138 Letizia Caronia ‘The human experience 9,.17-34. Ricoeur, P, (1984). Time and narrative (vol. 1). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press " (1972). Common-sense and scientific interpretation of human action, aM, Natanon & L. Van Breda (Bat) Collected papers. The problem of social reality (pp. 3-47). New York, NY: Springer. a iscourse in place. Language in the : Routiedge. A. (1995). comme proces et comme action. Pais, France: Sempris LHarmattan, Streeck, J. (2010). New adventures in language and social inter New adventures in language and social interaction (pp. 1-8) eland and Piladp, PA: Jb Dean. the changing meanings of things: Found objects and inscrip- action In J. Stezek, C. Goodwin, ©. Lebaron (Eds), Embodied interaction. Language and body inthe material world (pp. 67-78) Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. . Ziama, A. (2009). A quel point en sommes-nous avec la sémiotique de Vobjet Revue Internationale de Communication, 30-31, 69-86. 5 Following and Analyzing a Divinity God Speaks in Public, or Charismatic Prophecy from Intimacy to Politics Philippe Gonzalez Suddenly, the preacher interrupts his sermon as if something more urgent needed to be attended. The cleric, a short and corpulent man ies. According 1ow at a cross: road, *Time has come to take the cross and receive God's blessing.” ants are asked to breathe strongly to show that the Holy Spirit is present. Mo: them proceed, even if 2 person on my left looks un- is practice. Meanwhile the preacher summons an- ‘other man, Gilles, that I can‘ see from where I stand. Before praying for Gilles, the preacher declares: “God is telling you that this love He Your heart, He wants to make it grow. Pm giving you what God is giving me for you.” The preacher is joined by the person leading the worship service, 4 sharp layman well in his sixties wearing a marron chevrons jacket, ‘The layman staggers as if drunk, “intoxicated” by the Holy § Preacher starts to “speak in tongues” and, with his colleague--who, in the meantime, seems to have gotten a hold on himselé—both lay hands ‘There are many ways to describe a phenomenon from the point of of social sciences.” Sociologists deal with subjects, persons capabl eflexivity about their own practices i difficulty: how do our scientific descriptions relate to the cial actors’ perspective? The problem becomes even mote complex when ur task is to study religious practices where participants interact with ie unseen: for instance, God, angels or demons. How is it naccibla enaccount for these activities without taking for granted or converscly dis- carding the reality of such elusive beings? istic approach threatens to crush these fragile entities, a fra- both phenomenological and ontological. On the opp tic stance might grant them an existence that is too certain, ‘more affirmative than what the faithful assume on an ordi. nary basis. Indeed, both options, positivist or relativist share the same weakness: they try to dissolve the tension between a supernatural ontol= ogy and a more common one. The first option settles it in advance; the second refuses to argue about it. This amounts to discarding the fact that believers, especially in Western societies, live among secular and ist cultures and, consequently, strive to relate these diverse and ing perspectives about the world (Berger, 1967; Taylor, upon themselves to account for thes ts attempt to do the same drawing upon the re- sources of the social sciences? In this chapter, I try to walk the thin line between positivism and rela- sm, as I expose how Evangelicals (claim to) hear God talking to them, ‘use the methodological leverage offered by a relat without taking for geanted its ontology. My focus mn “proph- ecy,”* public utterances claiming to come directly from God. These ut- terances are common in Charismatic circles. These Christians indeed embrace a spirituality of “signs and wonders” asserting that God is ac- tive in the world and that He can be experienced: felt, heard and even or of a conversation to bestow on them an unexpected actuality (Boone, 1989; Gonzalez, 2009; Harding, 1987). But He is also able to speak loudly, in public, through “prophetic words” ot the voice of “prophets.” By carefully following these corporeal and enunciative traces, attempt to restitute how this evanescent being, God, becomes manifest for the believers and, potentially, for third parties. In order to best expose the different dimensions related to such an ethnography, my chapter is divided into three parts. The first part discusses how to follow and analyze a supernatural being. I start by addressing methodological, theoretical and normative moves made pos- sible by following such an entity. I then discuss specific issaes—notably ontological—posed by the fact that it is the Evangelical God that I try to shadow. The second part introduces dimensions of Charismatic prophecy—love, belief, power—through 2 discussion of two important authors who explore new ways to approach religious experience and its ontology, Bruno Latour and Tanya Luhrmann. I will rclate their anal- ysis to my fieldwork, since their stance is close to mine, pointing how Latour’s ontolog; ion overemphasizes performativity to the detri- ‘ment of referentiality and how Luhrmann eludes the political dimension = in Evangelical cligious experience. This c ion results from closely tracking the communicative acts thatthe faithful attribute to God during a worship service. The third part analyzes varieties of prophetic speech, with ateention to the continuum going from the manifestation of divine ‘my data delineate the local and glob: that I investigated participates. By tracking inspired utterances and pro- phetic figures, I show that the range of topics addressed by these di words can encompass the believer's intimacy as well as the (political) destiny of nations. How to Follow and Analyze a Supernatural Being? Phenomenon, I pay attention to the actors’ and third . The descriptions crafted through this stance allow me to dialogue with a community of inquirers and suggest insights into theoretical problems. These observations exceed a mere empiricism and raise normative questions about how, as a society, we value life together. Nonetheless, these general considerations regarding a method of. need to be specified in order to analyze a divinity that is bodiless: leads to the matter of referentiality, that is notably how the faithful at bute intentions and actions to their God. Following: Describing, Theorizing and Valuating a Social World My account of prophecy is empi It is empirical in that it tries to describe how Charismatics dras fact that God is present among them, directly and publicly communicating something about themselves or Himself, but also about the world. I will show that this divine communication ‘embraces levels going from the intimate (as was manifest with the proph- cies opening this chapter) to the political realm. My evidence comes mostly froma fieldwork that Iconducted between 2003 and 2012 in and around a Free Evangelical Church of Geneva, Switzerland, This Church participates in a transnational network of “apostles,” “prophets” and preachers known as the “third wave”—a Charismatic movement power- fully shaping Evangelicalism worldwide since the 1980s (Christerson & Flory, 2017; Gonzalez, 2008, 2014b). On a theoretical level, my account interacts with two contemporary authors who explore new ways to approach religious experience and its ontology. Bruno Latour is one of these authors. His sociology of sci- ences, and more specifically his principle of symmetry, but also the idea of following the actors and their networks (Latour, 1987, 2005a), was seminal in the French-speaking academic world: it opened the door to142. Philippe Gonzalez innovative inquiries on religious phenomena, for instance Albert Piette's fascinating use of methodological theism in his study of a Catholic par- ish (099), of Elisabeth Cl magistral anthropology of the Virgin apparitions in Medjugorje (2003). , Latour has also been pure I perspective on religion. “Angels become bad mes- sengers” when compared with scientific mediations was one of Latour’s (1990) first statements delineating his p ing that angels deliv form presence. Ever since, this author conti as a regime of speech and its related ontology (Latour, 2013a, 201 Chapter 11). Latour offers then a double perspective on the topic of reli- gion, the two versions being sometimes at odds: the first is methodolog- ‘Tanya Luhrmann is the other author religion is more empirical than Latour's: westigate the same phenomenon and an overlapping network of Charismatic actors, even if we draw different political consequences. Nevertheless, Luhrmann’s perspective has strong affinities with a attitude akin to a methodological theism that susp cal question and, in a Kantian move, refutes that (50 prove ot disprove the existence of God.” Her stance is empathic: “We want to understand how people their world hefore passing judgment on whether their interpret right or wrong. And so I will not presume to know ultimate reality.” But it retains a naturalist commitment tied to Luhrmann's emphasis on experimental psychology, as stated further on the same page: 1 believe that if God speaks, God's voice is heard through human minds constrained by their biology and shaped by their social com- munity, and I believe that as a psychologically trained anthropol- gist, I can say something about those constraints and their social shaping. (xxiv) Empicical and theoretical considerations lead me to methodology. My approach is semiotic and pragmatist. Its semiotic dimension has close parallels with an anthropological symmetry (Latous) or attitude (Luhr- mann). My first step is one of comprehension. It is not empathic, but phenomenological and hermeneutical. At this point, I am interested in describing the processes by which actors constitute the meaning, and the stability of their social world, In this I try to render Following and Analyzing a Divinity 143 ‘what ethnomethodology characterizes as the members’ point of view (Garfinkel & Sacks, 1970). Hermeneutics is especially relevant for this dof spirituality that operates ion between textual corpuses and the bodies of the faithful, lever can feel within the flesh. This going back and forth from the symbol of the text to the ineffable presence felt in the body bridges what Teall a semiotic arc (Gonzalez, My approach is also pragmatist and, in that sense, causal in three ways. perspective, but also the plurality of the social world. Here, my investigation follows the (some- times unintended) consequences of the actors’ actions on third parties; is allows me to take into account the standpoint of an indirectly af- ed and concerned public (Dewey, 1991), ofa spectator or a bystander (Lippmann, 1925/1993). This methodological move—rooted in the re percussions of action—exceeds the members’ point of view and unfolds inthe management or conflict over diverging perspectives and ontologies, (Gonzalez & Kaufmann, 2012) percussions of human ac sequences: my perspective then combines an anthropol experience with apolitical sociology in order to rail the Evangelical God beyond the boundaries ofthe religious community into the public sphere. Second, my method is also cau planation of the inves because it aims at producing an ex- cd social phenomena. My ethnography draws on the resourc ic induction (Katz, 2001, 2002, 2015) and abductive analysis (Tavory & Timmermans, 2014): I show the members point of view, and the counterpart of their act always already participates in the debate of a broader intel unity, ence my dialogue with Latour and Luhrmann. For causality is also a production of meaning “precisely ‘grounded? in theoretical debates -ommunity of inquiry” (Tavory & Timmermans, 2013, p. 709). following the consequences of. bystanders) as well as with the community offers insights into sormative questions regarding the kind of activities that promote and sustain a future community “without definite limits, and capable of a «finite increase of knowledge” (Peirce quoted in Aydin, 2008, p. 423). ‘Thus, following how the actors accomplish the social world raises ulti- ‘nately this question: is the kind of public life Evangelical believers pro- mote hospitable not only to their God and themselves, but also to others?®144 Philippe Gonzalez How to Shadow the Evangelical God? ‘After addressing following as a general methodology, let’s focus on the eing such as the Evangelical divinity does not have a body. He seems at least as by observing the material practices that perform relations between hu mans and nonhumans, and devising narrative forms able to account for this performance. In God’s case, as will be made clear by my descri ntanglement between human actors and objects is centr | artifact and the divine Word; the is can be moved by the action of the For the faithful, God is bodiless, bur not without intentions. He is en- dowed with a will. His presence and purposes are made manifest through the believers’ motions, their prophetic words or their Bible quotes. It is ‘of course not possible to literally follow this supernat done with workers in professional settings (Sachs, 1993) inces remains nonetheless possible. These utterances are not about what this supernatural entity could be (as found in ive philosophy or in theology); they are taken as Gods speech iressed to His Church and, possibly, society. ‘The variety of communicative acts happening between the supernat- ural entity and the believers ranges from bodily motions to inspired speech. This performativity needs to be grounded in a referentiality that allows the Evangelicals to perceive these diverse manifestations as em- anating from the same will. Paul Ricceur’s analysis (2008) helps under- stand this phenomenon: the philosopher notes that the mposed ofa wide variety of books (66 in the Protestant canon) written in differ- ent times and places, and using an impressive range of literary genres; nevertheless, the word “God” operates as a meta-character binding the different volumes into a single narrative Iwill contend that, on an extra-textual level, that is, in real life, “God” the same manner for Evangelicals. The word stands as the sin- attribute to human forgeries, or even to the devils deeds, extatic mani- festations seen by their Charismatic co-religionists as resulting from the work of the Holy Spirit.) Thus, my shadowing of a divine entity will take into account how actors interweave the performative and the referential dimensions in theis relationship to God, two central dimensions in my interaction with Bruno Latour and Tanya Luhrmann throughout part 2. Following and Analyzing a Divinity 145 Love, Belief and Power: Insights from Latour and Luhrmann discuss Latour’s (in fact, “Latour 2”) and Luhrmann's respective in relation to an ethnographic excerpt. This will show the rel- evance of their work, underscore similitudes and differences and raise some questions. The discussion will revolve around the more intimate tral s will empirically ground the theoretical discussion and open the way toa further understanding of prophesy Let's start with the frst partof the excerpt, which is taken from a Sun day worship service that followed the description opening this chapter. The chapel is packed with close to hundred and fifty people. We're ‘more than an hour into the service, approaching its end. Holy com- ‘munion has just been shared actoss the pews. The pianist, an elegant ‘man in his twenties wearing a thin moustache, resumes the praise. He is backed by a bassist, a drummer, and a chorister who, like the pianist, sings with a microphone. The musicians sound professional Together they produce a musical atmosphere that envelops and stirs the assembly. This worship er than the usual forty-minute moment that opens the Sunday service. It will last for half an hour. ‘The pianist plays “Shout to the Lord.” This praise song was com- posed by Hillsong, an Australian Church famous for its musical id translated into many languages, including French. The establish T want to praise | the wonders of Your mighty love | My com ny shelter | Tower of refuge and strength | Let every breath, a Tam | never cease to wo! The song is highly meditative. The participants remain seated as they go through the first part. Some sing with their eyes closed. ‘When the chorus comes, more powerful, most of the faithful, fol- owing the lead of their pastor, stand up and wave slowly their hands in the air, Shout to the Lord all the Earth, let us sing | Power and majes praise to the King | Mountains bow down and the seas will roar the sound of Your name II sing for joy at the work of Your hand | love You, forever I'll stand | Nothing compares to the146 Philippe Gonzalez ‘Ar the end of the song, as the musicians stretch the tune into a meditative background music, several people in the assembly pray spontaneously. A colored man in his fifties boldly invokes God with ‘strong African accent. Alluding ro a hymn sung a few minutes ago, he declares: “salvation is obtained through the Cross, and the blood of Christ washes all the sins.” A woman with long white hair, appar- tently in her seventies, gives thanks for “the communion between the saints.” A young woman, talking from the aisle where the teenagers "usually sit, quotes from memory a well-known excerpt from Revela tiom, the last book of the Bible: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.”? ‘The song, the atmosphere and the worshippers’ attitudes display an in- tense longing for the divine presence. The lyrics talk about love for God as if it were a relationship between lovers. Jesus, depicted in an inci- mate mode, appears as the ultimate object of passion: “forever V’'ll love ‘nothing compares to the promise I have in You.” An everlasting pledge of adoration akin to spousal vows. ‘As Percy (1997) noted, Charismatic worship is a “sweet capture” pos- sessing both erotic and eschatological overtones. Now, eschatology is about Parousia, the direct and long awaited encounter, at the end of times, with the returning Christ. This excerpt finishes preciscly with the Bible that is related to eschatology aphor for one’s heart—and letting know that he is willing to enter 0 life, make himself present. In fact, the young woman is not really “quot ing” Scriptuse, for, a she cites the verse, the text ceases to be a symbol of the past and becomes the medi merges with God’s voice, her “I” here He is, speaking publicly right now. f an actual presence. Her voice ides with His? And, suddenly, Love Talk Latour and Luhrmann stress the importance of divine presence and love talk, Luhrmann's descriptions are closer to mine, “Here in these songs,” she writes, ‘the remarkable God of this kind of church shines forth. Rarely do ‘you hear of his judgment; always you are aware of hi ever, docs a song suggest you fear his anger. He is a perso father, of course, but more remarkably, friend. Best friend. (2012, pp. 4-5} “The metanhar af the lovers i¢ a lanenase game central to Evangelical Following and Analyzing a Divinity 147 tropes. Most of their songs revolve around this image displaying an in- timate deity. Latour’s (2013a) use of the metaphor is somewhat different. He does not directly connect love talk to an empirical description, and thus to the actors’ categories, even though his language and allusions presuppose radition."" His his book on mation. “We might as well admit it straight away: there is no informa- tion in matters of religion, no maintenance of constants, no transfers of relationships intact throughout the stream of transformations” (p. 20). Love, on the opposite, when expressed in the right manner produces a change: the lover might manage to express the same love, not through rep- tition of the formula now, but through something quite different that bears no relationship of resemblance to the sentence he is being asked to recapture: a gesture, an act of kindness, a look, a joke, a quivering of the glottis. (...) No information is conveyed by the sentence and yer she, the woman who loves, feels transported, trans- formed, slightly shaken up, changed, rearranged, or not, or the op- posite, alienated, flattened, forgotten, mothballed, humiliated. (Latour, 2013a, p. 26) to Latour, belongs to the pure realm of performa- not descriptive, but travels time and space to pro- presence and transformation: “There are sentences, uttered every day, then, whose main object is not to map out references but which seek to produce something else entirely: the rear and the far, closeness or distance” {p. 26). Religious speech, just like talk between lovers, entails five felicity conditions. Words that “redress” must: (1) “be comprehensible”; (2) “be directed to the present situation (...) not the past”; (3) not “compromise between words of conversion and words of information, between creating closeness and secking the distant”; “have an effect, otherwise we say them falsely”; (5) reform “a unity, union or a people {in the lovers’ case, a micro-people)” What About Belief{s)? Latour and Luhrmann agree about presence and love (talk], but they are atodde when itcomes to belie. Ltoor sems preoccupied with sec religious speech from referentiality, because this confusion wit mation, and most of all with (the fantasy of a transparent) double-click