Sharing charisma as a mode of Pentecostal expansion

Abstract

The author discusses the emergence of charismatic leaders in Brazilian Pentecostalism and reflects on the exercise of authority through the circulation and transmission of Pentecostal charisma. The authority of Pentecostal charisma depends on its collective expansion, and the author highlights three types of charismatic flow: (1) through its commodification, (2) through family names and (3) through an emotional and bodily channel of energy between pastors and believers, who mimic the leader’s charisma, accessing the capital and acquiring the charismatic habitus not only through participation in the act of worship but also through consumption. To trace the path of charisma is also to trace the manner in which the Pentecostal message flows and is globalized.

In/dividuality and charisma among Pentecostal Gypsies

“…Sometimes family obligations determine the exercise of leadership, even when the traditional authority has no links to Pentecostalism. This means that while there are cases among Roma where charisma is transmitted through the family (Campos, 2011(Campos, , 2014, sometimes the family also influences charismatic authority without having to exercise leadership positions. Among the leaders, the exchanges they have with the Holy Spirit become more relevant and family ties become more flexible.…”

“…For the analysis of Christian in/dividualism, most texts seem to methodologically distinguish followers (see Daswani, 2011;Elisha, 2015;Haynes, 2016) from charismatic leaders (see Bielo, 2007;Werbner, 2011). In the ECP charisma is shared (see Blanes, 2010;Campos, 2011Campos, , 2014, so the distinctions between leaders and lay converts are less relevant here. However, and to the extent that I am interested in referring to the issue of charisma, it is important to note that Mosko (2015) has contrasted Crawford Macpherson's 'possessive individualism' with the individual as conceptualized by Louis Dumont, Kenelm Burridge and Max Weber.…”

“…Second, if when referring to charisma, Weber based himself on the separation between the leader and his followers, the way in which charisma is conceived in Pentecostal churches challenges this separation (Reinhardt, 2017: 75). Blanes (2010) and Campos (2011Campos ( , 2014 have pointed to the possibility of a shared charisma. However, if Blanes refers rather to a democratization of charisma among leaders, Campos points out that, once the charismatic leader has been invested as such, his legitimacy depends on his or her ability to circulate charisma among followers.…”

“…However, if Blanes refers rather to a democratization of charisma among leaders, Campos points out that, once the charismatic leader has been invested as such, his legitimacy depends on his or her ability to circulate charisma among followers. In addition to followers, family ties are forms of transmission of charisma (Campos, 2011(Campos, , 2014 and even shape it. In Argentina and Brazil, it is common for the leadership of Roma Kalderash congregations to be passed down from parents to sons.…”

Empaquetando el discipulado

“…Es importante tener en cuenta que el modelo G-12 se comienza a gestar hacia finales de la década de los 80, y que su auge ocurre después de unos 10 años de desarrollo, coincidiendo también con el inicio de la Nueva Reforma Apostólica (NRA), para la cual se convirtió en uno de sus principales caballitos de batalla eclesiológicos. Al disponer la NRA de un modelo empaquetado, reproducible, y llamativo, en cuanto a sus beneficios de crecimiento numérico, las posibilidades de globalización y expansión del movimiento apostólico, dentro de formas más o menos Ciencias Sociales y Religión/Ciências Sociais e Religião, Campinas, v.24, e022007, ago./dez., 2022 homogéneas que se pueden intercambiar y comercializar, se ven favorecidas (Campos, 2014). Sin embargo, a manera de discusión final me gustaría señalar al menos tres aspectos que el proceso de celularización de la iglesia evangélica por medio del G-12 facilita para la NRA: el desarrollo de redes de iglesias y debilitamiento de las denominaciones; la aceptación de estructuras teocráticas piramidales; y la incursión en la política por parte de las iglesias a través de su membresía disciplinada y obediente.…”