth covered its top. Osterberg built an altar with donated lumber that ran between two chairs. Space was left open for seekers. Bartleman sketched seating as nothing more than a few long planks set on nail kegs and a ragtag collection of old chairs.
What the new sources have revealed about the Mission, however, is fascinating. The people worshiped on the ground level — a dirt floor, on which straw and sawdust were scattered. The walls were never finished, but the people whitewashed the rough-cut lumber. Near the door hung a mailbox into which tithes and offerings were placed since they did not take offerings at the Mission. A sign greeted visitors with vivid green letters. It read “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin” (Daniel 5:25, kjv), with its Ns written backwards and its Ss upside down. Men hung their hats on exposed overhead rafters where a single row of incandescent lights ran the length of the room.
These sources also reveal that the atmosphere within this crude building — without insulation or air conditioning, and teeming with perspiring bodies — was rank at best. As one writer put it, “It was necessary to stick one’s nose under the benches to get a breath of air.”
Several announced that the meetings were plagued by flies. “Swarms of flies,” wrote one reporter, “attracted by the vitiated atmosphere, buzzed throughout the room, and it was a continual fight for protection.”
A series of maps drawn by the Sanborn Insurance Company give a clear picture of the neighborhood. The 1888 map discloses that Azusa Street was originally Old Second Street. The street was never more than one block in length. It ended at a street paving company with piles of coal, along with heavy equipment. A small house, marked on the map by a “D” for domicile, sat on the front of the property with the address of 87. (See highlighted section.) A marble works business specializing in tombstones stood on the southeast corner of Azusa Street and San Pedro. Orange and grapefruit orchards surrounded the property. On the right of the map a Southern Pacific railroad spur is clearly visible. The City Directory indicates that the neighborhood was predominantly Jewish, though other names were mixed among them.
A second map of the property was published in 1894. Old Second Street had become Azusa Street, and the address had been changed to 312. The house had been moved further back on the property where it served as a parsonage. The dominant building at 312 Azusa Street was the Stevens African Methodist Episcopal Church. At the front of the building a series of tiny parallel lines on the map mark a staircase that stood at the north end of the building providing entry to the second floor, the original sanctuary.
The only known photograph of the church from this period shows three interesting features. First, it shows the original staircase. Second, and less obvious, the original roofline had a steep pitch. Third, three gothic style windows with tracery lines adorned the front wall.
By 1894, the citrus groves had largely disappeared. On the southern side they were replaced by lawn. The smell of orange blossoms and the serenity of the orchard were rapidly being replaced by the banging of railroad cars and the smell of new lumber. A growing number of boarding houses and small businesses, including canneries and laundries, were moving into the immediate area by this time. The property marked “YARD” on the map is the beginning of the lumberyard that soon came to dominate the area. The City Directory reveals fewer Jewish names, and more racial and ethnic diversity in the neighborhood, including African Americans, Germans, Scandinavians, and Japanese.
Stevens AME Church occupied the building at 312 Azusa Street until February 1904 when the congregation dedicated a new brick facility at the corner of 8th and Towne and changed their name to First AME Church. Before the congregation could decide what to do with the property on Azusa Street, however, an arsonist set the vacant church building on fire. The structure was greatly weakened, and the roof was completely destroyed. The congregation decided to turn the building into a tenement house. They subdivided the former second-floor sanctuary into several rooms separated by a long hallway that ran the length of the building. The stairs were removed from the front of the building and a rear stairwell was constructed, leaving the original entry hanging in space. The lower level was used to house horses and to store building supplies, including lumber and nails.
In 1906, a new Sanborn Map was published. (See 1906 map.) The building was marked with the words “Lodgings 2nd, Hall 1st, CHEAP.” The transition of the neighborhood had continued. The marble work still occupied the southeast corner of Azusa Street and San Pedro, but a livery and feed supply store now dominated the northeast corner. A growing lumberyard to the south and east of the property now replaced the once sprawling lawn. A Southern Pacific railroad spur curved through the lumberyard to service this business.
The Apostolic Faith, the newspaper of the Azusa Street Mission between September 1906 and June 1908, later referred to the nearby Russian community. Many of these recent immigrants were employed in the lumberyard. They were not Russian Orthodox Christians as one might guess; they were Molokans — “Milk drinkers.” This group had been influenced by some of the 16th-century Reformers. They did not accept the dairy fasts of the Orthodox Church. They were Trinitarians who strongly believed in the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit. Demos Shakarian, grandfather of the founder of Full Gospel Business Men’s International, was among these immigrants who were led to Los Angeles through a prophetic word given in 1855.
Henry McGowan, later an Assemblies of God pastor in Pasadena, was a member of the Holiness Church at the time. He was employed as a teamster. He timed his arrival at the nearby lumberyard so he could visit the Mission during its afternoon services.
This map suggests why some viewed the Mission as being in a slum. A better description would be an area of developing light industry.
In April 1906, when the people who had been meeting at the house at 214 North Bonnie Brae Street were forced to move, they found the building at 312 Azusa Street was for sale. The photograph below taken about the time that the congregation chose to move into the building shows the “For Sale” sign posted high on the east wall of the building, as well as the rear of the tombstone shop. Seymour, pastor of the Azusa Street Mission, and a few trusted friends met with the pastor of First AME Church and negotiated a lease for $8 a month.
An early photograph reveals what the 1906 version of the map indicates. The pitched roof had not been replaced. The building had a flat roof. The staircase that had stood at the front of the building had been removed.
In a sense, this building suited the Azusa Street faithful. They were not accustomed to luxury. They were willing to meet in the stable portion of the building. The upstairs could be used for prayer rooms, church offices, and a home for Pastor Seymour.
Articles of incorporation were filed with the state of California on March 9, 1907, and amended May 19, 1914. The church negotiated the purchase of the property for $15,000 with $4,000 down. It was given the necessary cash to retire the mortgage in 1908. The sale was recorded by the County of Los Angeles on April 12, 1908.
Were Molokans the first to Speak in Tongues at Azusa?
Adopted from Andrei Conovaloff
American Molokan Dukh-i-zhiznik (lit. living in the Spirit) oral history (documented in the Book of the Sun: Spirit and Life, Dukh i zhizn’) reports that Molokani and Pryguny received the “outpouring of the Holy Spirit” in the Milky Waters region (now in Ukraine) in 1833. The diary of Vassili V. Verestchagin documents that Pryguny (lit. leapers) in the Caucasus in the early 1860s spoke in tongues, jumped to exhaustion, and held hands up in the air for more than an hour. These charismatic practices continue among Dukh-i-zhizniki in the U.S. and Australia.
From 1906 to 1909, the Apostolic Faith Mission conducted three services a day, seven days a week, for over three years or 1000+ services! Thousands of seekers received the “tongues” baptism, including many Molokani and Pryguny. Also many public Pentecostal revivals were conducted in tent meetings on Oake’s lot and other locations around the Flats area slums were Russian settled. English speaking Pryguny and other Russians immigrants often translated at the services. Oake’s lot later became Pecan Playground, at First and Pecan Streets.
In Molokans in America (pages 101-102, ch. 5), John K. Berokoff reports about the connection between Prygun leader Philip Mikhailovich Shubin and the early Pentecosts:
“During his 27 years in America he was the outstanding speaker and orator of the brotherhood with a wide acquaintance among non-Molokans , not infrequently taking a choir of singers to Pentecostal church meetings where he preached and explained the Molokan reasons for their migration. It was his wisdom, his profound knowledge of the scriptures plus his wide knowledge of Russian literature that enabled him to repel the periodic attempts by leaders of neighboring denominations—Baptists, Pentecostals, etc.—to proselytize the Molokan people …”
More evidence of connections between the Azusa Street Revival and the Pryguny is reported in the newspaper The Apostolic Faith, which was distribute free to 50,000 subscribers, when the population of Los Angeles was 250,000. Many Russian sectarians in Flats knew about this church and saw this free paper, especially since it reported about them in the first issue, the church was within walking distance, and elders exchanged visits.
1906 September — The Apostolic Faith (Volume 1 Number 1) — The first edition of the newspaper reports that Apostolic Faith Mission members spoke at a Prygun prayer meeting. In 1906, Pryguny held Sunday services at the Bethlehem Institutional Church and the Stimson-Lafayette Industrial School, and welcomed guests at both locations which were 1/2 block from each other and about 1/4 mile east of the Apostolic Faith Mission. The Pentecosts invited the Pryguny to attend their meetings, which many did with a translator:
RUSSIANS HEAR IN THEIR OWN TONGUE
“Different nationalities are now hearing the Gospel in their own “tongue wherein they were born.” Sister Anna Hall spoke to the Russians in their church in Los Angeles, in their own language as the Spirit gave utterance. They were so glad to hear the truth that they wept and even kissed her hands [showing respect]. They are a very simple, pure, and hungry people for the full Gospel. The other night, as a company of Russians were present in the meeting, Bro. Lee, a converted Catholic, was permitted to speak [translate] their [Russian] language. As he spoke and sang, one of the Russians came up and embraced him. It was a holy sight, and the Spirit fell upon the Russians, as well as on others, and they glorified God.”
1907 April — The Apostolic Faith (Volume 1 Number 7) — The 7th edition reports about the Russian and Armenian Pryguny in the Flats:
“Russians and Armenians in Los Angeles are seeking the baptism. The Armenians have a Pentecostal cottage meeting on Victor street, between 4th and 5th [Now under the I-5 Freeway]. Some have been baptized with the Holy Ghost.”
In his 2006 book, The Azusa Street Mission and Revival: The Birth of the Global Pentecostal Movement, Cecil Robeck reports that in 1906 Los Angeles had a population of 238,000 and was growing at the rate of 3,000 (1.3%) per month, as ~ 4,000 Russian sectarians migrated to the U.S. He mentions the Russian and Armenian Pryguny at least 5 times in his book:
[Page 57] Finally, between 1903 and 1912 several thousand Russians and Armenians arrived in the city, refugees from Russia’s increasingly repressive government. Unlike most Russians, they did not belong to the Orthodox church. They were [Spiritual Christian ethnic] Molokans, literally “milk drinkers,” a name they received because they refused to fast from dairy products during traditional fast days. More importantly, they could be described as a “proto-Protestant'” group, since they had been influenced by some of the sixteenth-century Reformers. They also had a special appreciation for the Holy Spirit. Many of them claimed that they had been directed to leave southern Russia through the gift of prophecy. They engaged in what was often described as ecstatic behavior, jumping and dancing; falling on the floor when they believed that they were possessed of the Holy Spirit to do so; and singing chant-like songs that strongly paralleled the “singing in the Spirit” (a multi-layered, harmony-rich singing in tongues that are unknown to the singers and are believed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit) at the Azusa Street Mission.
[Page 94] As the revival grew … Seymour celebrated the spread of the revival to other congregations … the Russian Molikan [sic] community, … He viewed them as fellow-workers.
[Page 138] While the mission was led by an African American pastor, dominated by and African American membership, and heavily influenced by African American worship patterns, it quickly developed into a multi-ethnic and multiracial congregation. … non-African-Americans did bring their own gifts and experiences. … Recent Russian and Armenian Molokan [Spiritual Christian] immigrants already practiced the unusual jumping and chanting also found at the mission. … This was a revival unlike any other the city of Los Angeles had ever seen … African Americans, Latinos, Armenians, Russians, Swedes, Germans, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, Native Americans, and other ethnic groups … bountiful expressions of ecstatic manifestation such as speaking in tongues, prophesying, claims of dreams and visions, trances, healings, exorcism, and falling “in the Spirit.”
[Page 153] “Singing in the Spirit” accomplished more than an expression of worship, however. It also provided a bridge that brought Russian and Armenian Molokans [Spiritual Christian Jumpers] into the mission — among them the Shakarian and Mushegian families. These families arrived in Los Angeles in the 1905 emigration. The Molokans commonly practiced a king of “sing-song” prayer, a form of vocal prayer and praise that resembled singing in Spirit.” Walking down San Pedro Street in 1905, Demos Shakarian, grandfather of the Demos Shakarian who would later found the Full Gospel Businessman’s Association, and his brother-in-law, Magardich Muchegian, passed the Azusa Street Mission. As they drew near, they heard sounds of praying, singing, and speaking in tongues coming from the mission — expressions that they identified as similar to their own. The single phenomenon of “singing in tongues” convinced Demos to embrace the mission as a place his family could worship. From the moment he heard it, he concluded that God was also beginning to move to America just as He had in their homeland of America and in Russia.”(27)
[Pages 189-190] At the same time a group of Armenians and Russians [Spiritual Christian Pryguny], who had come to Los Angeles in the Molokans immigration, opened cottage prayer meetings on Victoria Street between West Fourth and Fifth Streets that would quickly develop into an Armenians-language Pentecostal church.
American-born Armenian-Prygun historian Joyce Bivin comments: We have a similar story in our community about the Azusa Street Revival. The story goes like this — quoted from a letter by M. Mushagian:
“Our people came to Los Angeles right after the Azusa Street Revival. They used to attend the meetings even though they didn’t understand the American language. They saw that the Holy Spirit was moving there like it did in the Old Country. So they accepted Pentecostal because they believed in Acts 2:4.”
The Armenians apparently were worshiping in this manner, including dancing in the Spirit, (jumping, which my grandmother did at one of the Paskha meetings and the next day mother told me she was healed of whatever affliction she had at the time), prophesying, speaking in tongues, etc. before they came to America. I wasn’t aware the Molokans responded to the Azusa Street meetings. After the Armenians visited the Azusa Street meetings, they eventually changed their identity from Armenian Molokans to Armenian Pentecostals. Though they kept the Molokan traditions in their worship, their theology shifted from focusing on Jesus and M.G. Rudometkin (whose book was next to the Bible on the table) to Jesus’s teachings as defined by Pentecostal/Protestant doctrine.
The first place our people gathered to worship was on Boston Street. The next place was on 431 S. Pecan Terrace, in a large room where my great grandfather eventually turned into a bath house. Then they moved to Gless Street [all in the Flats] and next to Goodrich Blvd before moving to Hacienda Heights. The church today is located in Hacienda Heights, off Hacienda Blvd. on West. It’s the first entrance on the right after you turn on West.
Let the Protestant say the prayer: Protestant Participation in Bulgaria’s Liberation
A considerable number of Protestants took part in the prematurely erupted April Uprising. Many of them were in the immediate circle of Benkovski, Vasil Volóv, and the other revolutionary apostles. Some Protestants joined during the uprising itself. According to Dimitar Strashimirov, about sixty men from the village of Tserovo, in the Pazardzhik region, joined Benkovski’s detachment under the leadership of Tsvyatko Brŭshkov. At that time Tserovo had 120 households, fifteen of which belonged to Bulgarian Protestants. Two roster protocols were compiled – one larger list for the Orthodox, and a smaller one for the Protestants. The leaders of the Protestant group were K. Teliyski and Nikola Kochov. From the same village came Ivan Cheshírov, one of the “tens-men” (leaders of groups of ten) in the Flying Column. Collective memory has preserved the names of two well-known Protestants from Panagyurishte as active participants in the uprising: Stefan Balabanov, who organized the sewing of clothing for the rebels, and Rad Minev, one of the most experienced arms-bearers of the insurgent town.
Protestants were also involved in the activities of nearly all revolutionary districts. Particularly dramatic was the fate of the evangelist Stoil Findzhikov, the master craftsman of the “cherry-wood cannons,” who became a symbol of the uprising. As a youth, Stoil had worked in a military workshop in Constantinople, where he learned details of firearms manufacture. On the eve of the uprising and during its course, prompted by Volov and Benkovski, he crafted and refined several of these primitive cannons. He fired his last “cherry-wood cannon” at the advancing Ottoman forces beneath Mount Kamenitsa. Under the pressure of the attacking bashi-bozouk irregulars, the defenders fled one by one, and some fell in battle.
The evangelist Petar Donchev from Panagyurishte also took an active part in the April Uprising. During the height of the revolt, he served as a trusted courier between the surrounding towns and villages, employed by both Benkovski and Volov. “Petraki,” as the insurgents called him, displayed remarkable resourcefulness, courage, and self-sacrifice. After the uprising he departed for the United States, where he studied theology, later returning to Bulgaria as pastor in Chirpan. Yet he remained throughout his life a passionate patriot and tireless public figure. He declined every offer of praise or reward after the Liberation with the simple words that “whatever he had done, he had done for God and for the Fatherland.”
The numerological slogan “1876 – Turkey will fall” was created by the Evangelical Christian Petar Vezhinov. Serving as couriers for the Internal Revolutionary Organization were Bulgarian Evangelical preachers: Veliko Petranov from Panagyurishte; N. Boyadzhiev and N. Kochev from the Pazardzhik region; Blago Sarandov and Petar Musevich from Macedonia. The pastor from Chirpan, Petar Doichev, was entrusted with important intelligence missions. Ivan Neykov served as the personal courier of Georgi Benkovski, while V. Karaivanov from Chirpan was suspected and arrested by the Ottoman authorities. Stefan Balabanov supplied a significant portion of the revolutionary uniforms, while Rad Manev, a gunsmith, manufactured weapons for the insurgents. The design for the “Chereshovoto Topche” (Cherry Cannon) was the work of the Evangelical Christian from Panagyurishte, master Stoil Findzhikov. At the decisive assembly in Oborishte, he was asked to deliver the prayer for the blessing of the cause for Bulgaria’s liberation.
When Georgi Benkovski gathered the insurgents in Oborishte before announcing the uprising, he declared: “Let the Protestant say the prayer.” The Protestant was Stoil Findzhikov, the historical figure who became the prototype for Ivan Vazov’s vivid character Borimechkata (The Bear Slayer). According to the recollections of Findzhikov’s daughter, Radka Kaloyanova, his prayer was: “Lord God, Who created heaven and earth, Who has helped many who have put their trust in You – help us as well, gathered here today, to succeed in our endeavor.” (Bulgarian Baptist Digest, Heralds of Truth)
120 Years ago, the Azusa Street Revival Began with a Fast

On April 6, 1906 William J. Seymour and the faithful few gathered with him at the Asberry house, decided to engage in a ten-day fast while waiting on the baptism in the Spirit. The first baptism with the Holy Spirit would occur just three days later. Seymour himself would be baptized on the sixth day of the fast and on the seventh, which was Good Friday, Seymour and his followers leased an abandoned church property at 312 Azusa Street and begin cleaning it up. Easter was on April 15, 1906 when they held their very first Pentecostal service at Azusa Street. The rest is history…
Speaking in Tongues in America Prior to the Azusa Street Revival of 1906 (Diamonds in the Rough-N-Ready Series)

The Azusa street revival swept the globe starting with California
January 1, 1901– The initial phenomenon of speaking in tongues occurred at Parham’s school in Topeka, Kansas
January 6, 1900 – Frank Sanford’s Shiloh school reported that “The gift of tongues has descended”
1896 – Over 100 people baptized in the Shaerer schoolhouse revival conducted by the Christian Union in the North Carolina mountains
1887 – People falling in trances and speaking in tongues were reported at Maria Etter’s revival meetings in Indiana
1874 – Speaking in tongues occurred during healing meetings reported in New York
1873 – William H. Doughty and the Gift People of Rhode Island spoke in tongues
1854 – V. P. Simmons and Robert Boyd reported tongue speaking during Moody’s meetings
Pentecostal Neo-Primitivism: The Theological Framework

Dony K. Donev, D.Min., is a Pentecostal theologian, historian, and minister associated with institutions like the Pentecostal Theological Seminary and Lee University, where he has taught classes such as Intro to Digital Discipleship. His work focuses on Pentecostal history, leadership, primitivism, and practical theology, often drawing from Bulgarian Protestant contexts and global Pentecostalism. Below, I outline the key theological frameworks and terms he has coined or developed, based on his publications, articles, and teachings. These emphasize spiritual renewal, community, and missional application within Pentecostal traditions.1. U.S.H.E.R. Model of Communion
- Description: This is a theological framework for understanding the dynamics of Communion (the Lord’s Supper) as foundational to disciple growth in Christian catechism. It identifies five key elements: Unity (fostering communal bonds), Sanctification (personal holiness through the Spirit), Hope (eschatological assurance), Ecclesial communion (church fellowship), and Redemptive mission (outward evangelistic calling). The model positions Communion not as an isolated ritual but as a catalyst for ongoing spiritual formation and mission.
- Coined: During the Covid-19 pandemic (circa 2020–2021) as part of his “Intro to Digital Discipleship” class at Lee University.
- Key Ideas and Evidence: It builds on biblical Communion texts (e.g., 1 Corinthians 11:23–26) and Pentecostal emphases on experiential faith, adapting traditional catechism for digital and crisis contexts. No specific case studies are detailed in public sources, but it addresses post-pandemic disciple-making challenges.
- Contributions: Emphasizes Communion’s role in digital discipleship, linking ritual to practical growth.
2. Pentecostal Paradigm for Leadership
- Description: A leadership model redefining ministry in Pentecostal contexts through three core factors: (1) Leadership of the Spirit (divine calling and vision via the Holy Spirit), (2) Holiness Lifestyle (integrity and sanctification as ethical foundations), and (3) Emphasis on Community (team-based, accountable servant-leadership). It contrasts with secular or hierarchical models, promoting a “servant-church” ethos.
- Coined: In his paper “Pentecostal Paradigm for Leadership” (published on Cup & Cross Ministries).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Draws from biblical servant leadership (e.g., Christ as the “suffering servant” in Isaiah 53 and Philippians 2), historical Pentecostal examples (e.g., early church community in Acts and Bulgarian Pentecostals under Communist persecution), and contextual analysis (e.g., Bulgaria’s post-1989 crises with ethnic diversity in churches like Samokov and Razlog). Proof includes axioms: leadership solves problems in people-groups, proven by church growth data (e.g., 20.3% Roma-Gypsy members in Bulgarian Church of God).
- Contributions: Addresses leadership crises in postmodern and cross-cultural settings, integrating “Theology of the Persecuted Church” (a related concept he references, though not explicitly coined by him).
3. Pentecostal Primitivism
- Description: A theological approach advocating the preservation and reclamation of early Pentecostal experiences—expressed through power (miracles), prayer (spiritual intimacy), and praxis (practical ministry)—to resolve identity crises in modern Pentecostalism. It calls for returning to “primitive” (original) roots while adapting to contemporary challenges.
- Coined: In his book Pentecostal Primitivism Preserved (2012).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Rooted in historical primitivism (e.g., Azusa Street Revival) and biblical precedents (e.g., Acts 2’s outpouring). Evidence includes critiques of institutional drift in Pentecostalism, with examples from Bulgarian Protestant history (e.g., persecution fostering authentic faith). The framework posits primitivism as a solution to existential questions like identity and purpose.
- Contributions: Offers a renewal strategy for global Pentecostalism, emphasizing experiential faith over formalism.
4. 50/20 Principle
- Description: A biblical principle derived from Genesis 50:20 (“You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good”), framing God’s faithfulness in transforming harm into redemptive good. It serves as a framework for understanding divine vision fulfillment amid adversity.
- Coined: In his article “The 50/20 Principle Reexamined” (2025, on Cup & Cross Ministries).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Illustrates God’s sovereignty in trials, with Joseph’s story as the primary example. Proof involves reevaluating the verse’s application to personal and communal crises, emphasizing completion of divine promises.
- Contributions: Applies to leadership and discipleship, encouraging resilience in persecuted or challenged contexts.
Donev’s work often intersects Pentecostal history (e.g., Bulgarian revivals, figures like Ivan Voronaev) with practical theology, as seen in his reviews of Bibles (e.g., Fire Bible, Spirit Filled Life Bible) and articles on Pneuma Review. He cofounded the Institute of Bulgarian Protestant History and contributes to global Pentecostal discourse, but no additional coined terms were identified beyond these. His frameworks frequently draw from Eastern European pietism and emphasize Spirit-led community in digital and persecuted settings.
The Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith: A Framework of Experience and Restoration
Introduction
Pentecostal theology has long emphasized the experiential dimension of faith—where divine encounter, spiritual gifts, and communal expression converge. Among the contemporary voices shaping this discourse, Dony K. Donev offers a compelling framework known as the Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith, which seeks to restore the apostolic essence of early Christianity. This essay explores the theological contours of Donev’s model and compares it with other influential Pentecostal and charismatic paradigms.
The Triangle: Prayer, Power, Praxis
At the heart of Donev’s framework lies a triadic structure:
- Prayer: The foundation of spiritual intimacy and divine communication. Donev views prayer not merely as a discipline but as the gateway to supernatural encounter.
- Power: Manifested through the gifts of the Spirit—healing, prophecy, tongues, and miracles. This element reflects the Pentecostal emphasis on dunamis, the Greek term for divine power.
- Praxis: The lived expression of faith within the community. Praxis includes evangelism, social justice, and communal worship, embodying the Spirit’s transformative work in daily life.
This triangle is not hierarchical but interdependent. Prayer leads to power, power fuels praxis, and praxis deepens prayer. Donev’s model thus reflects a restorationist impulse, aiming to recover the vibrancy of the early church as seen in Acts.
Comparison with Wesleyan Quadrilateral
The Wesleyan Quadrilateral—Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience—has historically shaped Methodist and Holiness theology. Pentecostals have often adopted this model, emphasizing experience as a key source of theological reflection.
However, Donev critiques this framework as insufficient for Pentecostal identity. He argues that Pentecostalism is not merely an extension of Wesleyanism but a distinct restoration movement. While Wesley’s model is epistemological, Donev’s triangle is ontological and missional, rooted in being and doing rather than knowing.
Comparison with Classical Pentecostal Theology
Classical Pentecostalism, as shaped by early 20th-century leaders like Charles Parham and William Seymour, emphasized:
- Initial evidence doctrine: Speaking in tongues as proof of Spirit baptism.
- Dispensational eschatology: A belief in imminent rapture and end-times urgency.
- Holiness ethics: A call to moral purity and separation from the world.
Donev’s framework diverges by focusing less on doctrinal distinctives and more on spiritual vitality and historical continuity. His emphasis on praxis aligns with newer Pentecostal movements that prioritize social engagement and global mission.
Comparison with Charismatic Theology
Charismatic theology, especially within mainline and evangelical churches, often emphasizes:
- Renewal within existing traditions
- Broad acceptance of spiritual gifts
- Less emphasis on tongues as initial evidence
Donev’s triangle shares the Charismatic focus on spiritual gifts but retains a Pentecostal distinctiveness through its restorationist lens. He seeks not just renewal but recovery of primitive faith, making his model more radical in its ecclesiological implications.
Eastern European Context and Trinitarian Theology
Donev’s work is also shaped by his Bulgarian heritage. He highlights how early Bulgarian Pentecostals embraced a Trinitarian theology informed by Eastern Orthodox pneumatology. This contrasts with Western Pentecostalism’s often fragmented view of the Spirit.
His emphasis on free will theology—influenced by Arminianism and Orthodox thought—also sets his framework apart from Calvinist-leaning Charismatic circles.
Conclusion
Dony K. Donev’s Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith offers a rich, experiential, and historically grounded model for understanding Pentecostal spirituality. By centering prayer, power, and praxis, Donev reclaims the apostolic fervor of the early church while challenging existing theological paradigms. His framework stands as a bridge between classical Pentecostalism, Charismatic renewal, and Eastern Christian traditions—inviting believers into a deeper, more dynamic walk with the Spirit.
The Pastoral Trials of 1949 in the Foreign Press
Western journalism, even in the days before the pastors’ trial, widely covered the event in the reactionary press, making an unsuccessful attempt to present it as a campaign against churches and religion in a socialist country. The trial was attended by representatives of the American and British legations in Sofia, the agencies “United Press”, “Reuters”, “Telepress”, “International News Service”, the newspaper “New York Times”, etc. In the photo: a group of foreign journalists and Pastor Chambers (in the middle of the first row) during the trial.
The Milwaukee Journal – January 12, 1949 – Preachers Arrested in Bulgaria
Ottawa Citizen – February 8, 1949 Protestant Leaders Indicted in Bulgaria
Lodi News-Sentinel – February 11, 1949 – Bulgaria Arrests 15 Protestant Pastors
The Free Lance-Star – February 11, 1949 – 15 Pastors in Bulgaria Officially Tried for Treason
Ottawa Citizen – February 12, 1949 Geneva, World Council of Churches: Bulgarian charges dismissed
The Evening Independent – February 12, 1949 – Council of Churches denies espionage allegations
Gettysburg Times – February 17, 1949 – Bulgaria Tries 15 Protestant Pastors on February 25
The Evening Independent – February 17, 1949 – Bulgaria forms new national Orthodox church
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette – February 22, 1949 – 15 Protestant Pastors Charged with Espionage
Schenectady Gazette – February 24, 1949 – Bulgaria Rejects American Protests Against Pastoral Arrests
The Milwaukee Journal – February 24, 1949 – Bulgarian Bible Believers Under Fire in Red-Dominated Country
The Deseret News – February 25, 1949 – Church leader asks for prayer for Reds victims
The Deseret News – February 25, 1949 – Associated Press: Two Bulgarian Pastors Plead Guilty
The Evening Independent – February 26, 1949 Third Church Leader Pleads Guilty
The Deseret News – February 26, 1949 – Chief defendant pleads guilty – third plea in just two days
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette – February 26, 1949 – 5 Pastors Plead Guilty in Bulgaria
The Milwaukee Journal – February 28, 1949 – More officials plead guilty to espionage – five Bulgarian pastors tell of relationships with Americans
The Pittsburgh Press – February 28, 1949 – Russia Questions Religion and Patriotism
The Milwaukee Journal – March 1, 1949 – All Plead Guilty in the Pastoral Trials in Bulgaria
The Pittsburgh Press – March 1, 1949 – 15 pastors plead guilty in Bulgaria – all but one plead guilty
St. Petersburg Times – March 2, 1949 – Prosecutors testify in Bulgarian spy trials after defendants’ confessions
Prescott Evening Courier – March 2, 1949 – Bulgaria Suddenly Stops 42 Testimonies
St. Petersburg Times – March 4, 1949 – The Church in Bulgaria is Repressed
The Telegraph – March 5, 1949 – Trial in Bulgaria ends with pleas for mercy
The Pittsburgh Press – March 6, 1949 – 15 Protestant pastors in Bulgaria stand in the dock to plead for their lives
The Glasgow Herald – March 12, 1949 – Bulgarian trials in doubt – confessions in question
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette – April 7, 1949 – Pastoral trials have repercussions at the UN
The Milwaukee Journal – April 30, 1949 – Bulgarian Church Severs Ties with Methodism
The Pittsburgh Press – May 1, 1949 – UN Condemns Charges Against Churches
Sarasota Journal – January 22, 1969 – Pastor Dr. Ladin Popov – Bulgarian Billy Graham to preach on Wednesday
The Evening Independent – February 24, 1973 – H. Popov to preach after 13 years behind the Iron Curtain
Schenectady Gazette – January 22, 1985 – Rev. Kulichev’s Bulgarian Church Does Not Accept a State Pastor








