The diversification of Norwegian Pentecostalism: changing cultures, identities, and theologies through migration

ABSTRACT

This article describes the emergence of Christian migrant-initiated churches (MICs) in Norway and how these contribute to the diversification of the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape. The author describes various dimensions related to the ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and theological diversity that these MICs represent. The article's main findings build on fieldwork and interviews in a series of MICs and their transnational networks across various ethnic, cultural, and denominational lines. From this, the article discusses issues related to identity, culture, and spirituality and how these shed light on differences and the potential for unity across cultural and other boundaries. In particular, the article highlights the spiritual and organizational characteristics of global Christianity and many MICs and how these may represent challenges and opportunities for an increasingly diverse Norwegian Pentecostal landscape today and in the future.

KEYWORDS:

• Migrant churches
• Norwegian Pentecostalism
• migration
• Pentecostal spirituality
• diversity

Introduction

On the cover page of the weekly Norwegian Pentecostal paper Korsets Seier some years ago, there was a picture of a Pakistani worship team with the heading ‘Norwegian Pentecostalism changes skin’ with the explanatory comment, ‘The number of Pentecostals in Norway are decreasing. The percentage of Pentecostal migrants is increasing’ [my translation], pointing to how the influx of Pentecostal migrants was changing the Pentecostal-charismatic landscape in Norway.¹ Along the same thought, in the foreword to Jessica Moberg and Jane Skjoldli’s Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Finland, Norway, and Sweden, Allan Anderson comments that,

We cannot discuss Pentecostalism in Europe without mentioning the enormous impact of the so-called ‘migrant’ or transnational churches, many of which have now become national churches in their own right in the countries where they have been planted … . migration has brought new life to Pentecostalism in the Western world, although it might be argued that this is a different kind of Pentecostalism.²

As a case in point from my neighbourhood in Stavanger, Norway, the closest church to my house is La Gracia de Dios (God’s Grace), a Spanish-speaking ‘reformed charismatic congregation.’ Getting acquainted with the church, I found that La Gracia de Dios represented a wide range of participants from many Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries. Their Facebook page described it as part of a growing transnational network with churches, for instance, in New York, Los Angeles, Lima, and Buenos Aires. I also discovered they had started churches in Latin America and often broadcast their services across the globe through social media. La Gracia de Dios represents an example of a new kind of Pentecostal church in the Norwegian Pentecostal-charismatic landscape, not only in terms of ethnic and demographic differences but also concerning denominational and theological variance. Although less researched compared with other European contexts, the phenomenon of migrant-initiated churches (MICs) in Norway provides a case for how globalization affects religion and how religion globalizes today.

With this scenario in mind, this article asks and discusses how an increasingly diversified Pentecostal landscape may challenge the identity and future of Pentecostalism in Norway in terms of demography, culture, and theology. Based on observations, interviews, digital ethnography, and available documents across a broad section of MICs in Norway, I seek to describe some of this diversity and discuss its meaning and influence. As part of this discussion, it is needful to ask how MICs may relate to Norwegian churches and society and the other way around. The article does not seek to provide all the answers but instead suggests questions to be further addressed by researchers or the praxis field. Addressing the diversification of Norwegian Pentecostalism also invites considerable inroads for theoretical reflection, not the least related to questions of culture, identity, and theology. For the sake of space, I mainly address these questions in the discussion.

Contexts, materials, and methods

As already indicated, there is limited research on Pentecostal MICs in the Norwegian/ Nordic context, and only within the last decade has an emerging body of research surfaced.³ Previous mapping surveys estimated about 250–300 MICs in Norway, depending on who to include and how to count them. These represented many new church initiatives, particularly in major cities in the last decades.⁴ In 2019, an updated Christian Council of Norway report affirmed similar trends and figures.⁵ One of the first studies to focus on Pentecostal MICs was Kristine Laundal’s master's thesis from 2008 on cosmology and gender with a comparative analysis of two African congregations in Oslo.⁶ From a south-western region of Norway, Tomas Sundnes Drønen and Stian Sørlie Eriksen described the increasingly culturally diverse church landscape in Rogaland involving a diversified Catholic congregation and Nigerian churches such as the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG).⁷ In 2016, the first anthology on Christian migrants in the Nordic countries addressed various contexts, including Catholic, Orthodox, and Pentecostal migrant communities.⁸ Discussions on Pentecostal MICs have emphasized epistemology and spirituality, mission, and socio-spiritual transformation.⁹ Analyses have acknowledged translocal, transcultural, and transnational dimensions of MICs’ relations, identities, and strategies.¹⁰

Discussion the increasingly diversified Pentecostalism in Western contexts cannot be done without acknowledging the recent centuries’ phenomenal growth of World Christianity, not the least related to the explosive growth of Pentecostalism in the Global South.¹¹ The global shift of Christianity’s epicentre is monumental, yet, we have not fully discussed the broader implications, especially for the church in the North. The late Nigerian scholar Ogbu Kalu noted this shift as a ‘reverse flow,’ changing the church in the Global South and ‘reshaping […] northern religious landscapes.’¹² This type of Christianity is highly contextual and emphasizes, for instance, prayer and the role of the Holy Spirit not only in Pentecostal-charismatic churches but also in mainline/historic mission churches. Allan Anderson notes,

The Holy Spirit occupies an important place in charismatic Christianity in Africa, whether it be the beliefs of Pentecostal or new charismatic churches, Charismatics in older churches, or older African Independent Spirit Churches. At the same time, this becomes more meaningful when placed in the context of the spirit world that permeates most aspects of African life.¹³

How do churches of the North relate to this reality, and how do churches of the South relate to the northern contexts? Contrasting the socioreligious soils of Europe and the Global South, the sociologist of religion Grace Davie describes how Pentecostalism in the Global South has ‘create[d] havens in which both individuals and groups find the strength to cope with the vicissitudes of both economic and political uncertainty.’¹⁴ This can ‘offer a clue to why it does less well in Europe,’ Davie says, since ‘the spaces that Pentecostalism inhabits so effectively on a global canvas do not exist in Europe (at least not to the same extent).’¹⁵ In other words, secular societies offer existential, cultural, and institutional alternatives to religion playing critical roles in private and public spaces.

There is no doubt that migration has been one of the most potent forces changing European and global societies in recent decades. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates on its website that there are more than 280 million international migrants in or from more than 200 countries. However, migration represents far more complexity than first meets the eye, with complex causes of why people move and multiple issues entangled. It is, therefore, difficult, if not impossible, to speak of migration as if it constitutes a single thing.¹⁶

It is, however, of particular interest to focus on what Caroline Plüss terms ‘the globalization of religion through migration,’ i.e. how religion spreads globally in new ways through migration.¹⁷ Even secular European societies have transformed ‘into more multicultural and religiously more diversified societies,’ Willfried Spohn says, challenging secular and culture-relative models of integration by the ‘impact of other, different and less secularized religions within European societies and beyond.’¹⁸ Studies on religion by Pew Research Forum and others have shown that more than half of migrants to Nordic countries are Christians or come from countries where Christianity is dominant. Thus, asking how religious migrants ‘engage in processes that globalize their religious beliefs and practice’ and how this plays out in secular-oriented societies like Norway becomes very interesting.¹⁹

We can define Norwegian Pentecostalism narrowly or broadly. In the narrow sense, the Norwegian Pentecostal movement, Pinsebevegelsen, comprises around 340 independent churches connected in a denominational-like network sharing history, faith statements, a national leadership council, and various strategies and ministry initiatives.²⁰ In the broader sense, the Pentecostal-charismatic landscape also consists of neo-Pentecostal churches (or so-called faith churches), charismatic Baptist churches, the charismatic Oase movement, extending from the Church of Norway, and various independent churches and networks. Some churches belong to separate networks, such as Puls Norge (Hillsong Norway until August 2022) and the Salt churches, while still being part of Pinsebevegelsen. One could argue that Norwegian Pentecostalism has become more ecumenically oriented in recent decades. While considering Norwegian Pentecostalism broadly, I focus mainly on Pinsebevegelsen as the largest and mainstream of Norwegian Pentecostalism.

A question follows: Where do MICs fit in these structures and contexts? The Norwegian Pentecostal movement has always had an outward outlook with strong global impulses, from Thomas Ball Barratt’s conversion in New York, the early mission initiatives in Europe and the world, and identified with international networks such as the World Pentecostal Fellowship (WPF). ²¹ Relevant to the present discussion, the first African church in Norway was established in the aftermath of the World Pentecostal Conference in Oslo in 1992. Attending the conference, a group of delegates from the Church of Pentecost (CoP) in Ghana challenged an African prayer group at Filadelfiakirken (the church which Barratt started in 1916) to form an official church.²² In 1956, Nils Bloch-Hoell asked if the characteristics of Norwegian Pentecostalism were the same in 1946 as they were in 1906, pointing to demographic shifts and theological developments which had taken place within the movement.²³ Today, we can ask in what ways Pentecostalism in Norway looks different than two or three decades back, e.g. in light of the impact of Western globally oriented church bodies such as Willow Creek, Saddleback, Hillsong, and contemporary worship. We can, however, also ask if streams of Pentecostalism from the Global South influence the Norwegian Pentecostal-charismatic landscape in any significant way today and what this may mean for the future of Pentecostalism in Norway.

The bulk of empirical research underscoring the discussion reflected in this article was done between 2013–2017, interacting with close to 20 MICs across various ethnic and cultural backgrounds in mainly four cities in Norway. The study involved qualitative interviews with pastors and leaders, digital ethnography, and in-depth ethnographic studies of two church networks. I also consulted with leaders and others working in Norwegian churches and organizations, which interacted with the MIC context in various ways. The research involved field research and observations in Nigeria, the UK, and the US. Afterward, I continued to follow churches and their transnational networks, augmenting the original bulk of data. To protect anonymity and for other ethical research concerns, I anonymized and generalized the data material unless otherwise noted. The Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD) approved the project (research project no. 35194).

Findings: a taste of diversity

Historically, in terms of demographics, Pentecostalism in Norway has been relatively uniform, culturally and theologically, until recent decades of societal changes through modernization and, more lately, migration.²⁴ Many Pentecostal churches have integrated various ethnic groups in multiple fashions, for instance, as described in Kari Austigaard’s master thesis from 2008 about a Spanish-speaking congregation in Salemkirken in Oslo.²⁵ The Evangeliesalen-Berøa church in east central Oslo has had two Tamil congregations as part of their church. Filadelfiakirken in Oslo has hosted many groups. Today, Filadelfiakirken houses Shalom Eritrean Pentecostal Church and Filipino-dominated Filadelfia International Church (FIC), both growing and increasingly international congregations. Many MICs have used or rented space from Norwegian churches with varying degrees of cooperation.²⁶ Comprehensively describing the ethnic, cultural, linguistic, organizational, and theological diversity of Norwegian Pentecostalism is, however, nearly impossible, conceptually, methodologically, and empirically. During my research, the membership, leadership, affiliations, and locations of a number of the churches I interacted with changed, ceased to exist, merged, or moved.

To illustrate, peeking at the publically available regional lists of churches for Pinsebevegelsen provides some insight into the increasing diversity. Of Pinsebevegelsen’s (about) 340 churches, by previous knowledge and looking at church names, I identified twenty-two as MICs. As indicated in the table below, approximately half of these were located in or around Oslo (Table 1):

Table

Region	Church	Key Nationality/Focus
Eastern/central Norway (Oslo and Vestfold)	All Nations Full Gospel Church	International/Ghanaian/African
	International Church of Glory	African/Ghanaian
	Jesus Is Lord (Jesus er Herre)	Filipino
	Living Word Bible Center (LWBC)	Filipino
	The Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG Norway)	Nigerian/African
	Church of Pentecost International Norway	Ghanaiah/African
	Yewongel Berhan Church Oslo	Ethiopian
	La Compassion Kirke Drammen	(Not known)
	The Christian Faith Gospel Church Drammen	African
South West Norway (Rogaland, Haugalandet)	Grace Believer Church (formerly Bethel Living Church, Stavanger)	Myanmar/Chin
	Overcomers International Church Stavanger	International/Nigerian
	RCCG Dayspring Parish	Nigerian/African
	RCCG Gateway Haugesund	Nigerian/African
Mid-Norway (Trøndelag)	Overcomers International Church Stavanger	International/Nigerian
	Victorious Faith Ministries International	International/Nigerian
South Norway (Agder and Telemark	Grenland International Church	International
	The Redeemed Christian Church of God – Grace Sanctuary (Kristiansand),	Nigerian/African
Northern Norway	Overcomers International Church Tromsø	International/Nigerian

Source: Adapted from www.pinsebevegelsen.no (Key nationality/focus added by the author)

The table, however, contains inaccuracies and does not capture the full scope of churches, missing several locations for LWBC, JIL, CoP, and RCCG churches. The list does not provide information on when churches joined, the size of the congregations, etc. In recent years, we have seen an increasing number of pastors and leaders from migrant backgrounds leading Norwegian Pentecostal churches. For example, in Sion Molde on the northwest coast, pastor Albert Barankenyereye Ndayizeye from Burundi is the head pastor, leading an increasingly international and culturally diverse church. The point is that the field is blurry, calling for more information as well as more research.

While it is relatively easy to identify the countries of origin of pastors or the dominating cultural backgrounds in MICs, these backgrounds alone are often incomplete identifiers. I have interacted with churches and leaders with backgrounds from Ghana, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Brazil, Congo, Kenya, India, and Pakistan, to name some. However, more often than not, these did not capture the actual diversity of the church. For instance, though linked to the Church of Pentecost (CoP) in Ghana, CoP in Oslo had a wide range of nationalities represented in the church from the beginning.²⁷ Filipino-led churches may have participants from China, India, various African countries, or Norway, though led by a Filipino pastor.²⁸ RCCG churches seek to become international churches, not exclusively African or Nigerian ones.²⁹ Migrants from Myanmar may come from Chin, Zome, or Karen backgrounds and have formed Baptist or Pentecostal churches. Ethiopian migrants may be Oromo or Amharic, representing Orthodox, Ortho-Pente, Evangelical, or Pentecostal-charismatic churches. Intermarriages with Norwegians or second generations add to the complexity of what ‘country of origin’ means and to what extent country of origin represents a sufficiently helpful descriptor.

Similarly, noting the extended range of languages used could be an equally fascinating exercise for describing diversity. It would include, for example, Twi (Ghana), Trigrinia, Amharic and Oromo (Eritrea and Ethiopia), Persian, Pashto, Urdu and Hindi, Arabic, Tamil, Spanish, Mandarin or Cantonese, Vietnamese, Portuguese, French, Swahili, or English. Some of my informants highlighted the importance of using their native tongue to cultivate their cultural and religious identity for themselves and the next generations. Some said that worshipping in one’s mother tongue gave a sense of freedom while submerging in Norwegian culture most other days of the week. Using the mother tongue, Christian migrants could differentiate their beliefs and practices and resist the values and manners of a generally secularized Norwegian society. The Nordic Chinese Christian Church offers language training for children and youth. Most Tamil churches have continued to use Tamil to reach out to other Tamil speakers locally or globally through media.

Others, however, sought to become ‘more Norwegian’ by intentionally extracting ethnic or linguistic identifiers in the church names, e.g. strategically using Norwegian in songs, announcements, on flyers or changing church names to attract Norwegians or other internationals, or adapting to the next generations. Some churches made use of multiple languages in church services. CoP uses, for example, English (with the leading international congregation), Twi (with Ghanaian groups), and Norwegian (with the youth). Other churches offered translation to Norwegian, Spanish, or English, used Norwegian with the children, or mixed languages in different ways. English was often a ‘bridge language’ between the mother tongue and Norwegian. Thus, to the extent that language expresses the culture, noting changes and challenges related to language provides insights into how cultures of MICs change, even in small steps.

As already indicated, Norwegian Pentecostalism has traditionally been rather monochrome in terms of denominational and theological variation, with a limited number of streams running through the Norwegian Pentecostal-charismatic landscape. Pinsebevegelsen represents the oldest and main/stream of these. When it comes to MICs, however, the landscape diversifies considerably. Many MICs are informally or formally connected to large transnational church networks, which conglomerate the denominational variety of Norwegian Pentecostalism. Some of the churches represented were the RCCG (Nigeria), Christ Embassy (Nigeria), Mountain of Fire and Miracle Ministry (Nigeria), Deeper Christian Life Ministry (Nigeria), CoP (Ghana), Global Evangelical Church (GEC, Ghana), International Central Gospel Church (OCGC, Ghana), and Jesus Is Lord (JIL, the Philippines). Being connected to their global headquarters and regional networks was as important as being part of Pinsebevegelsen. Some churches had smaller-scale networks, such as LWBC and Filiadelfia International Church (FIC), having developed growing church networks in Europe through members who have migrated further from Norway to other European cities. Some MICs have joined the Baptist Union, though theologically being ‘pentecostal’ or charismatic. Others have remained independent or were part of other trans/national groups. Thus, MICs represent multiple-noded networks, transnational loyalties, and hybrid church identities.

I also found that denominational affiliations often did not reveal the background of congregants, not even for leaders. Even from mainline Anglican, Methodist, or Catholic church backgrounds, many identified with a Pentecostal spirituality in the migrant context. One pastor told me he was intentionally not going to remain in his Pentecostal denomination when moving to America so he could become acculturated in American culture and become an effective missionary there. I also found that individuals fluctuated between churches. Filipinos, for instance, often moved between the Catholic church and Pentecostal churches.³⁰ One Asian migrant Christian I met participated regularly in prayer meetings in a Pentecostal migrant church while at the same time sending her children to the local Lutheran congregation and attending her Baptist migrant home church. In my experience, many seemed to downplay the importance of denominational loyalty as long as they could find a church where they felt at home culturally and spiritually.

Looking across the variety of migrant Pentecostal groups and churches, uncovering the broader scopes and details of theological nuance is too vast a task to tackle. In Kristine Laundal’s previously mentioned study of two African congregations, the two churches were quite different theologically both in focus and in form. As such, one could argue that Pentecostal theology is as concerned with how people live out their faith as with how they formulate their doctrines.³¹ MICs represent a broadening of the theological landscape interlinked with the traditions, cultural ethos, mother denominations, and patterns for leadership and congregational response that these represent. However, comparing sermon emphases between how RCCG conduct services in Nigeria with how they do services in Norway, the two are not equally the same. In other words, just as culture and language are negotiated in new contexts, so is theology. One migrant leader firmly underscored that s/he did not embrace prosperity theology, though scholars often associate RCCG with neo-pentecostal prosperity preaching, often known for exaggerating material benefits and blessings of the gospel.³² A common denominator across most MICs was an unshaken emphasis on spirituality, maintaining a vibrant personal faith through an active prayer life, attending church, and reading the Bible regularly. This emphasis involved addressing the spiritual realm of reality when facing migration-related or other challenges.³³ In other words, MICs expressed their contextual theologies through their public and private spiritualities to cope with societal, church, or personal issues.

Discussion: changing cultures, identities, and theologies?

Returning to the questions of how the Pentecostal landscape is changing, I want to critically reflect on how much diversification may challenge Norwegian Pentecostalism's cultural understanding, identity, and theology in the future.

Diversification of cultures – A blessing or a curse?

Beyond describing the varieties and flavours of global cultures infusing the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape, it is even more interesting to discuss what this diversity means for MICs and the future of Norwegian Pentecostalism. Literature on organizational culture suggests that organizations are shaped by shared ‘histories, legends and myths’ [my translation] about key persons and milestones.³⁴ Thus, we can better understand MICs’ values and beliefs if we gain access to their heroic tales and heroes. If this holds on more general or societal levels, one could ask if Norwegian Pentecostalism is shaped so deeply by her history that it is hard for outsiders to ‘get underneath the skin.’ Taking a dynamic view of culture, however, discussing issues related to ethnic and cultural diversity in Norwegian society, Norwegian anthropologists Thomas Hylland Eriksen and Torunn Artnsen Sajjad ask the crucial question of what is Norwegian within a Norwegian societal context.³⁵ Along the same lines, we can ask what is Pentecostal in Norway today, and what should Norwegian Pentecostalism look like in the future? Thus, more importantly, we can ask if or how migrant and Norwegian Pentecostals can create shared histories, heroes, and milestones to shape new cultures, identities, theologies, and futures.

Taking one step back, the notion of diversification has caught the interest of researchers across fields, whether exploring the evolution of species, the diversification of financial investments, or discussing the cultural diversification of organizations, businesses, or societies. Within anthropology, cultural diversification theory deals more specifically with how cultures evolve.³⁶ Song concludes, for instance, that in culturally complex contexts, companies relate, innovate, and operate considerably better and with fewer culture-related risks with a culturally diverse staff’s competence.³⁷ From an entrepreneurial perspective, Colombelli et al. underscore that

cultural diversity may foster sectoral diversity as a result of the heterogeneity in the opportunities perceived by culturally diverse entrepreneurs, the existence of sector-specific competencies of immigrants with different nationalities, and the demand for diverse products and services that originate from culturally or ethnically specific needs.³⁸

In other words, immigrants’ cultural experiences, resources, and know-how often represent an untapped potential for growth and development. In organizations, intentional diversification can be a way to respond to contexts of change by analyzing how various kinds of resources may impact relations, performance, plans, and profits.³⁹ Similarly, research on religion and migration asks to what extent religion is a resource or hindrance to integration.⁴⁰ Thus, we can ask to what extent Pentecostal migrants or MICs are recognized for what they may contribute or if they are ignored for their differences, e.g. in relation to local cooperation or denominational strategies. It was interesting to observe the notable impact and how the Baptist Union strategically has become a multicultural denomination, having succeeded attracted Pentecostal-charismatic as well as Baptist MICs in their fold. Also, an increasing number of persons with an immigrant background serve in leadership positions.

At the same time, for many, intercultural engagement was challenging, not the least, in terms of communication, felt prejudice, and resistance to change. As points of illustration, several migrant informants expressed their concerns about Norwegian churches being secularized or spiritually detuned without much emphasis on prayer. Comparing church norms and attendance in a ‘Christian’ country like Norway with the intensity of demographically young and vibrant Pentecostal-charismatic home churches in Africa or Asia was, for many, a big disappointment. In their understanding, Norwegian churches better fit in the category of what Avi Astor and Damon Mayrl call ‘culturalized religion,’ where religion may be apparent in structures and history yet without much engagement and practice.⁴¹ Some migrant leaders said, however, that this perception changed once they interacted with Norwegian pastors or discovered that the charismatic spirituality in Norwegian Pentecostal churches was not absent but merely differently packaged.

Other points of discord related to the lack of spiritual or ministerial recognition, struggle with finding places of worship, and not nearly having comparable financial or human resources as Norwegian churches. Some also expressed a feeling of disinterest or not being treated with equal respect. ‘We always invite, but we are never invited back,’ one migrant pastor essentially summarized his interaction with Norwegian churches. Some resisted the temptation to become the ‘culturally different alibi’ or a pathway to rapid church growth in Norwegian congregations but rather started their own. On the other hand, some Norwegian church leaders I interacted with questioned an overtly spiritual focus or the lack of leadership structures in some MIC contexts. Some also found it challenging to adapt their church services so much to various cultural tastes, resulting in hardly catering to anyone. However, the Pentecostal-charismatic landscape in Norway is far more diverse today than it was two or three decades ago. Still, one could continue to ask to what extents these ‘worlds’ interact or remain separate.⁴²

Identity formation in a migrant context – One body or many tongues?

Cultural diversity relates closely with the notion of identity – how we see ourselves and how /others see us. Asking to what extent terms like ‘migrant,’ ‘migrant church,’ or even ‘Norwegian’ contribute to intercultural understanding or othering can be discussed. A very practical but real issue relates to how long a person should be considered a migrant. One pastor essentially asked, ‘I have been in Norway for more than a decade – for how long should we be regarded as a migrant church?’ This question becomes more complicated when addressing those with multiple cultural backgrounds or for the second and third generations. Introductory, I proposed using the term ‘migrant-initiated churches’ (MICs) to denote the origin and agency of these churches. Other alternatives that MICs prefer are ‘international churches’ or terms more specifically reflecting ethnicity, language, or spiritual focus. From the Swedish context, Jan-Åke Alvarsson found that some African migrant Pentecostals first wanted to be identified as Christian and only secondly as Africans.⁴³ One point is that we may differentiate between using terms analytically (e.g. ‘migrant church’) from how to speak of one another. The main point is, however, that notions of identity are complex and that even with the best intentions for seeking understanding, one may undermine the same processes.

Zooming out, summarizing some of the effects of post-WWII migration, Krystyna Romaniszyn notes,

Within a few decades after the Second World War, mass migration had led to the creation of multi-ethnic, and hence multicultural, societies with large, distinctive, and basically non-European minorities. It is true that the European receiving societies had been unprepared for the acceptance of a vast number of permanent immigrants. This seems to be changing. Nevertheless, policies towards immigrants still seem incoherent. On the one hand, governments try to defend a dominant culture of the nation-state and to integrate minorities. While, on the other hand, they attempt to safeguard the rights of immigrants wishing to preserve their cultural distinctiveness. As stated previously, newly adopted policies and joint agreements on migration, on the whole, enforce restriction. But there is also a wealth of discussion about the measures necessary to tackle the inequalities and exclusion confronting minority groups and immigrants. Needless to say, the permanent presence of immigrants calls for skilled governance of the emerging ethnic and cultural pluralism within a nation-state, that welcomes its cultural identity, coherence and stability, in their numerous aspects.⁴⁴

Krystyna Romaniszyn also points out the robust networks among many migrants in history, socially, and in trade.⁴⁵ However, migration remains a controversial political issue in many contexts and may cloud processes of identity formation today. While not ignoring deep-seated issues of culture conflicts, history, or hijacked political discourses, it is a given fact that most Western societies (e.g. our workplaces, schools, and sports teams) have become considerably culturally, ethnically, and religiously diverse. Yet, politicians, social scientists, and others keep discussing how to avoid the minefields of inequality, prejudice, and discrimination in our neighbourhoods.⁴⁶ By extension, we can also ask how such issues of cultural diversification relate to identity formation in the migratory contexts of the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape. Recognizing the complex streams of global Pentecostalism, Walter Hollenweger, Allan Anderson, and others have often preferred the notion of ‘pentecostalisms’ (in the plural) to describe better the diverse origins, histories and histories and theologies of pentecostal-charismatic type Christian movements across the globe. At the same time, these streams undoubtedly share cultural, theological, and spiritual repertoires.⁴⁷

In my research, there was no doubt that ‘Pentecostal’ represented a unifying and bridge-building notion, with which most identified, formally or informally. Being ‘Pentecostal’ provided a sense of having a global spiritual identity and being part of God’s doings today.⁴⁸ It also seemed to help me as a researcher build trust and report by being transparent about my own Pentecostal background and having a shared frame of reference about known events, movements, or preachers. Yet, under this umbrella, there is a need to discuss what ‘Pentecostal’ should mean. Several MIC leaders and members had not been able to feel at home in Norwegian Pentecostal churches, e.g. in terms of cultural identity, affiliation, or spirituality. In other words, Norwegian Pentecostalism may be quite different from my informants’ pentecostalism(s), reflecting perhaps Michael Bergunder’s notion that ‘differences between cultures are negotiated differences within hegemonic discourses.’⁴⁹ Informants also expressed the need for spiritual fellowship across backgrounds. Migrant leaders I have met have deeply appreciated initiatives to meet with Norwegian leaders on equal terms and conditions. Thus, I had a sense that there was much-untapped potential in exploring further the bridge-building potential of exploring more a shared ‘pentecostal identity.’

In particular, it became evident in my study that MICs cannot be understood merely by looking at their congregational size and local situatedness but rather understood in the context of their transnational identities. Plüss underscores the importance of taking a transnational gaze at globalizing processes of religion since ‘processes taking place in transnational arenas’ and that processes of integration ‘cannot be explained in terms of the characteristics of one territory alone.’ ⁵⁰ For RCCG in Norway, loyalty to Enoch Adeboye, the RCCG Headquarters in Nigeria, or the RCCG networks in Europe were as important as relating to Norwegian Pentecostalism. Many MICs had informal or formal ties with similar fast-growing, often highly hierarchical Pentecostal-charismatic church bodies. One could also argue that a global diversified Pentecostal-charismatic identity expresses Pentecostalism’s global DNA, seeking to be a movement of many colours, cultures, and tongues. Seeing how global church networks extensively use media technologies to expand within and beyond their geographies to global audiences adds to this argument.⁵¹

Theological diversification – opportunities and challenges

Perhaps the most challenging but less discussed aspect of diversification relates to theology. For Pentecostals, theology is not merely expressions of shared creeds and statements of faith but mirrored in personal and congregational practices of faith. It matters not only what one believes about God but also how one relates to God in daily life and communal worship. Hence, for Pentecostals, theology (and spirituality) is as inseparably interconnected with culture and identity as with beliefs.

To illustrate, and as already alluded, one of the critical theological emphases I encountered across a wide range of MICs was their emphasis on the role of the Spirit. For many informants, personal encounters with the Holy Spirit had made the difference, and the presence of the Spirit was something tangible to be embraced and not merely a doctrine to uphold. The importance of acknowledging the spirit realm that ‘the spiritual is more important than the physical’ heeded a need for spiritual discernment and sensitivity to God in all dealings of life. For many, this meant that prayer, fasting, and spiritual warfare were crucial for bringing about the purposes of God in one’s personal life, church, and society.⁵² This focus on spirituality was perhaps one of the most critical findings across the churches, ethnicities, and cultures I encountered, whether representing Nigerian, Ethiopian, Filipino, or Vietnamese churches. With exceptions, the distinct emphasis on spirituality and prayer also seemed to mean a felt difference from what many migrants had experienced in Norwegian churches.

While some Norwegian church leaders I interacted with expressed concerns about over-spiritualized theologies, we could ask if increasing attention to spirituality could inspire or challenge Western (Norwegian) churches to renew their focus on spiritual issues and the role of the Spirit. At the same time, one could engage in mutual discussion about sound pneumatology and practice. And, could the spiritual vibrancy of global Pentecostal churches inspire a re-pentecostalization of Western churches? After attending an otherwise spiritually inspiring national Pentecostal conference (LED), one migrant leader commented that s/he wanted to give feedback to the organizers and suggest, ‘Let us lead prayer next time.’ This experience indicated that Pentecostal theology is as much felt as it is believed. Anecdotally, and without critically discussing theological orthodoxies or personalities, it is interesting to note the pilgrimages of known Western charismatic figures to large megachurches in the Global South, such as healing evangelist Benny Hinn partnering with charismatic megachurch pastor Chris Oyakhilome of Christ Embassy in Nigeria for joint healing and media ventures. Looking at the global scope of Pentecostalism, one could ask to what extent these globally anchored MICs’ emphasis on the Spirit represents sources of potential spiritual renewal and unity across Norwegian Pentecostalism.

To some extent, early Norwegian Pentecostalism revival stirred questions about spiritual gifts and church organization.⁵³ During the Charismatic renewal in the 1960s and 1970s, there were additional divisions across the Pentecostal-charismatic landscape.⁵⁴ Pentecostalism has also been marked by a distinct emphasis on spiritual unity with the Spirit, attracting and uniting believers across ethnicity and denominations. In my study, many MICs attracted people from various Pentecostal-charismatic church backgrounds or pentecostalized mainline churches across denominations in the Global South.⁵⁵ Thus, if breaching cultural, organizational, and theological gaps and preferences, MICs represent potential theological and spiritual resources for rekindling spiritual vibrancy across Norwegian Pentecostalism.

One could argue that all theology – and, perhaps, Pentecostal theology in particular – is contextual, shaped by the times, contexts, and issues in which it is embedded.⁵⁶ Given the cultural and spiritual differences in the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape, one can ask if these theologies also necessarily must reflect difference. For instance, most MICs frequently foreground migration-related issues in sermons, prayers, and testimonies of how God can speak and act today. Placing oneself in the migratory narrative and promises to Abraham or other Bible characters represents a typical example of how MICs framed their theologies, not taking residence permits, job opportunities, or a roof over one’s head for granted. Sermons were often also illustrated with cultural and spiritual references to home contexts, e.g. in Africa, revealing not only different cultural contexts but, at times, vastly different worldviews and points of reference. Generally speaking, many MICs were notably conservative regarding social and moral issues, deeply embedded in their cultural backgrounds and theological convictions. In my analysis, there is a need to address further such concerns beyond skin-deep discussions of cultural differences and tastes.

In the broader Norwegian Pentecosal-charismatic landscape, there are not only cultural and spiritual differences but equally common challenges inviting for theologization, not the least related to mission, leadership, and next-generation issues. In the Pentecostal tradition, however, such theologization primarily takes place in the contexts of prayer, worship, and fellowship, thus challenging migrants and Norwegians to come together and join minds, hearts, and hands. One could also ask if such theological discussions could occur beyond local levels and involve denominational relations with transnational church bodies such as RCCG, CoP, JIL, and others. Crossing such Pentecostal ecclesiological boundaries would require intentional and substantial work on local and (inter)national levels across church bodies. On one side, Norwegian Pentecostalism represents an end of the spectrum in terms of individual churches’ autonomy in contrast to the often highly hierarchical ecclesial structures of many Pentecostal denominations in the Global South. In my experience, however, MICs often represent local pathways to global headquarters when key leaders such as CoP’s chairman Eric Kwabena Nyamekye or RCCG’s Enoch Adeboye visit churches or conventions in Norway or Europe. In addition, global Pentecostal umbrella organizations, such as Pentecostal World Fellowship (PWF) or the more recent Empowered21, may serve as common platforms where Pentecostals meet across cultures and geography.

Conclusion

Reflecting on the current diversity of Nordic Pentecostalism, Jessica Moberg and Jane Skjoldli note,

There is no one contemporary Nordic Charismatic Christianity, but many linger around the bonfires … Some groups have gone in a therapeutic direction, with popular music and sermon styles, and enjoy growth; their bonfires attract present lingerers. Others gather around the embers of old-fashioned Pentecostal psalms and sermons. These variations result from transformations native to the Nordic countries and internal dynamics in Charismatic bodies, as well as influences from the international, mainly Americanized Charismatic cultures.⁵⁷

In concluding, they ‘find it crucial to look at developments outside conventional denominations, in new networks and cooperative fora’ for Nordic charismatics to find their identity.⁵⁸ However, what is largely missing in their statement is noting the often invisible presence of migrant-initiated churches (MICs) that have surfaced in the Nordic countries. This reflection brings us back to the initial starting point, asking how and to what extent migration has and will impact Norwegian Pentecostalism (and, by extension, Nordic or Western Pentecostalism). Despite often undetected, the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape reflects a vast and growing diversity in terms of cultures, ethnicities, languages, organizations, and theologies. Also, acknowledging recent decades’ diversification of the Norwegian Pentecostal-charismatic landscape offers a peek into the microcosmos of what global Pentecostalism looks like, including local contexts in Norway.

In the previous discussion, we how discussed and asked if diversity represents hindrances or opportunities to the future of Norwegian Pentecostalism. Firstly, we have addressed to what extent Norwegian (Pentecostal) churches relate to changing demographics of Norwegian cities and towns. We have also asked to what extent migrant-initiated churches (MICs) are recognized for their potential resources, competencies, and contributions concerning common challenges for (Pentecostal) churches today. Secondly, I have also asked if ‘Pentecostal’ represents a unifying common denominator for identity as churches today or if the growing diversity in actuality makes it difficult to unite. For example, can the emergence and presence of Pentecostal MICs in Norway rekindle a sense of glocal Pentecostal identity?⁵⁹ Thirdly, I have discussed how MICs’ emphases on spirituality can represent a source for spiritual renewal in Norwegian churches and how different organizational structures can illustrate structural challenges related to the increasingly diversified landscape. For example, discussing the diversification of Norwegian Pentecostalism, one should not deny real issues or difficult questions related to coexistence across diversity.⁶⁰ Allan Anderson points out that while many large global megachurches have been established in metropolitan cities like London,

In most cases, the transnational churches in the North have been unable to break free from their ethnic minority character. However, the migrant churches have not inflated the numbers of Pentecostals in Nordic countries as much as they have in other Western countries like Britain, France, or Germany or, indeed, in the United States itself.⁶¹

Yet, it may be essential to underscore that the Nordic/Norwegian context is younger and different from other comparable European contexts in various ways. Trying to answer what this may mean for the future of Norwegian Pentecostalism, much is still at stake in how Norwegian churches and MICs respond to the noted issues discussed above. Will the Norwegian Pentecostal landscape continue to grow? Will MICs join forces with Norwegian churches to battle common challenges and opportunities, e.g. related to integration, secularization, or mission?

In recent times, there have been a series of initiatives within Pinsebevegelsen seeking to form relationships with MIC leaders and build bridges across linguistic and cultural divides. Future plans of Pinsebevegelsen include increasing attention to international dimensions within the movement. From a normative point of view, these initiatives are promising.⁶² However, by responding to such initiatives, Norwegian Pentecostal churches and Pentecostal MICs could be challenged to discover new visions to guide their church strategies and discuss issues related to identity, culture, organization, spirituality, theology, and mission, and subsequent generations (to name a few). Should migrants assimilate into Norwegian Pentecostal cultures, practices, and theologies, or should cultural and theological variance be encouraged? Will MICs contribute to spiritual renewal and a more global identity? Not providing all the answers and concluding on relatively open terms, Allan Anderson speaks of this future,

The growth may well have halted or even decreased in northern Europe, but the enormous growth of Charismatic Christianity in Asia, Africa, and Latin America also means that it may continue to expand and influence all types of Christianity there. In creative ways Pentecostalism has promoted a globalized Christianity that has not lost touch with its local context. It is able to preserve both global and local characteristics, making it possible to speak at the same time of ‘Pentecostalism’ and ‘Pentecostalisms.’ So at least for the foreseeable future, the continued vitality of Charismatic Christianity is probably assured. Where it will go in Nordic countries is anyone’s guess.⁶³

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Stian Sørlie Eriksen

Stian Sørlie Eriksen, Ph.D. currently works as the head of the Department for cultural and religious studies and as an associate professor at the Faculty of theology, diaconal and leadership studies at VID Specialized University (www.vid.no) in Stavanger, Norway. He also works part-time as an associate professor at the Norwegian school of leadership and theology (www.hlt.no) in Oslo. His research interest include Pentecostal studies, migration and religion, World Christianity, and mission studies.

Notes

1 For the Swedish context, see Torbjörn Aronsson’s article in this special issue and Aronson, ‘Migration and Global Pentecostalsim in the Greater Stockholm Area.’ Statistics from recent years show that while church membership in the Church of Norway (CoN) is declining, membership in churches increase. It is believed that migration has contributed significanly to this growth.

2 Anderson, ‘Foreword,” vii.

3 For a more extensive and updated overview of the current state of research on MICs, see Haug and Eriksen, En kartlegging.

4 DAWN, Kartlegging av migrantmenigheter i Oslo; DAWN, Nasjonal kartlegging.

5 . Desta, Faglig rapport om migrantmenigheter.

6 Laundal, “Afrikansk pentekostalisme i Oslo.”

7 Drønen and Eriksen, “‘Av alle folkeslag, stammer, folk og tungemål’.”

8 Aschim, Hovdelien and Sødal, eds. Kristne migranter i Norden.

9 Eriksen, “The Epistemology of Imagination and Religious Experience;” Eriksen, “Changing the World through Prayer;” Eriksen, “God Brought med here to Change Me.” These three contributions were part of Eriksen’s doctoral thesis, Beyond ‘Reverse Mission’? from 2019 on Pentecostal migrants in Norway.

10 Drønen, “Christian Migrant Communities”; Eriksen, Drønen, and Løland, “African Migrant Christianities.”

11 See Sanneh, Whose Religion Is Christianity; Demptster, Klaus and Petersen, eds., The Globalization of Pentecostalism.

12 Kalu, African Pentecostalism, 271, 290.

13 Anderson, Spirit-Filled World, 7.

14 Davie, Europe, 144.

15 Ibid., 144–56.

16 See Saunders, Fiddian-Qasmiey, and Snyder, eds. Intersections of Religion and Migration.

17 Plüss, “Migration and the Globalization of Religion.”

18 Spohn, “Europeanization,” 358–9.

19 Plüss, “Migration and the Globalization of Religion,” 491.

20 For the special issue it was decided to use the native terms for the respective Nordic Pentecostal movements, ie. using the term Pinsebevegelsen for the official Norwegian Pentecostal movement cf. www.pinsebevegelsen.no. This term is used interchangably with the term the Norwegian Pentecostal movement. The term the Norwegian Pentecostalism may be understood more broadly, incorporating also additional pentecostal-charismatic churches in the Norwegian church landscape. See also Tangen and Alegre’s article in this volume.

21 Kay, Pentecostalism, 36–8; Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition.

22 Eriksen, “The Church of Pentecost International”.

23 Bloch-Hoell, Pinsebevegelsen, 416.

24 Daugstad and Østby, “Et mangfold av tro og livssyn”.

25 Austigaard, “The Spanish-speaking Congregation.” Interestingly, this is the same building which today houses Puls Oslo, which until recently was Hillsong Oslo.

26 See Desta, “Migrasjon og norsk kirkeliv” and Desta, Faglig rapport.

27 Eriksen, “The Church of Pentecost International.”

28 Eriksen, “God Brought Me Here to Change Me.”

29 Eriksen, “Changing the World through Prayer.”

30 Eriksen, “God Brought Me Here to Change Me.”

31 Wilkinson and Althouse, “Pentecostalism as Lived Religion,” i–iv.

32 Smith, ““The Pentecostal Prosperity Gospel in Nigeria,” 103–22. See Asamoah-Gyadu, “God is Big in Africa: Pentecostal Mega Churches and a Changing Religious Landscape.”

33 Eriksen, “The Epistemology of Imagination and Religious Experience,” 1–29; Eriksen, 2017.

34 Bang, Organisasjonskultur, 154.

35 Eriksen and Sajjad, 97–98.

36 See e.g. Durham, “Applications of Evolutionary Culture Theory.”

37 Song, “Cultural Diversification.”

38 Colombelli et al, “Newborn Firms and Regional Diversification Patterns.”

39 Chatterjee and Wernerfelt, “The Link between Resources and Type of Diversification.”

40 Connor, Immigrant Faith; Kogan, Fong, and Reitz, “Religion and Integration.”

41 Astor and Mayrl, “Culturalized Religion.”

42 See Eriksen, ““Immigrant - Majority Church Relations in the West” (a more popularized article).

43 Alvarsson, “Afrikanska pentekostaler i Sverige.”

44 Romaniszyn, “Migration and Cultural Diversification,” 102.

45 Ibid.

46 Regjeringen, “Rasisme og diskriminering på grunn av etnisitet, religion og livssyn.”

47 Vondey, Pentecostal Theology.

48 Vondey, “Pentecostalism as a Theological Tradition.”

49 Bergunder, “The Cultural Turn,” 52.

50 Plüss, “Migration and the Globalization of Religion,” 491.

51 See e.g., Anderson, Spreading the Fires; Anderson, “Pentecostalism and the Transformation of World Christianity,” 47.

52 See Eriksen, “Changing the World through Prayer.”

53 Alegre, The Pentecostal Apologetics of T.B. Barratt: Defining and Defending the Faith 1906–1909.

54 Hegertun, “Pinsestrid i økumenisk og diskursteoretisk perspektiv.”

55 Kobylinski, “The Global Pentecostalization of Christianity and Its Ethical Consequences.” See also Onyinah, “The Movement of the Spirit Around the World in Pentecostalism.”

56 Bevans, “Contextual Theology as Practical Theology,” 32.

57 Moberg and Skjoldli, “Postscript,” 240.

58 Ibid., 242.

59 Wariboko, The Pentecostal Hypothesis, 44–5

60 Eriksen and Sajjad, Kulturforskjeller i praksis.

61 Anderson, “Foreword,” viii.

62 “Mission and migration” session and informal gathering with international pastors and leaders hosted by Fred Håberg, International leader of the Norwegian Pentecostal movement (Pinse Misjon), LED 23 conference, Lillestrøm, Norway, January 13-14, 2023.

63 . Anderson, “Foreword,” ix.