{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0242451967063129, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007319304666056725, 'mean_word_length': 4.942934782608695, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Catholic Pentecostalism: By René Laurentin

G. has extensive experience, at least as a consultant, and his comments are appropriately differentiated and perceptive. He urges the special responsibility of the churches in forming servant leaders and in providing an affirmative model of the institution as servant. The last part of his book includes a number of disparate pieces developing themes from the first two parts; the most interesting of these is a biographical sketch of Donald Cowling, president of Carleton College from 1909 to 1945. The problems that G. addresses are of considerable current interest, not least in the business world, as one can see from recent issues of the Harvard Business Review. His concern for shaping institutions to serve the needs of persons and for preserving creativity and quality against the pressures of bureaucratic mediocrity should be taken seriously, particularly by those who would regard his proposals as merely cosmetic improvements to capitalism and by those who would defend the cause of economic liberty without endorsing its abuses. For the problems that G. addresses will be with us as long as we live in a society of large institutions, and G. deals with them in a temperate and enlightening way. Unfortunately, the book is marred by a number of defects. Among the minor defects are his use of such opaque and eccentric expressions as "personeity" (8) and "chemic illusions" (54) and his moralistic and ahistorical criticisms of Scripture (84, 247). There are two major defects. First, the book is highly repetitive and much too long. There is considerable overlap among the extended arguments in the first three chapters, its application to types of institutions, and the collected papers of the last part. Second, G. neglects sources of social conflict that are not internal to the institutions for which he is prescribing, e.g., racism, cultural and ideological diversity, unequal distribution of resources and goods. This does not invalidate G.'s suggestions for these institutions; it does mean that his proposed changes are not likely to have the sweeping and unambiguously beneficial results he seems to expect.