Consider some old quotes from our wise friend Pelathais on conservatism:
Quote:
“We be brethren. I'm actually quite conservative in my views. It's just that it's the old style of conservatism and not this new trendy style that wants to change everything. I am a ‘conservative's conservative.’”
“Stop calling them "conservatives" - their ideas are new and their methods are anything but conservative.”
|
Definition according to an online dictionary:
Conservative -
adj. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style. Moderate; cautious.
n. One favoring traditional views and values.
My question is this: what context should we use when describing “conservative brethren” on AFF? I say this in honest pursuit because in the past I attempted to “rattle the [Pentecostal] chain of succession back to the Upper Room,” but the chain didn’t extend beyond the 20th Century.
Maybe we can implement a type of class clarification using the World War era (symbolism not intended) as group identifiers? For example:
Post-WWII Conservatives – [Pentecostals] adhering to views unique and novel to the generations born after the mid-1900s expressed as the radical addition to Parham’s “Initial Evidence Theory,” external compliance dress codes, performance emphases, etc.
Pre-WWII Conservatives – [Pentecostals] adhering to doctrines introduced at the beginning of the 1900s including Parham’s original theory of “Holy Spirit Baptism Manifestation,” a consensus of water baptism in the "non-regenerative" sense, minimal emphasis on dress identifiers, etc.
Or perhaps, we could use the “Great Nut” approach. The question being, which is the true conservative, the shell, or the nut inside the shell? Figuratively speaking, who deserves the label of "old" conservatism, mainstream Christianity or Pentecostalism emerging after 1900?
Do we have "old conservatives" and "new conservatives" on AFF? Maybe the label of "liberals" in the mouths of some Apostolic conservatives is code for "mainstream Christians?"