From corner shop to boutique franchise : the dilemmas of Australian Pentecostalism

It is my intention herein to deal with the issue of singularity or, as it appears in the Australian context, the dilemmas of Australian Pentecostalism. Those dilemmas start, in an intellectual sense, with the observation—discovered and rediscovered by a disbelieving Australian public sector to their own surprise from time to time—that Australian Pentecostalism is not American. It is not American either in origins or (largely) in development. Most importantly, however, like many religious bodies in colonized and later globalized settings, it exists in part through its negotiation of the larger conversation between Australian and American cultures, now counter-posing, now absorbing, the influences of globalized cultures. In other words, in the global reflexive space that we share with Canadians in particular, “not being American” is part of what being an Australian Pentecostal is about. The role of Azusa Street as a symbol, as opposed to Azusa Street as an event and/or historical process, is illustrative of this dilemma. In our inevitable mutual regard we try, of course, not to offend. Azusa Street in much literature has moved from being “the Pentecostal outbreak” to being “symbolic” of something larger. It is often we colonials (either of the British Empire or the American) who are at fault for this—undermining the canonicity of Azusa Street often seems like the logical place to begin in reconstructing other national stories.