placeholders for certain functions and then only provisionally engaged in
ways that invite further specifi cation. In short, whatever Asian or American
might mean are generalizations that serve certain (theological) purposes,
and these speak not only for segments of both groups but also in certain
(not exhaustive) respects.
At a second level, dyadic combinations multiply the diffi culties expo-
nentially, much more than as if issues were merely the sum of the two
considered disparately. For instance, Asian American invites qualifi cation
not only in terms of both sides of this binary, but also with regard to the
conditions of their togetherness. First-generation immigrants are differ-
ent from 1.5- generation sojourners, and these are in turn distinct from
second- generation experiences, and migrants and students have different
vantage points, as do those who are here on shorter- to longer-term work
permits or visas or who are Asian American biracially, and so on. The
point is that Asian American can mean so many different things not only
in what each category represents on its own but then vis-à-vis their vari-
ous possible combinations.
Here it is now appropriate to consider what difference Pentecostal
makes when factored into the equation. Initially, Pentecostal as an adjec-
tive can refer to a specifi c set of ecclesial traditions that trace their roots
back to the Azusa Street revival in the early twentieth century, and in
many contemporary contexts, such includes churches and denomina-
tions derived from these movements and often (though far from always)
including that specifi c word in their title. 18 Yet there is a sense in which
the notion Pentecostal has expanded to include charismatic movements
in the mainline Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox traditions and even
other groups indigenous to Christianity in the majority world that exhibit
Pentecostal-type spirituality but oftentimes go by other labels. 19 The point
is that apart from geographical markers, Pentecostal is already problematic
as a blending of ecclesial movements across spectra in multiple directions.
Following from this, the notions of American Pentecostal and Asian
Pentecostal (to move on to the other possible dyadic registers of our triadic
Asian American Pentecostal formulation) invite cautious procession for
additional reasons related to historiographical debates. 20 American in the
former case now includes not only the pluralisms inherent in the USA (and
Canada too), but also the intricacies related to the infl uence of the North
American versions of the movement across the global South. American
Pentecostal perspectives hence cannot be assumed to be located only in
the North American context, but may be prevalent across the majority
182 A. YONG