theologies and cultures Vol. V. No. 2, December 2008
Revisiting Mission From the Colonized Land
Contents
Editorial In Churches Construction of ‘Saviour’, Mission Stops 5
1. Revisiting History Conformity and Contestation: An Asian Theological Appraisal of Edinburgh 12
D. Preman Niles Doing Mission from the Underside -- Mission Beyond Edinburgh 1910: Towards a Critical Asian Perspective Huang Po Ho 37
II. Towards New Paradigms THE Mission of Jesus is Love of all Living beings for The Fullness of Life
Kim Yong- Bock 62 Towards a New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission Hope S. Antone 87
The Church is God’s Partner In Re-creation Choan-seng Song 105
III. Critical Enquiry of Praxis Relativism and Difference: Toward a Genuine Pluralism -The Multi-Religious Situation in Asia and Its Challenges to the Mission- Wang Shik Jang 128
Some Reflections on Tourist Evangelism in Tropical Africa J.N.K. Mugambi 151
Towards a Mission-Oriented Theological Education Chen Nan-Jou 181
theologies and cultures, Vol.V, No 2
December 2008, pp. 5~11
Editorial
In Church’s Construction of “Saviour”
Mission Stops
“Magi from the East came…asking,
“Where is the child who has been
born king of the Jews?”
… And having been warned in a dream
not to return to Herod,
they left for their own country by another road.”
(Matthew 2. 1-12)
While celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of the founding
of Christian Conference of Asia, Urban Rural Mission initiated a
study of mission with the caption ‘rerouting mission.’ The
image of rerouting has been taken from the birth narrative found
in the Gospel of Mathew which depicts an “Eastern” response to
the encounter with baby Jesus. Although the Magi from the East
were mandated to return to the Monarch, the “face-to-face
relation” with the vision of the incarnated truth encouraged them
to locate a new route by entirely abandoning a route that, with
all probability, would offer them material and political rewards.
The mystery of truth that they encountered and the
commitment towards it empowered the Magi to not only reject
6 theologies and cultures
the monarchic patronage, but to subvert the political designs of
the empire that would destroy the unraveling of truth. This
commitment to the mystery of truth and its practice of taking a
different route is a foundation for the concept of mission.
The political road that the Magi traveled is justified in
the life and death of Jesus. The death of Jesus as a convict on the
Cross was an empirical outcome of announcing Basileia tou
Theou as a counter project to the Roman Empire. Preman Niles
reminds through these pages that the closest translation of
Basileia tou Theou, is “Empire of God” rather than ‘Kingdom of
God’ [page 15]. The least and the marginalized occupies a
respectable space in the Empire of God, where the poor come to
a new realization that they are not alienated from God, but on
the contrary, are blessed; prisoners under the weight of
economic and political power experience freedom and liberation
and peacemakers are honoured. In the Empire of God, the
prevalent understanding that wealth and power are concrete
manifestations of divine blessing while poverty and
marginalization are the results of sin is reversed. Because of the
incompatibility between the pursuit of mammon and the love of
God, in the new Empire of God the proximity to wealth is
counted as an epitome of one’s distance from God. Change of
the social location of the poor involves a radical remapping of
the social distribution of power relations of the given order, and
that threat lead Jesus to the cross. A radical renunciation of
power for the free gift of the Love of God shattered the
prevailing power structures who claimed legitimacy for their
position by using the name of God. Basileia tou Theou is a
celebration of the powerless - women, lepers, blind, and
persecuted - on the assurance of the fullness of life against the
empire of hegemonic power - fear, slavery, and cruelty -
objectified through the presence of Roman Empire.
These pronouncements were not empty ideological
rhetoric in the gospels, instead, they assumed empirical
explanations in the table fellowship that Jesus had with the tax
collectors, sinners, and the vulnerable in Roman and Jewish
Editorial 7
social structure. The Empire of God reifies a reconciled society
where hierarchies based on power, wealth, gender, social class,
or religious and spiritual authority has no place. Wealth and
brute power-centered soteriology of the Roman Empire and
social power-centered Jewish establishments are inimical to the
values of the Empire of God to which Jesus had become a living
witness.
In the Cross of Calvary, the Roman Empire and its
cohorts including Herod and the Jewish religious establishment
were defeated. Rome failed to contain the subversive character
of the Empire of God converting itself as a radical hope among
the poor and the wretched of the earth.
The last commission in Mathew [Mt. 28: 16-20], given at
the “mountain” of Galilee, was a determined call to take the
revolutionary values of the Empire of God against all empires of
power, wealth, and religious hypocrisy. The appeal to the
disciples to “therefore go” is certainly not a statement of
discontinuity from what Jesus stood for and became a martyr (as
the missionary movement would like to believe), but was an
extension of what Jesus inaugurated through the sermon on the
mount [Niles, p. 16].
The early Church was a witness to this commission, and
they rejected the soteriology of wealth and power (Acts. 3.6) by
creating “communities of equals” (Acts 2:44-47)
However, this vision of Jesus encountered by the Magi
and the early church was defeated when Constantine claimed
leadership of the church and converted Christianity as a state
religion. The defeat that Herod and the Roman Empire
swallowed in the cross of Calvary was reversed through the so-
called conversion of Constantine into Christianity. Christianity
thus was redefined as “Constantinianism”.1
Since then, the
1 The term Constantinianism is used to denote the faith principle/ ideology of
the church since the time of Constantine. In the emperor Constantine, the
Church found the promise of God and they articulated the optimism that
“everything that people can ask of God has already been obtained for the
8 theologies and cultures
Church hierarchy has found that cohabitation with the Empire is
an empirical necessity for the establishment of Church. The
concept of mission in the church was sorely defined within this
newfound wisdom of “Constantinianism”.
Eighteenth and nineteenth century mission activities
reiterate the ideology of “Constantinianism” as opposed to the
principles of truth located by the Magi and the early church in
their encounter with Jesus. It is no secret that missionary
movements during these expansionist periods were a colonial
project with the aim of providing theological legitimation to the
political and economic expansion of Western empire. One of
the best examples is the Commission report of the World
Missionary Conference that met in Edinburgh (1910), which
acknowledged without any remorse the benefit of the Church for
being part of the colonial establishment. The report of
Commission 1 cited:
One of the most significant and hopeful facts with
reference to world evangelization is that the vast
majority of the people of the non-Christian nations and
races are under the sway, either of Christian
governments or of those not antagonistic to Christian
missions. This should greatly facilitate the carrying out
of a comprehensive campaign to make Christ known.2
The dominant discourse in the Missionary Movement
was proud of the political domination the west had over the
Asian and African nations, and perceived it as a providence of
God for the extension of their “Missiondom”. The Ecumenical
Missionary Conference held in New York, 1900, observed that
“the political and commercial expansion and occupation of
world by the empire.” See Chris J. Bota, “Extinction of the Church in North
Africa.” Journal of Theology for South Africa, (57 (1986) pp. 24-31 2 World Missionary Conference, 1910, report of Commission I, Carrying the
Gospel to all the Non-Christian World (Edinburgh: Oliphant, Anderson &
Ferrier) p. 6
Editorial 9
distant land by Europe and America had directed the thoughts of
Christendom to distant parts of the earth.”3
The fact that they are in reality an extension of the
colonial project incapacitated the mission movements to become
a living witness to the Empire of love and liberation that Jesus
had inaugurated.
Being deprived of the ability to be a proponent of the
Empire of God, missionary movements were in dire need to
locate legitimate theories to justify their intervention in the
colonies along with the European Empires; the result was the
construction of the truncated missionary geography which has
become an ideological weapon for mission movements since
then. This missionary geography however, legitimized the
support of the missionaries towards the empires of power. For
less militant supporters of the British Empire, the new
geography provided the solace to justify their silence towards
the blatant exploitation of the natives by the powers of the
Empire. The construction of missionary geography, in reality,
amounted to a strategic rejection of the empires of love and
reconciliation.4
The basic tenant of missionary geography is the bi-polar
world-view which assumed the existence of two parallel and
mutually exclusive worlds5
: the Christian world [meaning
Constantinian/European empires of power] and the non-
Christian world. Human salvation is possible only through the
Christian world; therefore, the invitation to the space of the
Christian world assumed the kernel of mission. They propagated
the idea that everything connected to the Christian world, which
in reality is the Empire of power, is sublime (or as Alexander
Duff claimed, “Pure and beneficent”) while the world outside
3 Ecumenical Missionary Conference: New York, 1900. Report.. p.10
4 When Bishop V.S. Azariah pleads “Give us friends, he alluded to the
dichotomy between the Empire of power and the Empire of Love. 5 Kosuke Koyama Lecture given at “Towards 2010” University of Edinburgh,
April 2002. www.towards2010.org.uk
10 theologies and cultures
the empire is defined as a reality where “life dies and death
lives.” 6
There were two immediate ramifications to this
newfound mission theory based on the bi-polar geography. First
is the radical rejection of the values of the Empire of God and
the witness of the “communities of equals” that the early church
inherited from the vision of Jesus. Faith praxis oriented by the
values of the “communities of equals’ were not only
discouraged within the practice of mission but were defeated by
equating them to heresy.7
Secondly, the presumptions of missionary geography
lead the church to claim an “ownership” of the absolute
knowledge of God. Their construction of the concept of
“Savior” was presented as an ultimate revelation of God, and
they used a perverted memory of the cross to justify their claim.
The success of mission was viewed as its ability and conviction
to present the certainty of truth over and against all
uncertainties8 which are part of other religious traditions.
But in reality, the claim of absolute truth rejected the
mystery of God; In other words, in church’s appropriation of
Jesus, God’s mystery ceases to be a reality. God stopped.9
Biblical literature presents God’s mystery as an ongoing
revelation in response to the empirical realities of the pain and
suffering of the people. In the context of pathos, the mystery of
6 Alexander Duff’s speech at the General assembly in Scotland in 1835,
quoted by T. V. Philip Edinburgh to Salvador (Delhi: ISPCK, 1999), p170 7 Christian identity as an anti-socialist front emanate from this change of
orientation. 8 Hendrik Kraemer, the most vocal propagandist of neo-orthodoxy in mission
discourse, found that the fundamental problem for the people is the complete
lack of absolutes in their lives. In the absence of absolutes, they surrender to
relativism, and that leads them to a fundamental and radical uncertainty about
the meaning of life. Therefore, providing an absolute is a mandate of mission,
and Kraemer argued that this religious absolute is given only through the
Christian gospel, because it is the work of God. See. H. Kraemer. The
Christian Message in a Non-Christian World, (London: The Edinburgh
House Press, 1938) p.6 9 Rev. M.J. Joseph, Christmas message, 2008
Editorial 11
God offered subversive surprises to people. But for any seat of
power, the subversive character of God’s mystery is a threat. To
maintain power, it is wise for those who occupy power to avoid
any uncertainties involved in an unfolding mystery. Uncertainty
is often equated to a disorderly situation which is costly for the
seat of power. Therefore, it is no wonder that the claims of
absolute knowledge of God become more appealing to the
church hierarchy rather than preaching about God’s mystery
which is unfathomable for human consciousness. Moreover,
absolute knowledge provides possibility to control the world
because those who control absolute knowledge are capable of
exercising absolute power
The danger of offering absolute truth by rejecting the
mystery is that mission stops, since mission is the participation
of creation in God’s mystery. Thus in Constantinianism,
euphemized as Christianity, the mission of God has stopped.
Papers presented in this volume have an objective to
revisit the concept and practice of mission. Forthcoming
centenary celebration of the World Missionary Conference met
in Edinburgh in 1910 invites Churches and Christian groups
around the world to redefine the concept and practice of mission.
This volume is a humble contribution towards that goal.
The “Protection of life” regulated the decision of the
Magi. Life is not an absolute principle, but a mystery
challenging the attempts of the empire to domesticate and to
convert it into objects in service of power.
mp.
theologies and cultures, Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 12-36
Conformity and Contestation:
An Asian Theological Appraisal of
Edinburgh
D. Preman Niles1
In the year 2010 there is to be a meeting of Christian
leaders in Edinburgh to revisit the mission conference that took
place there in March 1910. Though the 1910 conference did not
expressly call itself an ecumenical gathering, (the idea that it
should be called so seems to have been mooted at one of the
preparatory meetings but was later dropped), it nevertheless
prompted the forming of the ecumenical movement as we know
it today. Three major movements came out of that conference.
These were the movement for World Mission, the Life and
Work Movement and the Faith and Order Movement. These
1 Prof. Dr. D Preman Niles, a well known ecumenical leader and an Old
Testament scholar is a former General Secretary of the Council for World
Mission in London. He has been part-time Secretary for Christian Education
and Lay Training, EACC, Dean at the Theological College of Sri Lanka,
Pilimatalawa, an Executive Secretary for the Christian Conference of Asia
and Director for Justice Peace and Integrity of Creation of the World Council
of Churches.
Conformity and Contestation 13
three movements with later elaborations came together to form
the World Council of Churches.
As we shall see later, Asian participants at the 1910
world mission conference were heavily indebted to discussions
and theological trends in the YMCAs, YWCAs and the Student
Christian Movements of Asia in their time. In turn Edinburgh
1910 led to the later formation of the ecumenical movement in
Asia, especially the East Asia Christian Conference, which was
renamed the Christian Conference of Asia (CCA). However, on
the global ecumenical scene, while considerable attention has
been paid to developments from European and American
perspectives in the ecumenical movement, not much has been
done with Asian theological and ecumenical perspectives voiced
at the 1910 Edinburgh conference.
The purpose of this essay is to revisit Asian contributions
at the Edinburgh conference and surface them, so that they are
not lost in the welter of Western ecumenical and theological
arguments and explorations at the 2010 ‘reunion’. Up to now, if
I am not totally mistaken, discussions on matters concerning
mission and unity have largely been the domain of Christian
World Communions (i.e. confessional or denominational
organizations). These place the primary stress on Confessional
Christian traditions and dogma and adversely respond to the
matter of religious plurality. In presenting an Asian ecumenical
perspective, my hope is that it would encourage other
ecumenical regional perspectives to enter the debate. It is about
time the arena changed and regional ecumenical bodies took the
initiative placing the emphasis not simply on inherited Christian
traditions but rather on contextual theological articulations of
the Christian faith.
I have chosen ‘conformity and contestation’ as an entry
into the discussion. This choice requires some explanation.
At a meeting of the Commission on Theological
Concerns of the CCA, the late Professor Feliciano Cariño said,
‘Mission is what happens when the church meets the world.’
Shorn of any theological assumption, this description places the
14 theologies and cultures
emphasis on history and the social and political context in which
the church is placed at any time. I have expanded his statement
to describe mission as what happens at the places where the
church meets the world, the world challenges the church, and
the church responds creatively without simply reacting
defensively.
Implied in this statement is a rhythm of conformity and
contestation. On the one hand, the church accepts the fact that it
belongs to a specific context and identifies with that context.
Despite its negative connotations, I have chosen the term
‘conformity’ to express this fact but given it a positive twist. On
the other, the church also contests those aspects in the context
that attempt to circumscribe it and which it views as inimical to
the message of the gospel. When conformity loses the critical
dimension implicit in contestation it can be no more than
conformism. When contestation is bereft of a contextual base, it
becomes an alien voice that carries little or no conviction.
Conformity and contestation need to relate to each other in
creative tension.
Conformity and contestation should not be pressed as a
model or paradigm for understanding mission. Most times it is a
response to a world situation. Sometimes it is even a response to
a dominant theological or ecclesiastical position that is
perceived as antithetical to the Christian faith. This was the case
during the Reformation. Conformity and contestation should
rather be used as a key for interpretation, a heuristic tool, to set
out the theology that both informs mission and arises from
mission. The understanding of mission as both conformity and
contestation draws attention to the various ways in which Jesus
and those who followed him through the centuries construed
their role in expressing God’s will, i.e. God’s relationship with
the world, in changing historical situations.
Since we are implying that the rhythm of conformity and
contestation is a way of understanding Christian mission as a
whole, first, it would be worth culling out from mission history
episodes where this rhythm is particularly evident before,
Conformity and Contestation 15
second, moving to an examination of Asian contributions at
Edinburgh 1910. It would also show that this rhythm is not
peculiar or exclusive to Asian understandings of mission.
I. Conformity and Contestation in Mission History The purpose of this enquiry into various episodes in
mission history is to show that, despite theological attempts to
define what is and is not mission, historical circumstances have
conditioned understandings and practices of mission, which
have invariably been responses to the reality of ‘empire’.
The mission of Jesus was circumscribed in large measure
to the people and land of Israel. ‘The lost sheep of the house of
Israel’ was the target group (cf. Mt. 10:6; 15:24). Conformity
lay in this self-limitation (cf. Mk 7:27). In expressing his
mission to this group, Jesus chose a political concept expressed
in Greek as Basileia tou Theou, which brings out the dimension
of contestation. It is best to translate this Greek phrase as ‘the
Empire of God’ rather than ‘the Kingdom of God’, which the
King James Version uses reflecting British Kingship tradition. It
has since been followed by other versions and translations.
Those who heard Jesus, both friend and foe alike, would have
heard it as a direct challenge to the Empire of Caesar. It was
posed as an alternative in which those who were discards in the
Empire of Rome, namely, those who carried no economic
weight and therefore considered expendable, would find value in
the empire that Jesus proclaimed.2 In it ‘the least’ would be first.
For ‘the least’ this would be good news.
In making the least the central subjects of the Empire of
God, Jesus inverted and challenged the power and the values of
the Roman Empire. His proclamation of the Empire of God
would also have been viewed as an attempt to destabilise the
Peace of Rome (Pax Romana) through which Rome controlled a
vast territory. In the eyes of Rome, this was sedition. He was
2 For a fuller discussion of this point see Stephen J. Patterson, The God of
Jesus: The Historical Jesus and the Search for Meaning, (Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1998), 60-68.
16 theologies and cultures
crucified. This was a brutal form of Roman execution that was
reserved for common criminals and the political enemies of
Rome who were also considered criminals.
Hence, once we get behind all the theological arguments
that have emerged over the last two millennia to explain why
and how Jesus died for our sins, we are left with the troubling
fact that we worship as God a convict. Jesus was not killed
because of a religious offence, though the religious authorities
of his time seem to have played a role. Rome executed him.
After his resurrection, the theatre for mission broadened
from Israel to the world of nations. The commissions to mission
in Matthew and in Luke carry different emphases but have
certain commonalities.
Mathew, following Mark, has the Risen One going
before his disciples to Galilee. The commission is given on a
mountain just as the deepened interpretation of the law (chapters
5 to 7) is given on a mountain. The two are connected.
The sermon on the mountain begins with a set of
blessings of which the first four (5:3-6) are addressed to those
who are seeking some form of redress. They receive the
assurance (blessing) that they will find fulfilment in the Empire
of God. The next four (5:7-10) are addressed to those who
practise the values of God’s Empire. The disciples who are
called upon to practise the values of the Empire of God are
warned that they will be persecuted and accused falsely because
they are followers of Jesus (5:11f.). The balance of the sermon
expands on the law as addressed to these two target groups. The
note of conformity is struck with the words, ‘Do not think that I
have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to
abolish but to fulfil’ (5:17); and the note of contestation is struck
with the words that follow: ‘Unless your righteousness exceeds
that of the scribes and Pharisees you will never enter the Empire
of Heaven’ (5:20).
The commission in Matthew (28:18-20) is the climax to
his gospel account. It is a comprehensive conclusion in which
Conformity and Contestation 17
the word ‘all’ is repeated. The authority of the Risen One is over
the entire (‘all’) universe, which is the basis of the commission,
‘Therefore, Go!’ The good news is intended for all nations and
thus also includes Israel. Make disciples of them, baptize them,
and teach them to obey everything that Jesus has taught the
disciples. In a word, it is to do God’s will as set out particularly
in the sermon on the mountain and the prayer that Jesus taught
his disciples. (‘Your will be done’ is present only in Matthew’s
version and is not in Luke’s version.) Doing God’s will carries
the note of contestation which is enjoined on all nations.
It is doubtful that Matthew envisages a world mission.
The command simply says, ‘Therefore go!’ It is more likely that
writing to a number of Jewish Christian house groups, Matthew
was urging them to spread the good news of the Empire of God
and its demands (doing God’s will) to their neighbours – both to
Jews and to the Gentiles whom they would normally shun.
Unlike Mark and Matthew, Luke has the Risen One
appearing in Jerusalem (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4); and he gives his
commission to mission (Acts 1:7f.) there. When the followers of
Jesus receive the Holy Spirit they will receive power and they
will be his witnesses ‘in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria and
to the end of the earth’.
For Luke space is important. Jesus begins his ministry in
Galilee and sets off for Jerusalem. Though chapter and verse
divisions are not from Luke but were introduced later, the
importance of space for Luke is noticeable when we see that he
has Jesus setting off for Jerusalem in chapter 9 verse 51 but does
not get him there till chapter 19 verse 41 - almost ten chapters
out of 24! On the way from Galilee to Jerusalem many things
happen; and much teaching takes place to demonstrate the
authority of Jesus as the one who proclaims the Empire of God.
Once in Jerusalem, there is no back-tracking to Galilee. From
Jerusalem the mission moves through much space to end in
Rome with Paul’s arrival there. Paul preaches in Rome
proclaiming the Empire of God and the Risen One, ‘the Lord
Jesus Christ’, who embodied and proclaimed the Empire of
18 theologies and cultures
God.3 Paul lived and preached there for two whole years and
welcomed all who came to him. For Luke, the gospel message
moves from Jerusalem to Rome – from a regional political
power centre where Jesus was assassinated to the very centre of
political power itself.
Though it has no commission to mission as such, Mark’s
gospel account, which preceded and influenced both Matthew
and Luke, provides the span within which the two commissions
are to be understood. Mark places the statement of Jesus that
‘the gospel must first be proclaimed to all nations’ (13:10)
within a narration of the apocalypse (13:3-37). This
proclamation must take place before the End comes. The forum
for the proclamation is a conflict situation where the followers
of Jesus will be put on trial (13:9-11; cf. Matthew 5:11). They
are told that they are not to worry about what they would have to
say in that situation ‘for it is not you who speak, but the Holy
Spirit’. Luke picks up on this emphasis when he speaks of the
disciples receiving power when they receive the Holy Spirit. In
brief, the conflict between the Empire of God and the power
centres of this world and age will continue with the disciples till
the end of the age. Over against the power of the political and
religious centres of the world would be the power of the Holy
Spirit.
3 For a more challenging understanding of the mission of Paul see John
Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed, In Search of Paul: How Jesus’
Apostle Opposed Rome’s Empire with God’s Kingdom, A New Vision of
Paul’s Words & World, (HarperSanFrancisco, 2004). For a convenient
understanding of the basic theme of the book, see the ‘Prologue’ (1-12) with
the striking summation of Paul’s mission vis-à-vis the Roman Empire: ‘With
dusty tired much travelled Paul came Rome’s most dangerous opponent, not
legions but ideas, not an alternative force but an alternative faith. Paul too
proclaimed one was Divine, Son of God, God and God from God. But Paul’s
new divinity was Christ, not Caesar. His was a radically divergent but equally
global theology.’ (9f.) See also the essays in Part III of Paul and Empire:
Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society, edited by Richard A.
Horsley, (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1997).
Conformity and Contestation 19
Within an apocalyptic framework and the
martyriological traditions that were rife at that time, the
crucifixion of Jesus would be understood as the unjust death of a
righteous person.4 The resurrection of Jesus would be viewed as
the reversal of his condemnation as a criminal; and would be
understood as the first fruits, the sure evidence, of the
resurrection of the righteous to eternal life and the consignment
of the wicked to eternal damnation. The churches, as the body of
Christ, were the gathering of the righteous or the saints. It is this
apocalyptic world-view that gave a sense of urgency to the
mission of the early church. ‘Come, Lord Jesus!’ was both
prayer and hope at a difficult time when the world was under the
sway of the Evil One embodied in a cruel empire that was hard
on the ‘expendables’, i.e. those who were of no economic worth
to the empire of this world.
With Constantine the situation changed drastically. From
being the terrified objects of the empire, Christians became the
accepted subjects of the empire. At this stage, Christianity
changed its character from being the way of Jesus, whose
followers were called ‘the People of the Way’, to become the
religion of the state. In becoming the religion of the Roman
Empire there was a clear ideological shift. Metaphorically
speaking, the thorn-crowned Jesus was replaced with a gold-
crowned Christ. Luke’s expectation came to fruition. However,
while Rome was converted it was not transformed. The power of
the empire remained. Conformity eclipsed contestation.
After the Byzantine Empire built by Constantine fell and
the authority of the emperor disappeared, the Bishop of Rome as
the Pope took on monarchical responsibilities as well. It was a
situation that lasted for some 12 centuries. It was a period of
mission through conquest with the intention of establishing and
extending Christendom as a Christian empire.
The Reformation broke ranks in a massive way with this
empire, and contestation became the hall-mark of this period.
4 See Stephen J. Patterson, Beyond the Passion: Rethinking the Death and
Life of Jesus, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 39-68.
20 theologies and cultures
Actually, the Reformation was not really concerned with the
mission of the church. The Reformers were concerned with two
other important tasks that went hand in hand. The first task was
to reform the church, because the Reformers were convinced
that under papal authority the church had become corrupt. The
second task for the Reformers was to capture the political
allegiance of the nation states in Europe. Their political and
therefore religious targets were, by and large, ‘princes’ rather
than ‘people’. The Reformation was a revolt against both the
political authority and the teaching authority of Rome. Reform
rather than mission was the concern of the Reformers.
The Reformation seems not to have touched the ordinary
people in any significant way. A substantial change in
perspective came especially with the Pietistic Movement in
Germany and the Evangelical Awakening in Britain initiated by
John and Charles Wesley and George Whitefield. Intrinsic to the
Evangelical Awakening was the affirmation of the worth of each
person in the eyes of God. The gospel reached the masses.
The next important period in mission history appeared
with the emergence of British missionary societies which came
after Moravian missions. William Carey founded the Baptist
Missionary Society in 1792, and the ‘Dissenters who practise
Infant Baptism’ founded in 1795 the Missionary Society later to
be called the London Missionary Society (LMS). These
missionary societies prompted and inspired the formation of
other missionary societies. At that time, most church leaders
following Reformation thinking were not interested in mission.
It was in the face of the reluctance of the institutional churches
to engage in mission that Carey followed by others used
Matthew 28:18-20 and conflated it with Acts 1:8 and Mark
16:15 to argue for world mission as an inalienable aspect of
obedience to the Risen Lord.
The early period of the modern Protestant missionary
movement from 1792 to about 1830 is important for two main
reasons that express the dimension of contestation.
Conformity and Contestation 21
One was the extension of the message of the Evangelical
Awakening that stressed the worth of all people, not just
Europeans, in God’s eyes. They attempted to finish what they
perceived as the unfinished task of the early church.
The second reason was the extension of the political
influence of the French Revolution with its message of liberty,
equality and fraternity. While Church of England prelates were
damning the French Revolution, Carey spoke of the French
Revolution as ‘God's answer to the recent concerted praying of
his people’. He then went on to describe it as a preparation for
the reception of the Gospel: ‘a glorious door opened, and likely
to be opened much wider, for the gospel, by the spread of civil
and religious liberty, and by the diminution of Papal power’.5
These missionaries carried their class orientation into
their mission so that they were evangelists and social reformers
at the same time. In a new way, the gospel as good news to the
expendables reappeared in their mission work.
After about 1830 a new group of English speaking
missionaries came with a different class orientation. These
missionaries encouraged local Christians to stay clear of politics
and not identify with the nationalist aspirations of their people.
In a strange way the identification with empire that belonged to
the period of Constantine reappeared. The Empire of God in
some ways coalesced with the colonial empire and was
depoliticised, so that it ceased to be a challenge within history
and politics. It no longer functioned as an alternative reality of
hope and life in the here and now for those on the margins of
society. In other words, the challenge of the Empire of God was
removed from the arena of politics and the realm of history, and
placed in an otherworldly location, namely, heaven. Again,
conformity eclipsed contestation.
II. Asian Contributions at the 1910 Mission Conference
5 For a convenient description of the period of the early British missionaries,
see T.V. Philip, Reflections on Christian Mission in Asia: William Carey
Lectures and Other Essays, (Delhi: ISPCK/CSS, 2000), 1-42.
22 theologies and cultures
The conference at Edinburgh in 1910 took place, at least
from an Asian perspective, at the cusp of colonial empires
having to contend with and finally give way to the aspirations
for independence of colonised nations. The reality of empire
was being challenged on the political front, which had a bearing
on Asian contributions at the conference.6
For the missionaries, however, the purpose of the conference
was to bring together the work of the various Western
missionary movements that began in the 18th
and 19th
centuries
and to set out a basis and plan for mission to the so-called ‘non-
Christian lands’. Missionaries working in these lands
represented the so-called ‘mission field’. It is interesting that
while there were some one thousand two hundred Westerners
representing some 159 missionary societies there were just 17
non-Westerners, most if not all of them Asians, representing the
‘non-Christian lands’ which were the objects of mission!7
Though they were guests of their respective missionary
societies, several of them broke ranks to argue that one could
not conceive of Christian mission in Asia without taking into
account Asian realities such as the aspirations of the churches in
their lands and the feelings, thinking and culture of their people.
This conference provided a forum for the emergence of Asian
Christian thought, which on the one hand accepted many of the
theological assumptions of the missionaries but on the other
challenged their parochial perceptions which confused the
gospel of Jesus with Western culture. At that conference Asian
Christians also exposed the colonial mind-set of Western
missionaries. What we will notice is the rhythm of conformity
and contestation in what they had to say.
6 See Hans Ruedi-Weber, ‘The Church in revolutionary Asia,’ in Asia and the
Ecumenical Movement 1895-1961, (London: SCM Press, 1966), 30, for this
judgment. 7 For a compact description of Edinburgh 1910, see Hans-Ruedi Weber, Asia
and the Ecumenical Movement, 115-142.
Conformity and Contestation 23
Before moving to that contribution to Asian Christian
thought, it would be helpful to isolate the problem that was
being encountered. Lesslie Newbigin, who came to India much
later as a missionary, detected and surfaced the cultural
component of this problem:
The gospel comes to the Hindu embodied in the form
given to it by the culture of the missionary. As second
and third and later generation Christians make their own
explorations of the scriptures, they will begin to test the
Christianity of the missions in the light of their own
reading of the scripture. So the missionary, if he is at all
awake, finds himself as I did in a new situation. He
becomes, as a bearer of the gospel, a critic of his own
culture. He finds there the Archimedean point. He sees
his own culture with the Christian eyes of a foreigner
and the foreigner can see what the native cannot see.8
However, more than culture was involved. In his classic, Asia
and Western Dominance, K.M. Panikkar drew attention to the
religious and political component in Western missions. After a
historical sketch of Western missions in various Asian countries
in the post Vasco da Gama period showing the repeated failure
of missionary endeavours, he wrote:
The success of the missions need not have been so
meagre but for certain factors which may be discussed
now. In the first place, the missionary brought with him
an attitude of moral superiority and a belief in his own
exclusive righteousness. The doctrine of the monopoly
of truth and revelation…is alien to the Hindu and
Buddhist mind. To them the claim of any sect that it
alone possesses the truth and others shall be
‘condemned’ has always seemed unreasonable. Secondly,
8 Lesslie Newbigin, A Word in Season: Perspectives on Christian World
Missions, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1994), 68.
24 theologies and cultures
the association of Christian missionary work with
aggressive imperialism introduced political
complications. National sentiment could not fail to look
upon missionary activity as inimical to the country’s
interests. That diplomatic pressure, extra-territoriality
and sometimes support of gun-boats had been resorted to
in the interests of foreign missionaries could not be
easily forgotten.9
Though their comprehension of this problem may have been
inchoate, the responses of the Asians at the 1910 Edinburgh
mission conference showed that they experienced this problem
in their own lands.
While the antecedents of the Edinburgh mission
conference were in a series of regional conferences of
missionaries (some Asians attended the regional conferences
held in Asia as guests), the actual antecedents for the Asians
who participated at the Edinburgh conference lay elsewhere.
One was their membership in local student YMCAs
which later came together to form the World Student Christian
Federation (WSCF). In these associations, relationships between
them and persons from the West were more egalitarian. This
was absent in the relationship between them and Western
missionaries in their churches. They also held positions of
leadership in the local YMCAs and SCMs as well as in the
World Student Christian Federation. Missionaries denied them
positions of leadership in their own churches.
The second was the fact that many of them were
missionaries in their own right, and so could speak with first-
hand knowledge of what it means to be a missionary in their
own lands. A combination of these two experiences exposed
them to the nationalist aspirations of their people for freedom,
which also influenced their thinking.
9 K.M. Panikkar, Asia and Western Dominance: A Comparative Study of the
European Impact on Asia, from Vasco da Gama to the mid-twentieth century,
(London: George Allen & Unwin, 1969), 297.
Conformity and Contestation 25
At world conferences of the WSCF, Asians, both men
and women, enjoyed equal participation with those from the
West. Of particular importance in this regard was the WSCF
conference at Tokyo in 1907, which informed many of the
positions Asians took at the Edinburgh Conference that followed.
V.S. Azariah, from India, spoke at the Tokyo WSCF
conference on the need for indigenous missionaries. He was a
member of the Indian Missionary Society of Tinnevelly
(founded in 1903) and the National Missionary Society of India
(founded in 1905). To the shock of many of his colleagues,
Azariah had gone as a missionary to Dornakal, which the local
YMCA secretary, Sherwood Eddy from the USA, described
with some exaggeration as the place where ‘the most degraded,
drunken, carrion eating devil worshippers’ lived.10
In fact,
Sherwood Eddy felt that he would never see Azariah alive again.
It is the direct experience of being a missionary in his own land
that prompted Azariah to state at the April 1907 Tokyo WSCF
conference:
No country can be fully evangelized except by its own
sons. The fifty millions of Japan, the four hundred
millions of China and the three hundred millions of India
can only be fully evangelized by the sons of Japan,
China and India.11
While reflecting on his own vocation and experience, he could
not have failed but to recognize that at the conference there were
present Christian students from China and the samurai converts
from Japan, some of whom attended the later Edinburgh
conference, who were engaged in indigenous missionary
movements.
Indigenous Asian evangelistic undertakings were
concerned not simply with the conversion of people to the
Christian faith but also with their betterment as was evident in
10
Hans Ruedi-Weber, Asia and the Ecumenical Movement, 76. 11
WSCF Tokyo 1907, 124.
26 theologies and cultures
Azariah going to a place such as Dornakal. To use a later
expression: ‘evangelization also implied humanization’. This
was part of the Asian Christian consciousness of being sent as
missionaries to their own lands.
Christianization did not mean the wholesale rejection of
the Asian heritage. Of particular note in this connection was the
speech of T. Miyagawa, a delegate from Japan at the 1907
Tokyo WSCF Conference. After urging those present at the
conference to earnestly engage in the task of evangelization, he
went on to say:
I beg of you, bring out the deep, hidden thoughts of this
Orient of ours; some of you acquire Hebrew and Greek
and Aramaic, and through them learn the mysteries of
Christianity as the men of the West have not yet
fathomed them; and thus right here in Japan work out
such a complete form of Christianity as shall bring the
East and the West together into one.12
Membership in the Student Christian Movements in their
countries and their local YMCAs and the additional influence of
being missionaries in their own lands exposed Asian Christians
to the currents of nationalism. Yet, there was no slavish
acceptance of the ideals of nationalism. For instance, at the
Tokyo conference, Yoichi Honda, one of the samurai converts
from Japan and a vice-chairperson of the WSCF, who was also
present at the Edinburgh conference, spoke about the peace that
Japan had gained after the war with Russia. Then he went on to
say, ‘Is it the perfect peace that comes from God? Alas, no. The
peace that is the first object of us Christians is peace between
God and man. Let there first be such a peace, and then true
peace shall prevail through all the world.’13
What Honda said
contradicted the vision that Count Okuma, a Japanese politician
and educationist, proposed at the same conference. It was a
12
Ibid., 131ff. 13
Ibid., 4.
Conformity and Contestation 27
vision that exhibited the chauvinistic nationalism and military
intentions of Japan to be expressed later more fully in the
doctrine of the ‘Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere’:
If you wish Christianity to dominate the thought and life
of the whole Orient, it is indispensable that it should be
done by the might of the Japanese people. As Rome
expanded Christianity in the early centuries, so I believe
that the Japanese people are destined to give it a vast
impetus in these days. And if I am not mistaken, their
contribution will not be limited to Christianity, nor to
Buddhism or Confucianism, but they shall create a
universal religion, and we shall see realized for the first
time in history the brotherhood of man, the unification of
material and spiritual civilizations. For this
consummation the time is ripe.14
Japanese colonialism replacing Western colonialism for the
assumed betterment of humanity would be a risky option for
Asia as the later history that led to the Second World War
proved to be.
At the 1910 Edinburgh conference, the major line along
which the rhythm of conformity and contestation fell was in the
almost unanimous position of Asian Christians that churches in
Asian lands should take major responsibility for their own future,
and re-chart their relationships with the so-called ‘home
churches’ in the West, especially its missionaries. In presenting
this demand, they often also challenged the missionaries to
embrace a deeper understanding of the message of the gospel.
Instead of following a chronological sequence of Asian
presentations, we will group their ideas under various subjects
and end with the evening lecture of V.S. Azariah, which in
many ways drew together the main points that the Asians made.
14
Ibid.,188.
28 theologies and cultures
K. Ibuka of Japan expressed the shift in Asian Christian
thinking in a schematic way. He spoke of church history in the
non-western world as divisible into three periods: the period of
the missionaries, a period of transition and finally the period of
the indigenous church.15
Implied in this schematization was the
assumption that church history is more than Western missionary
history and would probably need historians with a different
perspective to write the history of the Christian church.
From an Asian perspective, the major hindrance both to
the acceptance of the Christian faith in Asia and relating to
Asian Christians was missionary collusion with colonial
attitudes and interests. C.H. Yun of Korea drew the attention of
missionaries to the unfortunate expression of power with their
control of money that hindered work in his country.16
C.C.
Wang of China, then studying at Edinburgh, openly criticized
missionary collusion with colonial governments. He argued,
‘The more you fall back on these resources [extra-territorial
privileges granted to foreigners through the pressure of foreign
power on China], the weaker you show yourselves to be in your
belief and trust in God, who is after all King of Kings, the
Supreme Minister of Justice.’17
Following up from his schematization of church history,
K. Ibuka raised questions about the cumbersome Western creeds
with their underlying complicated theologies that were being
foisted on Japanese Christians. These creeds were shaped in
theological debates in the West and had a place in Western
church history. For Japan, there had to be simpler creeds that
spoke to the Japanese situation.
The little group of Christians which formed the
beginnings of the Church, and of which I myself was one,
formed a simple Confession of its own. Very simple, and
no doubt very crude, but really a confession of its faith;
15
Edinburgh 1910, vol. IX, 294 and 305. 16
Vol.II, 359. 17
Vol. VII, 154-6.
Conformity and Contestation 29
and it was very reluctant to exchange it for an elaborate
system of theology with which it is very imperfectly
acquainted, however excellent the system might be.18
In effect, Ibuka may be seen as a forerunner of Asian contextual
theological expressions and Asian ecumenical insistence on
confessing the faith rather than accepting confessions of the
faith shaped in alien contexts.
C.Y. Cheng of China spoke of another consequence of
shifting the main emphasis of Christian work from the West to
Asia when he questioned the appropriateness of carrying on
denominational differences and loyalties, which were shaped in
Western church history. Cheng said, ‘Speaking plainly, we hope
to see in the near future, a united Christian Church without any
denominational distinctions.’19
The call for a shift from Western to Asian hands is
prominent in the evening lecture of V.S. Azariah from India,
which also shows more clearly the tension between conformity
and contestation that he resolves at the end of his lecture. The
title signals the basic issue he wanted to address: ‘The Problem
of Co-operation between Foreign and Native Workers.’20
The
lecture, which upset and annoyed several missionaries at the
conference, begins with the telling sentence: ‘The problem of
race relationships is one of the most serious problems
confronting the Church to-day.’ While referring to many
exceptions and with statements that may seem obsequious in
trying not to offend missionaries, he nonetheless called for a
shift in relations that would on the one hand give greater
responsibility to Asian Christians and on the other not break
relationships with the church in the West.
He saw the need for change in three areas in which one
led to the other. The first was personal, the second was official,
and the third was spiritual. For Azariah the model was the
18
Vol. IX, 296. 19
Vol. VIII, 195f. 20
Vol. IX, 306-15.
30 theologies and cultures
relationship of Jesus with his disciples: ‘The relationship
between Him and His immediate disciples and fellow-workers
was not only one of Teacher and pupils, Master and disciples,
but above all that of Friend and friends.’ It was a relationship
that allowed the disciples to grow in maturity though often they
stumbled and fell.
Addressing the matter of personal relationships between
foreign and native workers he said that while there were
exceptions, the basic problem was what we would call ‘racism’
today. It is that sense of ‘moral superiority’, to which K.M.
Panikkar pointed, which led to an exhibition of assumed racial
superiority. Of the many examples he gives, the most telling is
the disgust a missionary exhibited when a native worker
attempted to shake his hand: ‘This man thinks that because he is
a graduate and has put on a European costume I must shake his
hand!’
Azariah referred to the personal conversations he had
with two senior Indian workers (superintendents) who had
worked alongside missionaries, one for twenty years and the
other for eighteen years. Yet at no time were these indigenous
workers invited to share a meal with the missionaries and their
families. In a caste-ridden society, where high caste persons will
not sit with low-caste persons for a meal, table-fellowship is an
extremely important way in which acceptance could be
expressed. He gave real examples of table-fellowship in YMCA
circles that were natural and not contrived. It is worth noting
that Jesus expressed acceptance in the table fellowship he had
with the undesirables of society, who were labelled ‘sinners’.
In this regard, Azariah quotes with approval the words of
the Bishop of Lahore:
…The missionaries, except a few of the very best, seem
to me to fail very largely in getting rid of an air of
patronage and condescension, and in establishing a
genuinely brotherly and happy relation as between
equals with their Indian flocks, though amongst these
Conformity and Contestation 31
[the Indian flock] there are gentlemen in every truest and
best sense of the word, with whom relations of perfect
equality ought easily to be established.21
Azariah considered what the bishop said as sound advice for all
missionaries to follow, so that bad personal relationships could
be tackled and put right.
In the matter of relationships in the official area, Azariah
was of the opinion that it was not just certain individuals but
rather the prevailing power structure with the missionary as the
pay-master and the native worker as the servant that was at the
heart of the problem. He argued that it was this structure,
expressed in missionary claims such as ‘our money’ and ‘our
control’ that was detrimental to the mission of the church in
India and by implication the church in Asia as a whole. He
pointed out that in the YMCA the problem of race relationships
had been resolved quite naturally, because at the heart of the
relationship was the axiom, which a Western YMCA board
secretary said to a worker going out, ‘Make yourself
unnecessary in the field.’ This advice recognized the fact that
ultimately it is the indigenous workers who must bear the
responsibility for work in their lands. Azariah was of the opinion
that ‘there can never be real progress unless the aspirations of
the native Christians to self-government and independence are
accepted, encouraged and acted upon.’ He then went on to say,
‘I plead therefore that an advance step be taken by transferring
from foreigners to Indians responsibilities and privileges that are
now too exclusively in the hands of the foreign missionary.’ He
saw this as a gradual but clear and steady shift in responsibilities:
‘For, without growing responsibility, character will not be made.
We shall learn to walk only by walking – perchance only by
falling and learning from our mistakes, but never by being kept
in leading strings until we arrive at maturity.’
21
Ibid. 309.
32 theologies and cultures
‘True co-operation is only possible with a proper
spiritual relationship.’ With these opening words, Azariah spoke
of the third area of relationship between the foreign and native
workers. The inability to understand and accept this dimension
was a reason not only for bad relationships with the native
workers but also with other Indians with whom the missionary
desired to share the gospel. He pointed out that for the Hindu
‘the one and only ultimate is God: his great and only reality [is]
the unseen: his true and eternal environment the spiritual.’ He
urged the missionaries to cultivate a life style of Christian
mysticism that exhibited ‘the Christian graces of patience and
meekness and humility, the life of denial of self, the cultivation
of fellowship and communion and the practice of the presence
of God.’ Only then could the missionary impart ‘elements of
Christian character, Christian activity, and Christian
organization’ which Western Christians have developed and
India needs.
In the first two areas of relationships, Azariah exposed
the problem of colonialism and its detrimental effect on relations
between foreign and native workers. In the third area, Azariah
brought up the problem of the clash of cultures. Clearly, there
are important Christian values developed in the West that Asia
needs. But these cannot be communicated or accepted without a
Christian life-style that would resonate with the receptor culture.
Though he addressed a specific situation, he raised in principle
the hybrid nature of Asian Christianity and theology in general.
Azariah resolved the tension between conformity and
contestation by projecting an ecumenical vision that would hold
Christianity, West and East, together:
It is in this co-operation of joint study at the feet of
Christ that we shall realise the oneness of the Body of
Christ. The exceeding riches of the glory of Christ can be
fully realised not by the Englishman, the American, and
the Continental alone, nor by the Japanese, the Chinese,
and the Indians by themselves – but by all working
Conformity and Contestation 33
together, worshipping together, and learning together the
Perfect Image of our Lord and Christ. It is only ‘with all
Saints’ that we can ‘comprehend the love of Christ
which passeth knowledge, that we might be filled with
all the fullness of God.’ This will be possible only from
spiritual friendships between the two races. We ought to
be willing to learn from one another and to help one
another.
The realization of such a vision would be possible only if
relationships reflected Christ’s relationship with his disciples
whom he called ‘friends’ (cf. John 15:15). Ringing the changes
on 1 Corinthians 13, he ended his speech with these famous
words:
Through all the ages to come the Indian Church will rise
up in gratitude to attest the heroism and self-denying
labours of the missionary body. You have given your
goods to feed the poor. You have given your bodies to be
burned. We also ask for love. Give us FRIENDS!22
Azariah was clear that the representatives of the churches in the
West should heed this challenge, because we ‘need each other’
to demonstrate the inclusiveness of the church and we ‘need to
learn from one another’ to accomplish the task of Christian
witness. Both needs are basic for the doing of theology.
Consequently, though he berated Western missionaries, he was
not willing to exclude them from the missionary enterprise in
Asia. The business of learning from one another and helping
each other was no easy matter because it had to take place on
Asian soil, which imposed its own conditions. This is why he
also emphasized the need for the right spiritual dimension in the
relationship that would be sensitive to the religious culture of
the people of the land.
22
Ibid., 315.
34 theologies and cultures
An important subject that the Asians did not directly address,
but was implied in several of their interventions, related to Asian
religions. Despite the over-arching concern ‘to carry the gospel
to the non-Christian world’, Commission 4, which addressed the
‘Missionary Message in relation to Non-Christian Religions’,
had some sane observations to make. The Commission based its
work not on hypothetical theological positions but on the written
reports of workers in the field who had first-hand knowledge of
other religions through their contact with persons from those
faiths. After surveying the report of the Commission, S. Wesley
Ariarajah makes the following points:
Faced with the reality of the religious and spiritual life in
other faiths, the Commission refused to become
defensive. It did not engage in apologetics, seeking to
marginalize other religious experiences or even the
doctrinal formulations of other faiths, as ‘primitive,’
‘preparatory,’ ‘natural,’ ‘human,’ etc…First, there was
the attitude of listening to and learning about other faiths,
not simply to have an adequate knowledge, but with a
view to grasping their ‘meaning’ for their believers.
Second, there was no attempt to judge the other faiths on
the basis of the unacceptable manifestations of their
religion in social life even though such manifestations
were taken seriously and criticized… Third, the doctrinal
formulations or the belief systems of other faiths were
not ruled out as incompatible with the gospel
message…[These] were all taken seriously, and a
genuine attempt was made to understand them in their
own terms in order to grasp the meaning behind the
formulations and the spiritual search that produced
them.23
23
S. Wesley Ariarajah, Hindus and Christians: A Century of Protestant
Ecumenical Thought, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1991),
29f.
Conformity and Contestation 35
The impulse for contestation came from a deep-seated revulsion
to the reality of a colonial empire that had percolated into the
behaviour and theology of the foreign missionaries. The impulse
for conformity was the desire to belong to the emerging
movements for independence and the culture of their countries
while maintaining strong links with the global church.
In different ways all the Asians had as their goal the
‘Asianization’ of the church in Asia, so that it may indeed
become the church of Asia in an ecumenical setting. It is no
accident, for instance, that the formation of the Church of South
India as an independent united church bringing together several
confessional traditions was formed in September 1947 a month
after India gained its independence.
III. The Asian Legacy from Edinburgh 1910 - Some
Concluding Remarks
There is no easy transition from Edinburgh 1910 to
Edinburgh 2010. Much has happened in between. All that is
possible is to pick out some principles as we face the challenges
of the present.
First, if Christian mission is to be anything and is to be faithful
to the mission of Jesus that challenged the Empire of Caesar
with the Empire of God, a clear response to the world situation
today is imperative. The rhythm of conformity and contestation
could provide a way of charting our obedience. To repeat what
was said earlier: When conformity loses the critical dimension
implicit in contestation it can be no more than conformism.
When contestation is bereft of a contextual base, it becomes an
alien voice that carries little or no conviction. Conformity and
contestation need to relate to each other in creative tension. This
is a principle that we derive not only from Edinburgh 1910 but
also from the wholesome aspects and or episodes in the history
of Christian mission.
36 theologies and cultures
Second, more than ever before, we live in a global situation.
Globalization as an economic, political and military reality is
with us and has an impact on almost all, if not all, situations.
The American Empire with its allies has created satellite states
under the alleged war on terror. Nation states are being pressed
more and more to tout the ‘good news’ of economic
globalization to their people and these have become less and less
concerned with the welfare of their people. Countervailing force
in militant expressions are also increasingly evident. We live in
fearful and troubling times. A question that we need to face
ecumenically is ‘What perspectives for action does the Empire
of God which Jesus proclaimed provide for our obedience
today?’ At this point we are reminded of what Azariah had to
say. We need each other across national boundaries to chart a
global missionary response.
Third, the ecumenical forum for discussion needs to broaden,
moving away from purely confessional concerns to faith
positions emerging from contextual Christian engagement. At
this point, we also need to recognize the fact that contextually
there are coalitions for action that span many faiths which call
for a broader ecumenism than just Christian ecumenism. Given
this situation, it would be an error to use labels such as ‘non-
Christians’ and ‘non-Christian lands’ evident in Edinburgh 1910
even though in its attitude to other religious experiences
Commission 4 was progressive. Today, such tagging could
easily lead to a conquest mentality that even finds political
expression in terms such as the ‘axis of evil’.
Fourth, ‘evangelism’ needs to be understood more broadly. Our
forebears at Edinburgh and early 19th
century missionaries were
conscious of a more holistic understanding of evangelism in
which ‘humanization’ (our word) was implicit. In word and
deed we are called to proclaim the good news of the Empire of
God as a dimension of hope especially for those that the powers
of globalization consider as expendable.
theologies and cultures,Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 37-61
Doing Mission from the Underside --
Mission Beyond Edinburgh 1910:
Towards a Critical Asian Perspective
Huang Po Ho1
Introduction:
What is the nature of Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference? How do people from Asia view this loudly sounded
Christian mission history? Many of us may not be aware that
when this world missionary conference was held, the missionary
activities in Taiwan were put under the country reports of Japan2.
It was of course due to the reality that Taiwan was colonized by
Japan during this period (1895-1945). However, the crisis of
identity falsification that the people of Taiwan have experienced
1 Rev. Dr. Po Ho Huang, one of the leading theologians and a prolific writer
from Taiwan, is the Vice-President of Chang Jung Christian University. Dr.
Huang also serves as the Associate Dean of South East Asia Graduate School
of Theology and the Dean of School of Theology, Chang Jung Christian
University. 2 Missionary Research Library Achieves: Section 12, Finding Aid for World
Missionary Conference Records, Edinburgh, 1910 prepared by: John L.
Grillo and Ruth Tonkiss Cameron, January 2006. See series 1 WMC 1910
Commission 1: series 1, box 6 folder5, and 7.
38 theologies and cultures
over a century had explicit and implicit significances to our
understanding of Christian mission.
The celebration of Edinburgh 1910 launched by
ecumenical bodies a century later that event, is an occasion to
search for locating the missionary identity within the present day
Christian history. It is thus appropriate to take the issue of
“identity” as an entry, to delve into the nature and its
development of the Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference.
Controversial Identity of Edinburgh 1910
Christian Mission has gone through a long and circuitous
journey. Early churches in some measure with its illegal
religious identity, struggled to witness the Gospel of Jesus to the
marginalized and the underdogs in their society, and eventually,
Paul the apostle of gentiles, crossed the national and religious
boundary proclaiming the Good News to the so called “heathen
land”.
Following the early churches footsteps, Christian
mission was extended throughout the territory of Roman empire
with the assistances from the political and military establishment
of the empire after Christianity was made legal by the empire
through to the conversion of Constantine the Roman Emperor to
Christianity. The idea of a great international conference to
discern the next steps for worldwide Christian mission is by no
means the sole prerogative of the Edinburgh 1910 World
Missionary Conference. More than a century earlier, William
Carey, the pioneer Baptist missionary in India, had proposed a
decennial interdenominational world missionary conference and
had suggested that the first should be held in Cape Town in
1810. Since the mid nineteenth
century Carey’s idea had found
expression, not in centres close to the “mission fields” of the
southern hemisphere but in the great cities of the Western world:
New York and London in 1854, Liverpool in 1860, London in
Mission from the Underside 39
1878 and 1888, and New York in 1900. Edinburgh 1910 stood
in this line of succession.3
Edinburgh 1910 has been advocated by some of the
ecumenical leaders as “A defining moment for the modern
Western missionary movement.”4, or “The birthplace of the
modern ecumenical movement.”5 Yet to confirm the question
raised by Ken Ross, we may ask: was it really such a unique
event? Or it is but one among many?6 To answer these questions,
we may have to testify the nature of this conference from
different angles. Keith Clements has made the following
observation on the identity character of this conference:
A distinctive feature of Edinburgh was that it was not a
rallying of the faithful. It did not make inspirational impact its
primary objective. Rather, it was designed to be a working
conference, reflecting and planning. It was distinguished from
earlier great missionary conferences by its attempt to achieve
a more unified strategy and greater coordination within the
worldwide engagement of Christian mission. The participants
were delegates of the missionary agencies which were
assigned a quota of places in proportion to the amount of
income which they spend on overseas mission. The aim of the
organizing committee was that it should be “a united effort to
subject the plans and methods of the whole missionary
3 Stephen Neill, A History of Christian Missions (Harmondsworth,
Middlesex:Penguin Books, 1964) p. 252. 4 Ken Ross, Edinburgh 1910 – Its place in History, see
http://www.towards2010.org.uk/downloads_int /1910-PlaceHistory.pdf,
assessed in August 14, 2008 5 Kenneth Scott Latourette, “Ecumenical Bearings of the Missionary
Movement and the International Missionary Council”, chapter 8 in Ruth
Rouse and Stephen C. Neill, eds., A History of the Ecumenical Movement,
1517-1948, Vol. I, 4th
ed., Geneva: WCC, 1993 [1954], p. 362. 6 Ken Ross, ibid.
40 theologies and cultures
enterprise to searching investigation and to coordinate
missionary experience from all parts of the world.”7
Furthermore, as documents pointed out that the delegates of
Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary Conference were
overwhelmingly male and Anglo Saxon:
The delegates were, overwhelmingly, British (500) and
American (500). Representatives from continental Europe
were a small minority (170). Even fewer were the delegates
from the “younger churches” of India, China and Japan. There
were no African participants nor were there any from Latin
America. No one was invited from the Roman Catholic or
Eastern Orthodox Churches. While the participants were
struck by the diversity of participants, from a longer historical
perspective it is striking how limited was their range. Of
course, the participants were also overwhelmingly male
despite the fact that women were already making a massive
contribution to the missionary movement.8
The observation continues to point out9:
Few though they were in number, the Asian delegates – from
Burma, Ceylon, China, India, Japan and Korea – clearly
exhibited the changing composition of the Christian church
and demonstrated where its future might lie. Their presence
was celebrated as a sign of the success of the Western
missionary movement but, as Andrew Walls points out, “there
is no sign that these delegates were expected to have a
distinctive or original contribution to the conference.”10
7 Cit. Keith Clements, Faith on the Frontiers: A Life of J.H. Oldham, Edinburgh
and Geneva: T. & T. Clark and WCC, 1999, p. 77. 8 Ken Ross, ibid.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid., quoted from Andrew F. Walls, The Cross-Cultural Process in
Christian History: Studies in the Transmission and Appropriation of Faith, New
York and Edinburgh: Orbis and T. & T. Clark, 2002, p. 58
Mission from the Underside 41
And this is why Martin Kahler had his reservation on the
conference and pointed out that the conference went ahead as
planned, however, structured largely on guidelines provided by
North American assumptions. He said: this remarkable
“ecumenical evangelical” conference had no difficulty in praising,
in one breath, both the salvation wrought in Christ and the
astonishing progress of “secular” science. The latter was naively
lauded as manifestation of God’s providence for the sake of the
church’s worldwide mission.11
Viewing from above observations, the over accentuation
of the importance of Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference for the missionary history, is none other than the
outcome of careful political manipulation. Without denying its
contributions, the centennial celebration maybe a good occasion
to redefine the place of Edinburgh 1910 against the background
of world mission from the perspectives of the people being
represented but [if not totally] absent from the conference.
A Mission of Heroism
Many critiques of the conference have mentioned the
challenging speech made by the South Indian priest V.S.
Azariah, one of the delegates from the very small group invited
from the so call younger churches12
, who were not supposed to
make any distinctive contribution to the conference. Azariah
concluded his speech by saying: “Through all the ages to come
the Indian church will rise up in gratitude to attest the heroism
and self-denying labours of the missionary body. You have
11
David J. Bosch Transforming Mission, Paradigm Shift in Theology of
Mission, (New York: Orbis: 1991), pp. 336-337 12
The term “younger church” was used to address those church from the
mission field. However, according to many Asian historical theologians,
Christian mission in Asia has it history as long as the western world. See T.V.
Philip, East of the Euphrates: Early Christianity in Asia. The expression of
the term demonstrated a mentality of western centered view of mission
concept.
42 theologies and cultures
given your goods to feed the poor. You have given your bodies
to be burned. We also ask for love. Give us FRIENDS!”13
“Missionary heroism” a terminology used by Azariah to
describe the overseas missionary activities of the Western
churches in 19 century was a vivid picture of its nature. Harping
on the so called “great commission”,14
the Western overseas
missionary activity was a zealous mission movement, which in
nature was a Christian project that entangled with issues of
economic, political and even military interests. Scholars of
Christian mission history generally agreed that the modern
missionary movement emerged with an expansionist
missiological motif.15
William Cary, the missionary “veteran” of
India, argued that the “New Testament command to preach
gospel to every creatures was as binding upon the Christians of
all times as it was upon the apostles.16
” His small tract “An
enquiry into Obligations of the Christians to Use Means for the
Conversion of the ‘heathen’” offered the legitimacy for
expansion and set into motion the rapid emergence of the
missionary movements around the world17
.
If the argument that Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference is the birthplace of modern world mission has any
significance, it does represent this dualistic colonial world view
of the modern world missionary nature. The substantial content
fed into the meeting by 8 Commissions of the conference was
obvious demonstrations of this tendency. The following topics
13
World Missionary Conference 1910: The History and Records of the
Conference, Edinburgh and London: Oliphant, Anderson & Ferrier; New
York, Chicago and Toronto: Fleming H. Revell, p. 315 14
Mt. 28.18-20 15
M. P. Joseph, Revisiting the Edinburgh Conference in the Context of
Globalization, Witnessing in Context – Essays in Honor of Eardley Mendis,
edited by Monica J. Melanchthon, George Zachariah, (Tiruvalla: Christava
Sahitya Samithi, 2007), p. 153 16
William Carey, an Enquiry into Obligations of the Christians to Use means
for the Conversion of the heathen in Francis m. duBose, classics of Christian
Missions (Nashville, Broadman Press, 1979) pp. 24-29. 17
M. P. Joseph, Ibid.,
Mission from the Underside 43
were considered and researched over a period of two years before
compiling them into reports to be presented at the conference:18
1. Carrying the Gospel to the non-Christian World.
2. The Church in the Mission Field.
3. Education in Relation to the Christianization of National Life.
4. The Missionary Message in Relation to Non-Christian
Religions.
5. The Preparation of Missionaries.
6. The Home Base of Missions.
7. Missions and Governments.
8. Cooperation and the Promotion of Unity.
The orientation adopted in the reports demonstrates a dichotomy
in the concept and practice of mission that the missionary
societies promoted; a dichotomy between the Christian world
and non Christian world, and between the sending body and the
receiving field. This dichotomy which was rather created by a
mindset of superiority coupled with a sense of heroism became
the foundation of the self-perception of the missionaries and was
viewed as inevitable to deal with the people in the so called
“mission fields”. While the socio-political, economic and
military interests were involved behind the scene of the
missionary activities, a colonial model of Christian mission was
thus developed and exaggerated. Take the observation of M. P
Joseph on the first commission report “Carrying the gospel to all
the non-Christian world,” to that conference as example, he
rightly points out:
Though most of the factors listed by the commission were
manifestations of a biased reading facilitated through the
lenses of western rationality and the historical experience
and related consciousness of the missionaries in different
mission fields, their findings naturally goaded the mission
strategy and its theology. A majority of the missionary
18
See: Missionary Research Library Achieves, ibid.
44 theologies and cultures
enterprise had undertaken with zeal the promotion of a
western scientific rationality informed by the European
Enlightenment. Such a campaign of the new rationality
against the traditional wisdom of the native was conceived
as a civilizational imperative and thus it was carried out
with utmost earnestness.19
Explicit political interests related to the conference were also
expressed in different ways, for instance the commission report
(Commission 1) cited a political reason for the urgency in
Christian missions:
One of the most significant and hopeful facts with
reference to world evangelization is that the vast majority
of the people of the non-Christian nations and races are
under the sway, either of Christian governments or of those
not antagonistic to Christian missions. This should greatly
facilitate the carrying out of a comprehensive campaign to
make Christ known.20
And thus, pointed out by M.P. Joseph:
It is not adventitious; therefore, that King George V. of
England and the Secretary of State of the imperial German
Colonial Office sent greetings to the participants of the
Edinburgh Conference. Former US President Roosevelt
was a prospective delegate but later sent a letter of regret
for his absence. Generals of the colonial administrations
were present throughout the conference signifying the
mutual importance of mission agenda and the colonial
project. In his greetings, King George V observed that the
“dissemination of the knowledge and principles of
19
MP Joseph, ibid., pp. 156-157 20
World Missionary Conference, 1910, report of Commission I, Carrying the
Gospel to all the Non-Christian World (Edinburgh: Oliphant, Anderson
&Ferrier) p. 6, taken from MP. Joseph, ibid..
Mission from the Underside 45
Christianity by Christian methods throughout the world”21
would usher in the cause of peace and the well being of all.
The conference responded positively and thanked the King
for his political leadership as the emperor of the world.22
If we look into the theological orientation of John Raleigh Mott,
the chairman of the Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference, we can even see the motif behind this significant
missionary conference. In response to the 19 century’s
missionary ambition of “to evangelize the world in this
generation”, Mott provided a faith statement as endorsement:
“rests securely upon Divine commandment.” He says: “the
Great Commission of Christ given by Him in the Upper Room
in Jerusalem on the night after the resurrection, again a little
later on a mountain in Galilee, and yet again, on the Mount of
Olives, just before the ascension clearly expresses our obligation
to make Christ known to all men.”23
It is thus, correct to echo to the comments made by
Azariah towards the western world mission in the Conference,
that heroism and self denying labors of missionary commitment
will be appreciated, yet “love” is still expected by the people
who are made objects of this mission endeavour.
A Challenge of Mission of Kenosis
The conclusion of Azariah’s speech: “we also ask for
love, Give us FRIENDS!” must not be considered as a single
personal appeal, but a common voice of the people from the so
called “non Christian world” who confronted Christian mission
from the west with the missionary model of heroism. Heroism
21
Harry Sawyerr, The First World Missionary Conference: Edinburgh 1910”
international Review of Mission Vol. LXVII No. 267, July 1978, taken from
cited from MP. Joseph, ibid. 22
MP. Joseph, ibid. p. 157. 23
John R. Mott, The Obligation to Evangelize the World, reprinted in Francis
M. DuBose, Classics of Christian Missions (Nashville: Broadman Press,
1979) pp. 320-321
46 theologies and cultures
mentality of missionary activities is a product of colonial model
of mission. It is a self-centered mission, and when mission
works originated from this self-centered motif, even a self
denying labor of missionaries with extreme example of giving
their bodies to be burned, is not informed by the love towards
the people but by their principle concern of seeking quick results
in establishing Christendom in a “pagan” world. Is not the
appeal of Azariah to the Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary
Conference echoing to what Paul has warned the congregations
of Corinthians about the excellent way to exercise one’s gift to
witness the Gospel? He says:
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not
love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If
I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries
and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move
mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I
possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,
but have not love, I gain nothing.24
The contents of Love to Paul are: patience and kindness. He
argues that love does not envy, does not boast, it is not proud,
not rude, not self-seeking. It always protects, always trusts,
always hopes, and always perseveres.25
In another word, love is
not a self-centered enthusiastic behavior but is an altruistic
commitment of identification with the “other.” And this was
what Paul understood of the mission of Jesus, when he
elaborates the essential attitude of Christ and asked his audience
to imitate Christ. Thus he says:
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality
with God something to be grasped, but made himself
nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in
24
I Corinthians 13.1-3. 25
I Corinthians 13. 4-7
Mission from the Underside 47
human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even
death on a cross!26
This passage has been known as the source of the Christology of
Kenosis: the self-empting love of God. Was not this kenosis the
way of mission that Jesus Christ gave model through his death
and resurrection that Azariah had in mind when he appealed to
the missionary conference which was otherwise overwhelmingly
represented by enthusiastic and triumphal missionary heroes
who were excitingly celebrating the dream “to evangelize the
world in this generation” with his exclamation: “We also ask for
love, give us FRIENDS!”
Regretfully, this challenging voice from the so called
mission field has not been heard by the heroic delegates of that
conference. One should not expect that this appeal could be
appreciated in such a circumstance. Just imagine a poor Indian
priest among thousands of Anglo Saxon heroic missionaries, his
voice must be like a tiny stone thrown to the surge of the ocean.
His words were recorded but just like ripples making no impact
in the shore. Therefore it is right to say that the so called modern
world missionary movement was launched with its mission
strategy and its theology based upon the expansionist ideology
blessed by the Edinburgh 1910 World Missionary Conference.
And thus, the churches around the world have to continue
struggling to mending the damages left within and beyond the
churches created by this dichotomy of Christian and non
Christian world view.
Go Beyond Edinburgh 1910
Then how do we envision the coming centennial
celebration of Edinburgh 2010, and make it a new milestone
with genuine identity of missionary conference for world
churches? The answer probably is to “go beyond it.”
26
Philippians 2.5-8
48 theologies and cultures
The concept of “Go beyond Edinburgh 1910” has
implications in at least two important layers, one is geographical
and another is historical. Geographically speaking, Edinburgh
1910 as mentioned above was basically a northern hemisphere
missionary enterprise, or in more precisely an Anglo Saxon
project of world mission. A real world missionary conference
must have participation of missionaries from all parts of the
world, and reflect the views of people from the native churches,
but not their representative agents. We have the reason and right
to demand that, the ongoing planning for another world
missionary conference in 2010, a hundred years after Edinburgh
1910, will have a totally different dynamics in its attendances
and representations.
Historically speaking, 1910 was a hundred year old event.
It may not be fair to make judgments on a hundred year old
event from today’s perspectives. A hundred years can make
tremendous changes in the geo-politics of the world. Incredibly
diverse understandings regarding the concept of mission have
developed in the last hundred years. Particularly with the
Christian population remapping, the irruption of the two-third
world has subverted the traditional concept of western
Christendom. Many theological efforts derived from the
contextual concerns of the third world Christians and churches
have emphatically emphasized the need to locate the identity
and the meaning of being a Christian in the so called non
Christian world. The definitions of “mission” are thus opened
up to a significant broadening of the concept. David J. Bosch, a
prominent South African scholar of missiology, has highlighted
them as follows:
Until 1950s “mission” even if not used in a univocal sense,
had a fairly circumscribed set of meanings. It referred to a)
the sending of missionaries to a designated territory, b) the
activities undertaken by such missionaries, c) the
geographical area where the missionaries were active, d)
the agency which dispatched the missionaries, e) the non-
Mission from the Underside 49
Christian world or “mission field”27
, or f) the center from
which the missionaries operated on the “mission field”. In a
slightly different context it could also refer to g) a local
congregation without a resident minister and still dependent
on the support of an older, established church, or h) a series
of special services intended to deepen or spread the
Christian faith, usually in a nominally Christian
environment. If we attempt to a more specifically
theological synopsis of “mission” as the concept has
traditionally been used, we note that it has been
paraphrased as a) propagation of the faith, b) expansion of
the reign of God, c) conversion of the heathen, and d) the
founding of new churches.28
David Bosch pointed out that until sixteenth century the term
mission was used exclusively with reference to the doctrine of
the Trinity, that is, of the sending of the Son by the Father and
of the Holy Spirit by the Father and the Son. The Jesuits were
the first to use it in terms of the spread of the Christian faith
among people (including Protestants) who were not members of
the Catholic Church. In this new sense, it was intimately
associated with the colonial expansion of the Western world into
what has more recently become known as the Third World (or,
sometimes, the Two-Third World).29
These traditional
interpretations and performances of mission inevitably invite
criticism, not only from outside the fence, but also from within
its own ranks. For instance several books of missionary self-
critiques were written by missiologists or mission executives in
27
Thomas OHM, Machet zu Jungern alle Volker: Theorie der Mission.
(Freiburg/B:Erich Wevel Verlag, 1962) pp52f., cited from David Bosch,
ibid., p. 1. 28
K. Muller & T. Sundermeier, (ed.) Lexikon Missionstheoloischer
Grundbegriffe (Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1987) pp. 31-34 cited from David J.
Bosch, ibid., p. 1 29
Ibid.,
50 theologies and cultures
one year alone of 196430
. Apart from these works, James
Heissig writing in 1981 in a missiological journal, has even
characterized Christian mission as “the selfish war.”31
These
strict self-criticisms nevertheless provide tremendous
momentum for the transformation of the understandings and
practices of historical Christian mission.
Besides these sincere reflections out of missionaries’
experiences and theological consciousness, there are other
factors that compelled the churches and Christians to transfigure
the faces of mission and to go beyond traditional understanding
of mission; they are, quoted David Bosch again32
:
The advance of science and technology and, with them,
the worldwide process of secularization seems to have
made faith in God redundant.
Linked to the former point is the reality that the West -
traditionally not only the home of Catholic and
Protestant Christianity, but also the base of the entire
modern missionary enterprise - is slowly but steadily
being de-Christianized.
Partly because of the above, the world can no longer be
divided into “Christian” and “non-Christian” territories
separated by oceans.
Because of its complicity in the subjugation and
exploitation of peoples of color, the West – and also
Western Christians – tends to suffer from an acute sense
of guilt. This circumstance often leads to an inability or
unwillingness among Western Christians to “give an
account of the hope they have” (I Pet 3.15) to people of
30
Ibid., p. 2 Some of these works are: R. K. Orchard, Missions in a
Time of Testing; James A. Scherer, Missionary, Go Home!; Ralph
Dodge, The Unpopular Missionary; and John Carden, The Ugly
Missionary.
31
Ibid., 32
Ibid., pp. 3-4
Mission from the Underside 51
other persuasions.
More than ever before we are today aware of the fact that
the world is divided – apparently irreversibly – between
the rich and the poor and that, by and large, the rich are
those who consider themselves (or are considered by the
poor) to be Christians. In addition, and according to most
indicators, the rich are still getting richer and the poor
poorer. This circumstance creates, on the one hand,
anger and frustration among the poor and, on the other, a
reluctance among affluent Christians to share their faith.
For centuries, Western theology and Western ecclesial
ways and practices were normative and undisputed, also
in the “mission fields”. Today the situation is
fundamentally different. The younger churches refuse to
be dictated to and are putting a high premium on their
“autonomy”. In addition, Western theology is today
suspect in many parts of the world. It is often regarded as
irrelevant, speculative, and the product of ivory tower
institutions. In many parts of the world it is being
replaced by Third-world theologies. This circumstance
has also contributed to profound uncertainties in Western
churches, even about the validity of the Christian
mission as such.
Doing Mission from the Underside
The aforementioned observations made by David Bosch
some 17 years ago, gave fair reasons and background for us to
understand the crisis and drive us to seek the transformation of
the concept and practice of mission. These observations are
however, concentrated heavily on the disabilities of the western
churches and their theology in their practice of traditional
mission. Not to say that western churches and theologies have
been diverse and can not easily be categorized, but the
development and transformation of the churches and theologies
in the western world are also dynamic and progressive; and thus
52 theologies and cultures
the attempt to describe all of them in one category is a too naive
approach.
Instead of focusing on the failure of the western churches
and theologies, my plea is that the enquiry into the failure in
comprehending the genuine sense of Jesus’ mission; the
dramatic change of context of world Christianity;33
and the rapid
development and impacts made by the geo-political and
economic world that surrounds the church, such as the process
of globalization and challenges of post-colonial awareness,
should be the driving force that compels Christians to seek a
mission mandate that permits us to “go beyond” the traditional
concept and practice. Even though Bosch offers an entire
chapter for the discussion on “The emergence of a postmodern
paradigm” and a section on “postmodern response” under the
title of Mission as witness to people of Other Living Faiths, he
does not adequately consider the issue of post-modernity as an
epoch-making factor in Christian mission. Instead he treated it
as a new emergence within the mission paradigm and one of the
new challenges to be responded by the modern missionary
movements.34
To say it differently, David Bosch’s analysis of
the failure of traditional mission was done purely from the
perspective of the western churches and not at all from the
vantage point of the people from the underside.
Changes in the traditional concept and practice of
mission started with the emergence of new missionary demands
from the people in the mission fields who were considered as
mere recipients of mission by the established mission agencies.
When people come to the awareness that they are themselves
right in front of God once they are involved in mission activities
driven by their own perspectives, their identities began to be
preserved, and their autonomies are upheld. They cannot be
33
The irruption of the third world into the Christian map in terms of Christian
population, theological impacts and their socio-political, economical and
cultural/religious significances have dramatically remapping the scenario of
Christian world. 34
See David J. Bosch, ibid, pp. 349-367, 477-483.
Mission from the Underside 53
represented without their participation or presentation through
due commissions.
People are subjects of mission, and as subjects, they
challenge not only the Christendom concept of Church centered
mission, and Christ centered mission or even theo-centered
mission, but also reject the dualist approaches of Gospel and
cultures, Christian world and non-Christian world, sacred and
profane, sending and receiving, and so on. Christian mission
thus, can not be a top down enterprise manipulated by the
missionary societies or church headquarter offices, but are in the
process of developing and shaping in the midst of the struggling
people in the presence of God. Missionary work is none other
than the job of a mid-wife to help for discernment and providing
reflective partnership to the parturient.
People as subject of mission indicate that Christian
mission should be done from the underside. In another words,
people’s experiences should be the determining factors in
missionary projects. And people’s well being and eventually the
restoration of their dignity which is sanctioned by the divine
promise of humanity with imago Dei nature, should be the sole
purpose of Christian mission. This involved of course, Justice,
Love and Integrity of the whole creation of God.
An Asian Contribution to the World Missionary Conference
2010
A hundred years can make things change tremendously.
As mentioned in the beginning of this paper, that in Edinburgh
1910, the mission report about Taiwan was listed under the
national report of Japan. And people of Taiwan were
represented without the consensus from them. However, during
this hundred year period, the world experienced two world wars
(the first world war from 1914-1918, the second world war from
1937-1945), the geopolitical remapping of the nations and the
redistribution of world powers have deeply impacted the
concept and nature of Christian mission. Taiwan was liberated
from Japanese colonialism after Second World War,
54 theologies and cultures
nevertheless was soon fell into another foreign colony through
the hands of Chinese Nationalists because of the Chinese civil
war. Along with this political development in Taiwan, the
western missionaries were wiped out totally together with other
westerners in Taiwan by Japanese in the period of 1942 after the
incident of Pearl harbor war, and the end of second world war
not only brought back the missionaries from western world, but
also drew in multiple Christian denominations from China with
the defeated troops and fellow comrades of Chiang Kai-Sek
group. This dramatic change of the Christian scenario in Taiwan
against the political change of the fate of the island has forced
the Christians and churches in Taiwan to confront an identity
crisis brought by the meaning of being a Christian in this land
and thus, launched a process of identity struggle as a mission
agenda. Today, churches in Taiwan although still under the
impact of these historical happenings, have developed mature
autonomous theological understanding and practice of mission,
albeit, not without dispute among themselves.
This experience of people in Taiwan is not an isolated
case, it can be considered as an epitome of the common
missionary experience of Asian people, an experience of
mission done in search of preserving one’s selfhood. The
emergence of the contextual theologies in many Asian countries
is a demonstration of this identity seeking struggles of
missionary projects.
Theological education implemented in this region is an
example of this new phase of mission engagement. Some
earliest theological schools were though established in this part
of the world for more than one hundred years, an association for
theological education (ATESEA) was formed only 50 years ago
(1957), and a higher theological education institute to confer M.
Theol and D. theol. Degree programs (SEAGST) were started
some 40 years ago (1966) both with strong commitment to
reclaim theological identities for Asian Christians and churches
through the efforts to do contextual theologies and contextual
theological education in Asia. A Critical Asian Principle (CAP)
Mission from the Underside 55
was adopted for doing theology and theological education for
ATESEA member schools and SEAGST programs. These
critical principles are, quoted from its original text:
1. As a situational principle, by which we seek to locate
where we are and thereby indicate our area of
responsibility and concern, namely, the varieties and
dynamics of Asian realities.
2. As a hermeneutical principle, suggesting that we are to
understand the Gospel and the Christian tradition with
these realities. Accordingly we must approach and
interpret the Gospel and its traditions in relation to the
needs and issues peculiar to the Asian situation.
Alternatively, we must approach and understand Asian
realities not only through variety of academic disciplines
available in study and research, but also in the light of the
Gospel and its traditions.
3. As a missiological principle, which aims at the
responsibility of equipping people with a missionary
commitment that is informed by a missionary theology
capable not only of illuminating Asian realities with the
flood-light of the Gospel, but also of helping manage and
direct the changes now taking place in the region along
lines more consonant with the Gospel and its vision for
human life in God.
4. And finally as an educational principle which should give
shape, content, direction, and criteria to our educational
task in our member-schools and in the South East Asia
Graduate School of Theology. 35
This Critical Asian Principle has been replaced by a new
updated and reflective document of the “Guidelines for Doing
35
Handbook, The Association for Theological Education in South East Asia
& The South East Asia Graduate School of Theology, version year 2005-
2007, p.86
56 theologies and cultures
Theologies in Asia” (GDTA) since the jubilee of ATESEA in
2007. These new guidelines include36
:
1. Responsive engagement with the diverse Asian
contexts
2. Critical engagement with indigenous cultures and
wisdom for the preservation and sustenance of life
3. Reflective engagement with the sufferings of the Asian
people in order to provide hope for the marginalized,
women, indigenous people, children, differently-abled
people and migrant workers
4. Restoring the inter-connectedness of the whole
creation
5. Interfaith dialogue as well as intra faith communion
and communication for the fullness of life and the well-
being of the society
6. Enhancing capacity building in order to serve people
experiencing disaster, conflict, and disease as well as
those people who suffer physical, emotional, and
mental disabilities
7. Prophetic resistance against the powers of economic
imperialism
8. Equipping Christians for witnessing and spreading the
gospel of Jesus with loving care and service to fulfil the
Christian mission of evangelism.
If we take a closer look into both these documents, we will see
the emphasis and commitment that ATESEA and SEAGST have
been consistently maintained on Asian realities and their
contextualities. And as well both emphasize on the Christian
missions critically engaged with Asian contexts, indigenous
cultures and wisdom, and also the sufferings of the Asian people.
The new guidelines was formulated against the contextualities
discerned from recent Asian realities, the following eleven
36
Handbook, The South East Asia Graduate School of Theology (SEAGST)
2007-2008, compiled by Huang Po Ho, pp.66-67
Mission from the Underside 57
propositions are identified as particular and challenging
characteristics of Asian contextualities37
:
1. Religious Fundamentalism – The escalation of tensions
between the Muslim world and the West, as well as
terrorist activities sponsored by religious sectarian groups
in Asia continue to challenge us in the way we think and
act as Christians in Asia. The revival of many sects, with a
fundamentalist tendency within the living religions of
Asia, stand witness to rising religious fundamentalism.
Living in a pluralistic community leaves limited
alternatives for Asians: either we build bridges or walls.
2. Gender Justice Issues – The rising cases of violence
against women and children, as well as issues aimed
directly at marginalizing women from mainstream
activities, the evident gender deficit in organizations and
institutions, and the circumvention of women’s quest for
equal rights and opportunities have become a growing
concern in Asia. Often times the oppression of women in
Asia is reinforced by Asian cultures and religions. Gender
justice issues compel us to accept the truth that women are
human beings created in God’s image.
3. Ecological Problems, Disease and Disasters – These
ecological and health problems have become common in
Asia today. The recent Tsunami, flash floods and
earthquakes have taken away thousands of lives and left
the living devastated. The outbreak of Avian Flu and the
resurgence of diseases (like Tuberculosis. Dengue and
Malaria), once thought to have been eradicated in
Southeast Asia, have once again resurfaced in epidemic
proportions. HIV and AIDS are affecting families,
communities and nations and challenge us to re-examine
37
See Ibid., pp. 63-66
58 theologies and cultures
our ministerial formation program. Furthermore,
uncontrolled and one-sided exploitative economic
development projects have brought with them various
ecological crises. “Ecological concerns have often been
neglected or conveniently sidelined.”38
The rape of
Mother Earth manifest in uncontrolled logging,
indiscriminate use of chemicals in agriculture,
inconsiderate disposal of non-biodegradable waste, and
human beings’ many other ecocidal acts due to negligence,
ignorance or greed destroy the ecosystem.
4. Globalization and Global Empire Building – Much of
Asia has moved from colonial contexts to a variety of
post-colonial and neo-colonial situations where the global
empire and the neo-liberal economic scheme of
globalization play symbiotic relationships. The greed of
the Empire and the neo-liberal globalization threatens and
destroys all life, especially the poor and marginalized
people and Mother Earth. Thus, economic globalization
and the rise of a global empire is a serious concern for
Asia today. Such “new realities within the Asian contexts
are posing new challenges to our theologizing today. . .”39
5. Colonization – Most Asian countries have a colonial
experience. Asia’s post colonial realities and emerging
neo-colonial attitudes are matters that should be given a
renewed emphasis in combating abuse, imperialism and
exploitation. “Neo-colonialism is now disguised in the
form of economic domination.”40
Neo-colonialism also
employs cultural hegemony in both subtle and glaring
38
Wilfred J Samuel, Review of the Critical Asian Principle –Malaysia,
Thailand and Singapore Region, 2006. 39
Taiwan Area’s Critical Response to the Critical Asian Principle (CAP) of
ATESEA/SEAGST, Taiwan, 2006. 40
Emanuel G Singgih, Critical Asian Principal: A Contextual Theological
Evaluation, Indonesia, 2005.
Mission from the Underside 59
ways. The principle of ‘decolonization’ must be
implemented in making people “aware of the colonizing
command and dominance that is around us and in us. We
need to engage consciously and continuously in
decolonizing all alienating and imposing influences.”41
6. Spirituality – With the increasing influence and impact of
materialism, secularism, and liberalism in the post-
modern era, Asian countries continue to experience
challenges and stagnation in spirituality. These include
loss of focus in discipleship and spiritual formation, loss
of indigenous wisdom, character and values, and
infiltration of western culture and ideology through the
neo-Pentecostal and new religious movements influences.
7. Identity and Power Struggle - Most communities in
Asian countries have experienced identity crisis through
history. In the process of post-colonial impact, some
experienced a ‘hybrid’ identity.42
Similar to this is the
question of “what kind of world order is theology going to
project that is consistent with its hope for the kingdom of
God, as the people of Asia rise to claim their basic rights
and rightful place in the world?”43
8. Peoples' Movements and Ecumenism – In a Christian
minority and multi- denominational context enhancing
ecumenical unity and cooperation is vital. In seeking to
fulfil the Great Commission and the Great Commandment,
the Asian Churches need to transcend denominational
boundaries and constantly seek to promote wider
41
Taiwan Area’s Critical Response to the Critical Asian Principle (CAP) of
ATESEA/SEAGST, Taiwan, 2006. 42
Simon SM Kwan, A Hong Kong Reflection on the Critical Asian Principle,
CAP Continual Discussion Group Report – 2006. A “meeting place identity”
is used to describe this floating nature of identity. 43
Philippine Area Committee Report, Revisiting the Critical Asian Principle.
60 theologies and cultures
cooperation. Some Asians see denominationalism as a
legacy of Western mission agencies that promotes a
particular brand of Christianity. Learning from the past
history ecumenism must not be just seen in functional
terms but as a dynamic unity (‘that they may be one’)44
Ecumenism is about a vision of God’s household where
the members seek to listen to the variety of Asian
theological voices, and to practice intra faith and interfaith
dialog in order to promote peace, healing and
reconciliation.
9. Information and Technological Change and
Challenges – “Globalize capitalized economic activities
act not only to widen the gap between the rich and the
poor, but also weaken the sovereignty of individual nation
states by interruption of capital power. Its operation is
backed by the information technology and military power,
and has led to the decline of the weaker cultures,
discrimination against minorities such as aborigines, and
exploitation of women and children.”45
10. Social Challenges – The expression of sin in terms of
greed for power and wealth experienced by the peoples of
Asia has had a tremendous effect on the community,
especially the poor and marginalized. Ethical problems
such as corruption, abuse of power, and prostitution;
poverty realities such as indentured child labour and
population explosion; communal problems such as ethnic
conflicts, racial tensions and breakdown of family
structures and continued marginalization of women,
44
Wilfred J Samuel, Review of the Critical Asian Principle –Malaysia,
Thailand and Singapore Region, 2006. 45
Huang Po Ho, “Covenant with the Churches in Asia – Retargeting
Theological Education in Responding to the Life and Death Struggles of the
People of Asia,” ATESEA General Assembly Meeting, Chiang Mai,
Thailand, 2005.
Mission from the Underside 61
children, and persons with disabilities continue to rise.
11. Reclaiming Indigenous Identity and Minority Rights –
Loss of identity, dignity, and loss of good cultural values
have resulted from lack of dialogue with the indigenous
peoples. Dialogue with them has been hindered by our
prejudices and stereotyped views about them that were
influenced by western theology and culture. The
indigenous has often been equated with being ‘backward’,
‘primitive’ and ‘irrational.’ For these reasons, local
cultures and their wisdom has been systematically
suppressed and marginalized. However, indigenous
wisdom has a valuable character that needs to be
rediscovered.
All these characteristics were identified from the experiences of
people in Asia. They are considered propositions served as
challenging factors for rethinking theological education in our
region, and thus also the settings of Christian mission in Asia.
As the missiological principle of CAP points out, Asian
theological education has aimed at the responsibility of
equipping people with a missionary commitment that is
informed by a missionary theology capable not only of
illuminating Asian realities with the flood-light of the Gospel,
but also of helping manage and direct the changes now taking
place in the region along the lines that are more consonant with
the Gospel and its vision for human life in God.
Conclusion
Doing Christian mission based upon these specific Asian
characteristics and guidelines is not only a valid way of doing
theologies and missions in Asian contexts; they are invaluable
perspectives of mission understandings and mission
performances contributed from Asian continent to the world
mission.
theologies and cultures,Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 62-86
THE Mission of Jesus is
Love of all Living beings for
The Fullness of Life
Kim Yong-Bock1
Reading a History of Christian Mission in Asia
Missiology since Jesus has been shaped by three phases
of mission by the Christian community. The first was the
mission of the primitive Asian, or West Asian, Christian
community. This moved to the West and to the East. The
Westward movement got involved with the power of the
empires, whereas the Eastward movement got never established
with the powers-that-be.
The mission of Jesus the Galilean emerged out of the
convergence of prophetic and messianic traditions of faith
communities under the Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek and Roman
empires. It evolved into the new faith and mission of the early
Christian community. It has been anti-imperial and deeply
1 Prof. Yong-Bock KIM is the Chancellor of Advanced Institute for Integral
Study of Life, Korea. He has been the President of Hanil University and
Theological Seminary and one of the most prominent Minjung Theologians.
Yong Bock is currently engaged in the integral study of life as an alternative
way of doing academic studies.
Mission is Fullness of Life 63
rooted in the social-cosmic experiences of oppressed peoples
(Minjung). What is clear is that this experience was that of the
(West) Asian faith community.
The Westward missionary movement developed into
complex power relations with the Western empires. It was a
major political development that the mission of Christian
community evolved into symbiotic power relations with the
Roman Empire, later with the Byzantine Empire, the British
Empire, and so on. This meant that throughout history
Christianity had a kind of political sponsorship from the empires
and later from Western colonial powers in the form of modern
Western nation states. Edinburgh 1910 was a peak of this
development in Christian mission. Now missiology has become
the ideology of Western economic, political, cultural and
religious domination over the peoples of the world in modern
history.
Today it is closely associated with the global empire as
well. Some of the missionary movements are deeply involved in
the political complex of “global Christendom,” as we see in
Christian fundamentalism and Christian Zionism. In fact this is
pervasive in the dominant global Christian movement; and it
creates global resistance against Christianity as a Western
imperial religion.
Furthermore, Christianity has developed symbiotic
relations with Western capitalism, and now with global
capitalism in the global market. The modern history of
capitalism implicates Christianity in an economic religion that
legitimized the right of private property and promoted
profiteering as divine blessing. The ecumenical movement has
failed in its prophetic witness to transform this history of the
global economy into the“oikonomia” of God for the abundant
life of all living beings.
Modern global history has reached an apex of
technocratic development2 with the theological sponsorship of
2 Theodore van Leeuwen, Christianity in World History,
64 theologies and cultures
Christianity as well as with political and economic justification.
The technocracy is the driving engine and power regime of
globalization in its market system (dominated by the
transnational regime of corporate capitalism), in its hegemonic
geopolitical domination (by means of military domination by the
global empire), and in its cultural hegemony (in the form of
modern media and communications systems in the virtual world
as well as in the real world).
Asian Christianity in modern times has become, by and
large, an extension of this complex development, in spite of its
participation in the national struggles against the Western
colonial powers and in spite of ecumenical and theological
struggles for indigenization in all different forms and
dimensions towards becoming a true religion of Asian people. It
lost its original Asian roots, and its Asian identity is till floating
in the Western cultural clouds over the Asian continent. In Asia,
Christian churches are experiencing major reactions by Asian
people in their Western political association with colonial and
imperial domination, in their economic symbiosis with
capitalism, and in their cultural grounding in Western
philosophy, science and technology.
In the interactions of Northeast Asian history with the
Western powers and cultures, our people have accepted Western
culture, namely, science and technology, the political ideologies
of liberalism and socialism for political modernization, and
globalized economic capitalism, even in the midst of the
struggle for national independence and social development. Yet
this history has been a tragic saga of loss of the wisdom of life,
deeply rooted and richly inherited in the people’s history. Asian
Christianity has not yet discovered its spiritual grounding or its
locus as a well-spring of wisdom of life for all living beings.
The identity of the Christian movement is questioned radically
in Northeast Asia and in Asia as whole. The political, economic
and cultural identity of Christian religion has not been settled.
The spiritual identity of Christian faith is very much
Mission is Fullness of Life 65
overshadowed by the history of Asian Christianity. Today this
has become a critical question.
Our question is, where do we begin our reflection?
Jesus’ Movement of Love for Life
Our affirmation begins with the following statement: The
movement of Jesus as mission is the Alpha and Omega of the
love movement of all living beings. It is the T’aeguk (太極) of
the life of all living beings, in East Asian expression. This has to
be a pivotal affirmation for our reflection. It means not only
dismantling past and current missiology as a decisive
ideological component of global power today, but also
dismantling the dominant power regime of the global empire
and the global market, along with their technocratic culture.
Recovery and revitalization of the love of Jesus among all living
beings will lay the firm foundation of the mission of love. Life
of all living beings is proposed as a new framework for fresh
missiological thinking.
Jesus the Galilean
Galilee was a pivotal locus into which all streams of past
West Asian wisdom of life flowed to open a new horizon of life
against empires. This is the story of the biblical narratives. The
story is political, in that resistance of people together with all
living beings against the oppressive powers of ancient empires,
is at the core. This story has profound social implications as
well as political meanings. It is cultural, in that all religious-
cultural wisdoms converged in the small local community of
Jesus to open a new, fresh axis of love movement among all
living beings. It is the Cosmic Framework of Love for the life of
all living beings. All this means the formation of a new pivot of
“topos” and “kairos” at the crossroads of fresh life of all living
beings.
66 theologies and cultures
Galilee3
is Asian Land.
The story of Jesus had its new beginning in this region,
which remains a cosmic abode of community life among all
living beings. It is a local, regional, global and cosmic location
(場), its unique local history linked together with the story of
Jesus. This history is “coterminous” with every locus of life in
the cosmos in political, economic and ecological dimensions,
and yet it is truly Asian, not Western. It is differentiated
geographically, anthropologically, linguistically, culturally,
religiously and especially politically from the Western history of
the Roman Empire. It is the place of resistance against the
Roman Empire and all other empires. The wisdom of life to
resist the dominant powers arose in this Asian soil. It is
crystallized in the love of Jesus among all living beings. This
story of Jesus is Galilean. The love movement of Jesus is the
3 (Hebrew: ha-Galil, lit: the province). Most of the Galilee consists of
rocky terrain, at heights of between 500 and 700 meters. There are several
high mountains including Mount Tabor and Mount Meron in the region
which relatively low temperatures and high rainfall in comparison to
elsewhere in Israel. As a result of this climate, floraand wildlife thrive in the
region, whilst many birds annually migrate from colder climates to Africa
and back through the Hulah-Jordan corridor. The streams and waterfalls, the
latter mainly in the Upper Galilee, along with vast fields of greenery and
colorful wildflowers make the region full of life. In Isaiah (8:23), the region
is referred to as "the District of the Nations" - ; lit:Glil HaGoyim),
with much of this name being retained in its present name of Galil or HaGalil.
The Galilee region was the home of Jesus during at least thirty years of his
life. The first three Gospels of the New Testament are mainly an account of
Jesus' public ministry in this province, particularly in the towns
of Nazareth and Capernaum. Galilee is also cited as the place where Jesus
cured a blind man. During the Hasmonaean period, with the revolt of
the Maccabees and the decline of the Seleucid Empire, the Galilee was
conquered by the newly independent state ofJudaea, and the region was
resettled by Jews.[citation needed].
In Roman times, the country was
divided into Judea, Samaria, and the Galilee, which comprised the whole
northern section of the country, and was the largest of the three
regions. Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, ruled Galilee
as tetrarch.( Wikipedia).
Mission is Fullness of Life 67
Galilean movement; it began there. We are concerned with the
Asian story of this movement, not only at its roots but also its
movement into Asian lands. It is significant that the movement
dissociated itself form the powers-that-be. Moreover, its positive
association with the Asian wisdom of life and Asian traditions4
of love of life among all living beings, should be regarded as
decisive for our deliberation.5 “Serve all living beings so that
their life is in full.” This is the wisdom of life. The Christian
churches have been blinded, unable to see the light of the Asian
wisdom of life due to their ideological missiology.
Asian Convergence of Love of Life
Asian traditions of love met at the pivot of Jesus’
Movement of Love. The “wisdom” of Asian empires and their
powers confronted the Asian wisdom of Jesus’ love. Egyptian,
Babylonian, Greek and Persian empires could not integrate the
wisdom of love of all living beings due to their “mythologies” of
power. Yet they provided the background from which the
wisdom of life rose and converged into the pivotal point of love
of Jesus the Galilean, for resistance to power means
accumulation of wisdom of life. As the Jesus movement of love
went through its historical course in Asia, the Asian wisdom of
love converged with his love movement. The compassion (慈悲)
of Buddha over the regime of greed, the Wisdom (仙道) of Lao
Tsu, the Benevolence (仁=惻隱之心) of Confucius (孔子), the
Hindu Karma and Muslim Salam have converged with Jesus’
love movement in the contours of Asian history of people on
earth, under heaven.
This story reached the Korean land. Chong Yak Yong’s
Praxis of Life is an illustration of how the primeval Yao Sun
utopia was used as a ground for social transformation and vision
for the people in 19th century Korea. Similar examples can be
found in China and Japan. In Buddhist tradition, Maitreiya
Buddha is the Messiah of the Suffering People. Korean Buddhist
4 John England, et al, Sources of Asian Christianity
5 See Kim Yong-Bock articles on the subject.
68 theologies and cultures
intellectual leaders used this Buddhist tradition for the national
liberation struggle. Maitreya (Miruk 彌勒) Buddha in Korea is a
messianic Buddha of hope among the suffering and oppressed
people, especially in the southwestern part of Korea. Another
tradition is a new religion, Tonghak Tradition. It is a Korean
Tradition (Confucian-Buddhist-Sunist-Christian Interreligious
Ecumenical Synthesis of Vision for New Life (-儒, 佛, 仙, 巫,
基督之 統合). It played a great messianic role in transforming
the Korean society and backing Korean national independence
and liberation from Japanese colonialism, and in fostering the
subsequent movement for human rights, democracy, national
reunification and ecological sustainability.
The Dynamics of Jesus’ Love Movement Respond to the
Powers of Destruction and Death.
The original Matrix of Love versus Power under the
Roman Empire is an axial foundation for our reflection. In
dealing with the present situation of the Empire, the Love of
Jesus against the Power of the Roman Empire is the key to
understanding the Power of the Empire today.
The geopolitical orbit of the Jesus movement is twofold:
one is the geopolitics of Galilee Against Rome. Jesus’
geopolitical perspective is from Galilee to Rome. The other is
the geopolitics of Kairos, of the Reign of God. The Reign of
God transforms imperial geopolitics. It is the politics of Love of
All Living Beings.
Today it becomes the dynamics of “Power and Love” in
the global market and the global empire. The drive of modern
development in the West and consequently in the non-Western
world has been forcing a process of globalisation. This process
began with Western industrialization, and its concomitant
colonialization for the expansion of the Western market. The
central driving force was the power of globalizing capital. The
military order in the post WW II and post Cold War periods
reflects fundamentally the same trend in a qualitatively
accelerated manner. Modern technology is an essential element
in this globalising process. Recent developments of cyber
Mission is Fullness of Life 69
technetronics have accelerated through the rapid expansion of
this process, which is bringing about colossal change in earth
and cosmos. Some believe that life is threatened with
destruction by the manifold forces of death present in the
globalisation process. Until recent times, World War III had
been regarded as the ultimate threat to life. Although there are
some who believe that the post-Cold War situation has opened
an era of peace, others believe that the world is in greater danger
from the mono-polar military hegemony. Though wars are
limited in scale, their intensity is “omnicidal,” and there is no
countervailing military power to the war-making, mono-polar,
hegemonic military power. Genetic modification of life forms
has penetrated deeply into the life process, with uncertain
consequences. This is connected to the technetronics and
cybernetics developments. The environmental destruction
brought by modern industrial civilization now poses a colossal
threat to life.
Symbiosis of Global Market, Global Empire and Global
Technocracy
Love of mammon--unmitigated greed as the spiritual
dimension of the market—together with the hegemonic demon
in the political community of nation states and global empire,
and the pseudo-religious / fetish 氣運 in the communication and
media world—in all these spheres a sort of Demonic Spirit
Energy is running rampant. The powers of destruction, violence,
war and death have taken on the forms of moral, cultural,
philosophical, religious and spiritual languages and symbols, as
human greed turns into a collective will, generating the logic,
ideology and mechanism of the philosophy of survival of the
fittest (strongest).
Messianic Politics of Love for New and Full Life
It is proposed that Jesus’ Movement of Love for Life, which
may conjugated in the following theological convergence.
God and Life: God So Loves the World….
70 theologies and cultures
The Biblical view of life is clear enough without detailed
discussion. We only need to refer to a few Biblical texts. God is
the giver of life to all living beings in the cosmos. This affirms
that God is the Creator of life and its sustainers. God as the
founder and giver of life cannot be limited to humanity, to
Christian community. It extends to the whole universe. The
expanse of life is cosmic.
God’s act of creation is the overcoming of darkness
(death and evil) and chaos (wasteland). God is at the centre of
the dynamic movement of life against death. Life is the
movement from death to the new life of eternal bliss. God is at
the centre of the Exodus movement, the prophetic movement
and the eschatological movement for new life in the whole
cosmos.
God created life with the Spirit (breath) and the word.
This is the biblical affirmation that the origin of life is the Spirit
of God. The Spirit is the dynamic force for the justice, peace and
shalom of God. The Spirit gives to life in the cosmos a
subjectivity that embraces all the dimensions of human and
other natural life.
Christ and Life: the Messianic Feast of Life is the Core of
the Movement of Love for Life
Revelations 21 and 22 show clearly the climactic and
eschatological dynamics of the messianic feast of life. New
Heaven and New Earth, and the New Community therein—the
OIKOS of God—is the geo-political locus of the Messianic feast
of life, in which all nations and the whole universe participate
for eternal (full) life. The water, fruits and trees and the Spirit of
life are constituent elements of the Messianic Garden of Life.
This reminds us of the image of God’s creative act in the books
of Genesis and Isaiah.
In the movement of Jesus for the Reign of God (Luke 4)
and in the movement of Jesus against the Roman Empire, eternal
life is the core, realized in his crucifixion and resurrection,
overcoming the powers and principalities of death. The life and
Mission is Fullness of Life 71
works of Jesus should be understood as integral parts of the life
movement. The Jesus movement, through his actions, works and
teachings, is to establish the movement for eternal life in the
new cosmos.
Once again, the Spirit of the Messiah is the central
dynamic of the movement for new life in the universe, in the
context of the Messianic Reign, to which all the peoples and
nations—indeed, all living beings—are invited to the feast of
eternal life in the new cosmos (new geo-politics.)
The Spirit in the Life Movement
The Spirit of God is already working in God’s Creation.
It is the central dynamics establishing justice and shalom for life,
as demonstrated in the Exodus, in the Jubilee, in the Prophetic
movements and in the Apocalyptic movement for the new age
(eschaton) for life.
The Spirit is the agency of love establishing the
subjectivity and the dynamics of life-new and eternal life. The
Spirit is present in the depths of life: natural, community and
universe. The Spirit has no limits in geo-politics, and it is not
determined by nature or the human community.
The Spirit gives hope and imagination to the life
movement throughout the universe. “And in his (Christ’s) name
the Gentiles will hope (Matthew 12:21)." “To them, God chose
to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of
the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of
glory (Colossians 1:27).” The messianic hope is cosmic in its
scope and its inner dynamics, determined by Christ’s
resurrection overcoming the power of death. This hope invokes
the messianic spirit among the people for messianic movement
to overcome the power of evil and death in the world. All the
nations (the oppressed) are invited to the messianic feast of life
in the new OIKOS under the new heaven, in the new earth. The
Holy Spirit is the Pervasive “Power” of life and hope among all
the suffering people and in the groaning cosmos.
72 theologies and cultures
Thus the Triune God can make sense in the convergence
of Three Persons in the Life of all living beings in the cosmic
sphere. At the pivotal and kairotic point of太極 (omega point)
God in triune convergence is the Creator, Giver and Lover of
Life of the people of God and of the whole cosmos. Messianic
celebration of the New Life in New Heaven and Earth is the
fulfillment of eternal life. The kairotic presence of the Spirit is
the dynamic and pervasive “vitality” of life among all the
suffering people/nations in the groaning cosmos. God and Life
(God’s Created Life) are partners in the drama of the cosmos, in
which the Garden of Life is the centerpiece. This is the cosmic
politics of God’s love of the life of all living beings.6
Now is the Kairotic Time of Love in 8 Dimensions:
All living beings are sovereign subjects of their life,
participating (參與) in and sharing (相生) life.
Koinonia: spirit and community of love, where spiritual
and cultural life are abundant, expressed in fiesta and
celebration.
Covenant of righteousness and justice for love: The
weak, the poor and the disabled are protected, in the
context of justice, peace and conviviality.
Oikomomia of life and livelihood management
Health and wholeness of life
Politics of life: Rights of life of all living beings
Geo-political peace for life
Ecological management of life among all living beings
In search for such wisdom of love, and as an ecumenical
praxis of hope, we seek a convergence of East and West, a
6 A Rereading of History of Asian Missiology From Below(Rev. Kim Yong-
Bock, Ph.D., 2003)
Diaconial Mission for Life – A New Paradigm of Security for Life
LIFE as the Paradigm of the Ecumenical Study and Action for New
Millennium
Mission is Fullness of Life 73
convergence of religious and philosophical wisdom, based upon
the paradigmatic movement of convergence for life. This is a
process of multiple convergence, a sort of convergence of
convergences.
Affirming love as the convergence of wisdom of whole
life, we propose that the Integral Study of Life (Zoesophia=학
生命學) may be an academic and professional instrument to
advance the mission of Jesus’ love for the life of all living
beings. This convergence of love is the missiological alpha and
omega point for a cosmos of life.
II
Zoesophia: Life is the Living Subject of Conviviality.
As we search for an integral and holistic understanding
of life, we reject any understanding of life that is reductionist,
fragmentary and compartmentalized. Our main affirmation is
that life as Subject is known through its story. The story of life
is the best way to describe the way life lives. The underlying
assumption is that life is not object, but subject.
This is an important understanding of life. Life is not to
be fragmented or reduced to its minute parts; and its subjecthood
is the whole of the living being, not in a part or particle of the
living body.
This is analogous to the subjecthood of the Minjung. The
Minjung is the subject who creates the whole life. The
subjecthood of the Minjung is revealed through the whole story
of the Minjung, in action, thought, feelings and senses, belief
and spirit. The subjecthood of life is revealed through the story
of life in action, in thought, in feelings and senses, in belief and
in spirit. Feminist studies use the story as the best way to
understand the reality of the suffering and struggle of women for
liberation, to be subjects of their own life in body and spirit.
Feminist studies are an excellent mode of integral studies.
74 theologies and cultures
We call this “Zoegraphy = Story of Life = Saemyong
Jeongi (生命傳記).” We avoid the term “biography,” for it is
used almost exclusively to refer to the story of an individual
person. We have used “social biography” in reference to the
story of the Minjung, to express the social and community
dimension of subjecthood of the Minjung. “Zoegraphy” is used
here to refer to the integral study of whole life (living beings),
which involves biological and ecological as well as social and
cultural dimensions of the whole of life.
Here, life is the inclusive category that embraces all
living beings. Any discrimination among human life, animal life,
and life of plants and trees is arbitrary, since these all form one
interrelated web-work of life. Fragmentation and reduction are
abstract and arbitrary. Even discrimination between organic and
inorganic is abstract and arbitrary, for life cannot exist without
inorganic substances. Life lives as an inclusive web-work of
living beings. We call it a "web-work of conviviality," or
common life. In reality there is only one common life in the
universe. Thus, Zoegraphy is the universal story of life of all
living beings as a whole.
Prof. Zhang7 argues that whole (global)life is the only
conceivable notion of life. Other concepts of life are
fragmentary, only derivatives of whole life. He believes that the
notion of the individual human person cannot be a viable
concept of life in an ultimate sense; and the same goes for any
individual animal or plant life. The viable concept of life must
include the interconnected web of life as a whole. His argument
is that the concept of whole or global life is based upon
scientific argument. However, he suggests that this concept
should be interfaced with the Asian cosmic understanding of life.
This suggestion is significant in that any concept of life must
include not only biological, social and ecological dimensions,
but also cultural and spiritual dimensions.
7 Zhang Hwe-Ik, Living and Global Life, 1999
Mission is Fullness of Life 75
Life as subject (Juche=主體 ) is inclusive of all the
dimensions of whole life. “Subject” means that it is spiritual and
cultural as well as social, biological and ecological. Thus the
only way we can understand whole life is to describe life in
terms of its story.
Life is the subject of the whole universe, and the whole
universe is the body of life. It is easy to understand that the
community is the body of life. The community is a web-work of
all the dimensions of life: ecological, biological, sociological,
cultural and spiritual. The integral study of life will clarify this
proposition, and Asian philosophy can easily explain it. For
example, the individual self, the family, the nation and the
universe are one and the same entity of life.
The selfhood or subjecthood of life is not the
epistemological self or subject of modern science, such as the
Cartesian ego. It has aesthetic perceptions and spiritual sense as
well as thinking and reason. It is based upon the unknown
mystery of life. It is creative and open. It cannot be objectified,
although it is bodily, physical, biological and social. It cannot be
reduced to an object, or to an abstract entity, and it is not even
transcendent.
Life as the subject gives birth to itself in the context of
the whole web-work of life. The birth and death of life should be
understood in this context. The reproduction of life cannot be
explained in biological terms, that is, merely in terms of cells
and genes. It is not a simple biochemical process, for it involves
the inherent subjecthood of life beyond the biological dimension.
The birth of a living being is not merely an internal process but
is closely related to the natural, social and cultural environments.
This is true of both humans and other living beings.
Perhaps on the level of whole life the reproductive
subject should be intelligible and perceptible. Whole life is a
dynamic web-work of the permanent reproductive and
productive activities of living beings. As Lovelock has asserted,
the earth as GAIA is a living being as a whole. Therefore, the
earth as a whole living being must have subjecthood. It cannot
76 theologies and cultures
be understood as a purely biochemical or physical agency. The
subjecthood of life cannot be explained in a biological, bio-
chemical or physical way on the micro or macro level. It has
unknown dimensions.
The productive and reproductive dynamics of birth and
rebirth are an elaborate and wholistic network of mutual
cooperation and common life. Here the subject of life is not
individualistic or fragmentary, but a convivial entity. The
subjectivity of any living being should be understood in the
close and organic cooperation of cells and genes on the micro-
level. It should be understood in terms of the symbiosis of living
beings. It should be understood in terms of interaction of the
organic and inorganic elements. Any living being is a subject in
this complex matrix of "common life, cooperation and co-
existence." Yet it is a mystery. It is a mystery that life is the
subject, not the object, of its being.
Life grows by itself. The growth of life cannot be
understood merely as natural, biological, ecological dynamics.
Rather, it indicates that this is the subject, which experiences
inner life and interacts in relation to its external environment.
Life nourishes and nurtures itself in mutuality with the web-
work of living beings. This is a key expression of its
subjecthood.
Life learns to live. This is a self-education process. It
learns from the environment. It learns from experiences in
interaction with other living beings. Living beings learn from
each other. They learn from the past and from the present. They
are open to learning from the future. They adjust to the living
situations and overcome obstacles to life through the self-
educational process. One cannot reduce this self-educational
process of living beings to mere instinct or automatic function.
One cannot understand life in a deterministic way.
Life heals itself. When it is injured or ill, it cures its own
illness and restores its wholeness and balance for wholesome
life. Asian health is based on the notion that life has self-healing
Mission is Fullness of Life 77
energy, and that medical treatment is mainly to strengthen the
self-healing power of life. Life is a self-healing subject.
Life communicates among living beings and with its
environment. Plants and insects communicate with each other.
This communication is mutual. The life of living beings
involves symbols and semantics of communication. Plants,
animals and human beings are equally capable of mutual
communication. Though we do not fully understand this
communication process, there are sufficient indications that life
is a communicating subject.
Life matures and fulfills itself. It realizes itself toward its
fullness. The maturity and fulfillment of life is neither natural
destiny nor mechanical process. It involves a telos, or a destiny
toward which life as subject moves. All living beings seem to
have their own destiny of self-fulfillment—another mark of
selfhood.
Life creates and recreates itself. It interacts creatively
with living beings. Creative subjecthood can be understood on
the biological, evolutionary level as well as the cultural level.
Living beings are creative beings. The creative activities of
living beings involve the process of creating novelty in life. The
evolutionary and culturally creative process is an integral part of
life.
Life lives in the world of meaning. Living beings create
meaning of life and of the world in the context of the web-work
of common life. Life should be understood in the context of the
community of meanings. The living being creates meanings and
fulfills the meaning of life and of the world in which it lives.
Life is spirit. Living beings are spiritual as well as
material. They are bodies as well as spirits, individual as well as
communal. The spirit of life is not confined only to human
beings. The spirit is cosmic, ecological, biological, cultural and
religious. This spiritual subjecthood of life cannot be reduced to
a biological question. It is a cultural and religious question. But
the spirit should not be understood without its body, like a ghost.
78 theologies and cultures
The spirit is a bodily and ecological reality in a living organism
and in a community of living beings.
The subjecthood of life can be more fully understood in
an integral way. This is the reason why we are suggesting the
story of life, Zoegraphy, as an alternative paradigm with which
to talk and learn about life. In this learning we are concerned
about the wisdom of life for its fulfillment. We are not
excluding scientific knowledge of life. We are putting it in the
integral context of the wisdom of life and transforming it.
To learn the wisdom of life, we propose integral, inter-
disciplinary studies as well as fusion between the Western and
Eastern wisdom of life. This is the meaning of Integral Study of
Life. And it begins with Zoegraphy = the story of life.
III
The Zoegraphy of Life against Death is the Story of Cosmic
Love
The Story of Life (Zoegraphy) beings with the story of
death and destruction of living beings as well as fulfillment of
life, not with the origins and birth of life.
Modern scientific biology begins the study of life with
the question of the origin of life in cosmic history. The answer
we get is highly hypothetical, highly reductionist, and highly
remote in time and space. We could even say that it is an
extension and construction of modern scientific ideas. The
question of the origin of life in the modern sciences reveals its
own limitation. Here the history of life is also very reductionist
and abstract in that the process is to trace the first simple point
and evolutionary process. This is a very limited way to learn
wisdom of life. Zoegraphy is a story of ever-evolving
complexities into new levels. Neither the tracing of the origin
and its components nor the reductionist search for the simplest
elements of life can adequately tell its whole story.
The story is an integrative way to reveal the reality,
experiences and dynamics of the life of living beings in the
Mission is Fullness of Life 79
whole universe. It is a way of connecting dimensions of life, a
way of weaving and integrating experiences of life in terms of
time and space. In fact, it can frame its own unique time and
space to tell the unique story of life. The story is a way of telling
about the reality of life without closing it. It is an open story. It
cannot be reduced to a narrow sequence of scientific and
objective causality. It is a way of revealing the meaning and
wisdom of life. It is holistic. It can integrate scientific and
objective knowledge of life so that they also become integral
elements of the wisdom of life.
Zoegraphy (the story of life) begins with the present
situation of life on earth in seeking the wisdom of life. It deals
with experiences of life here and now (in a Kairotic way). Then
we ask questions of past stories to open questions about the
present and future. The story of life is not determined by the
modernist time framework of absolute or relative time. Life has
its own destiny (time).
Zoegraphy is a very local story of living beings in a
concrete geographic and ecological situation. It does not
transcend time and space and become "abstractly universal," for
it refuses to be reduced to a minute particle or to a highly
abstract entity. Life has a home in its own locality. We are
reminded of the integral methodology of "cultural
anthropology," which can be evolved and applied to Zoegraphy.
Zoegraphy is a story of the conviviality of life. Living
beings live together, forming the web-work of life. Humans
form community, living together with animals, insects and
plants, and many micro-organisms. There can be no separation
between humans and other living beings in this convivial life,
which has a network of mutual support. Zoegraphy is an
expression of the convivial subjecthood of life. Conviviality is
an expression of the body of life in micro and macro cosmic
frameworks.
The most important element in the integral study of life
may be the story of conviviality of all living beings: How do we
discover the story of the life together of all living beings,
80 theologies and cultures
especially humans and other natural beings? The primary mode
of living together is not competition but cooperation and mutual
adjustment. Biological sciences, ecological sciences, social
sciences and human sciences need to be studied together in the
context of Zoegraphy, an integral story of life of living beings.
The story cannot begin with the human subject of life. It
must begin with the convivial community of living beings,
which would include humans, animals, plants, soil, and all other
living beings as well as the so-called inorganic elements. The
convivial community of living beings is not a human-centered
entity, but a life-centered identity. Relatively speaking, the
agrarian community before industrialization had such a
Zoegraphy of convivial community,8where all lived together,
adjusting and adapting to each other for mutual life (Sang Saeng
= 相生).
The Story of Life is the Story of Overcoming Arbitrary
Death and Destruction.
The story of life is in a dialectical relationship with the
power of death and destruction. In human his/herstory, life is to
overcome arbitrary death by natural and human disasters as well
as by disease, hunger, violence, war and other social and
ecological causes. The subject of life is the protagonist of life,
and the agency of death and destruction is the antagonist to life,
in the drama of Zoegraphy. In an analogous and connected way,
all living beings are struggling to overcome the powers of death
and destruction to fulfill their destinies.
"Natural death" is only a part of life. When we
understand life as a web-work of all living beings, death can be
a moment of fulfillment in the story of life. What is the death of
a butterfly in the life of insects? What is the death of a
caterpillar? It is a moment in the story of the insect. When we
8 The Global Life, advanced by Prof. Zhang, is related to this integral story of
life. The GAIA is also a notion that may be related to the common life of all
living beings on earth and their organic relations.
Mission is Fullness of Life 81
look at whole life in conviviality (common life), the natural
death of one living being may be a moment in the whole story of
life (Zoegraphy). Humans have sought ways to overcome
natural death and to have permanent life, through biological and
medial means. This is arbitrary human “hubris,” attempting to
extend natural life beyond its limits.
There is also death in the convivial web-work of life
itself. For example, there is a chain of mutual nourishment
through mutual sacrifice. Humans eat plants, fruits of trees, and
some animals. This is supposed to be a convivial, mutual and
interconnected web-work of life in the garden of life. "Natural
death" may be regarded as an end, for the beginning of new life.
In biology, however, this is conceived as a chain of power
struggles in which the fittest and strongest survive (Darwinism).
In Asian wisdom, however, it is regarded as common life,
mutual life, convivial life, which is a web-work of mutual
service. This is nowadays called “sustainability.”
There are moments of arbitrary death and destruction,
caused by unjust power, in Zoegraphy - the story of life. The
first instance is humans’ destruction of life. This arbitrary killing
has greatly intensified in the process of globalization in the 21st
century.
The most powerful human agencies destroying life are
modern science and technology, and industrial and military
technocracy. At the foundation of modern science and
technology, life itself, all living beings and their components are
objectified on the level of epistemology. They are fragmented
and reduced to the minutest particles, cells and genes. Life is
turned into an arbitrary construct of scientific theories.
Technocracy, organized technology, is the most
powerful agency controlling, dominating and destroying life.
Even if we view science-technology as value-neutral,
epistemologically it has totalistic control over its object: life and
all living beings. It manipulates, modifies and distorts according
to the designs of the “human” sciences. Technocracy is driven
82 theologies and cultures
by the principalities and powers of the global market for their
own profit.
The technocratic regime, under the control of the global
market and the Empire, drives the globalization process, which
involves ecological destruction, pollution and manipulation of
the biosphere, destruction of human life through increasing
hunger and poverty and the accompanying spread of diseases,
omnicidal wars, ensuing social violence, political oppression,
and economic exploitation. Life as a whole is threatened. In this
context Zoegraphy is closely connected with the process of
globalisation.
Life of Peace: Against War and Destruction of Life
Although human history has been that of wars among
human groups and against nature, in the 21st century world
geopolitics has become the process of creating weapons of war.
The 20th century experienced two World Wars; now science and
technology, with its cybernetic and technetronic developments,
has enabled humans to engage in total, omnipotent wars to
destroy life in its totality. This is the work of the global empire.
New life demands a matrix of security for the peace of all of life,
one that is capable of overcoming wars at al levels. A
comprehensive peace movement with studies and praxis at all
levels, is needed for life on earth. Cosmic peace is cosmic
compassion, permeating the whole heaven and earth {天地}.
Just and Healthy Life: Against Starvation, Hunger and Poverty
The historical development of the economy has had mixed and
paradoxical blessings for life. OIKOS + NOMOS =
OIKONOMIA is the meaning of economy, which is
management of the household to care for life in the home and in
the garden. (經世濟民) is the East Asian notion of economy,
which means “caring for the people according to the canons of
the scriptures.”
Human greed, manifested in many different forms, has
caused starvation, hunger and poverty as the economy has
grown and developed into new stages. Riches have been
Mission is Fullness of Life 83
amassed by the powerful in each stage of human history. Now
the power of global capital and its transnational corporate
institutions dominate the emerging global market. Their
monopoly of science and technology enables them to have
almost unlimited power and influence. In recent years money—
financial power—has victimized people radically. All exchanges
and dealings among peoples are controlled by the global market
agencies to meet the insatiable greed of capital. Profit
maximization and absolute control are the name of the game that
they play. Greed is the root of destruction of life.
Life of Direct and Common Participation in Solidarity
Network: Against Oppression
Political institutions have oppressed the people in many
different ways. Nations and peoples have suffered despotism,
autocratic rule, imperial domination, national totalitarianism,
state dictatorship, military dictatorship, religious-political
symbiosis, colonialism and ideologically rigid rules in many
different forms. The Western liberal democracy has not brought
about the full participation of the people. It enhanced liberal
political rights such as human rights and other individual
political freedoms, but it also opened the door for the powerful
and the rich to dominate over the weak and the poor. Recent
neo-liberal developments are a sequel to the liberal political
democracy. Liberal tradition has failed to control either the
global market or national markets.
People themselves demand direct participation and
intervention in the global market, as well as radical
democratization of the existing political institutions. Truly the
people must realize their political selfhood on the local, national,
regional and global levels.
This requires a local-national-regional-global network of
participation and solidarity, commensurate with the global
powers and principalities, old and new. We will need new
political institutions on all levels for glocal participation and
cosmic solidarity across the boundaries set by the powers and
84 theologies and cultures
principalities. This is a new vision of ecumenical politics for
love of life on earth. This is the affirmation that all living beings
are subjects of life.
Life of Shalom (Secure Well-being with All Living Beings)
Human history is a jungle where the strong eats the weak
and where the fittest alone can survive. The classical
contradictions—ethnic-racial, class-caste, and gender-social
status—form a vortex of social violence. In this jungle there is
no justice, no community and no cooperation and peace.
Globalization has brought a new social process that is dictated
by the so-called new social Darwinism. New conflicts and new
contradictions—for example, between information haves and
have-nots—are emerging. Injustice is deepening; and intensity
of conflict is mounting to cause greater violence and its cyclical
acceleration.
Social justice, social security, social peace and social
reconciliation need to be redesigned, countering a global process
in which neo-liberal ideology makes people worship the
ideology of competition, glorifying the victor regardless of the
means and ways used. The people need a new approach for
common living at all levels of local, national and global
community.
Social security systems in both welfare states and
socialist states must be transformed to establish a dynamic
human community based on justice, peace and harmony.
Prerequisite for this may be people’s participation in their local
communities; such participation links them with the network of
common human security throughout the world, and makes them
part of cosmic conviviality.
E. Life of Rich Meaningfulness and Fine Beauty: Against
Desertification of Cultural Life
Culture is the soul of a civilization. It is the art of
common life, through which people attain their identity, value
orientation and aesthetic sense, and enjoy the feast of life.
Mission is Fullness of Life 85
Culture gives people their perceptual apparatus and orientation
for understanding. Culture is the reservoir of wisdom for life, for
people throughout the cosmos. It is the resource of love for all
living beings.
Ethnic, national and cultural identity—the inner core of
community life—is rapidly eroding under the impact of
globalization. Powerless and marginalised ethnic and national
communities are especially affected.
Culture contains the wisdom of life and is the spiritual
home of life. Spirituality is the vital energy of life, but this is
being eroded in the globalization process. Modern philosophy,
science and technology have reduced or uprooted the spiritual
core of life, reducing it to rationality.
Here the religious dimension of culture and therefore life
itself has been eradicated at the roots. Religions are the
substance of civilizations, and cultures are forms in which
religious truths and spirituality find expression. Modernity has
reduced religion to the minimum of what is rational; and the
spiritual mystery of life is suppressed in the name of what is
rational. Suppression of religious vitality has been detrimental to
the vitality of life.
F. Life of Vitality in the Macro- and Micro-Cosmos: Against
Destruction of Life
Modernity created a fatal split between life in human
community from life in nature. It also reduced the reality of life
to the biochemical process. These two statements epitomize the
role of modern reductionism in (mis)understanding life.
Life is whole. Life is to be cared for in the Garden of Life.
Gardening of life demands respect for life in the cosmos in its
entirety and its integrity. Enhancement of life in the cosmos
demands an entirely new paradigm of life, one that overcomes
the current misunderstanding and manipulation of life. Life must
prosper against death and destruction.
G. Life of Bliss in Celebration
86 theologies and cultures
The peak bliss of life is to glorify God and enjoy life
with God. The foundation of such bliss and celebration of life is
based upon faith in God. God has made with us the covenant of
life in Shalom. Life is life when it overcomes the power of death.
Life is true life when it has an eternal dimension. Life is truly
life when it is fulfilled wholly and fully. This is the foundation
of new life according to the Biblical teachings. This blissful life
should be realized on the earth in a kairotic way. This is the
beginning and the culmination of the wisdom of life.
IV
Concluding Word
World Christianity is in a crisis. The Christian West and
indeed the Christian churches in the whole world are caught up
in the illusion that “World Christendom” will save the world.
And yet there is a bankruptcy of theological perspective with
which to deal with the issue of destruction and potential death of
all of life. It is with a strong sense of urgency that we present
these suggestions for reflection.
At the same time, the world Christian population lives,
culturally and religiously, in the context of world religions
outside the context of the Christian world. This is a major shift.
The mere or conjugated expansion of the Christian world is not
tenable. The situation demands a convergence toward a new
horizon of love for all living beings in the cosmos. Dialogue,
cooperation and solidarity may be steps toward such
convergence, which may be seen as a cosmic omega point of
oikoumene. For this task we need to recover and revitalize the
Love of Jesus the Asian for all living beings. The Asian wisdom
of life (Zoesophia) may provide the convergent dynamics of life
to deal with the destructiveness of the global market and empire.
Wherever there is a struggle of living beings for life, there may
emerge the wisdom of life and the convergent dynamics of
Zoesophia.
theologies and cultures,Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 87-104
Towards a New Paradigm in the
Concepts of Mission
Hope S. Antone1
Why a New Paradigm?
The topic assigned to me by the organizers and planners of
this conference implies the need for something new in our
understanding and practice of mission. I believe that this need
for something new is not simply to be in tune with the times –
there is indeed a lot of discourse on paradigm shifts these days.
Neither do I believe that this is just something we have to do as
we observe the 100th
year anniversary of the Edinburgh 1910
mission conference. Rather, I believe that the topic implies an
honest realization as well as a sincere confession that the old
paradigm of mission is no longer the best or the most relevant
for our context in Asia today.
1 Dr. Hope S. Antone is joint executive secretary of the Christian
Conference of Asia – Faith, Mission and Unity (CCA-FMU) program area.
Her portfolio includes education and ecumenical formation for CCA and a
joint consultancy with the World Council of Churches (WCC) on ecumenical
theological education in Asia.
88 theologies and cultures
As I began writing this paper, I remembered a comment
that Hans Ucko (a former staff in the dialogue unit of the World
Council of Churches) shared with me a few years ago when I
co-organized with him an interreligious program in Tao Fong
Shan, Hong Kong. He said to me that as far as he was
concerned, the word mission needs to be dropped from the
Christian vocabulary. His reason of course is that mission does
not only carry a lot of negative connotations (ranging from its
complicity in colonialism to its aggressive stance towards
people of other faiths); it simply poses as an obstacle to dialogue.
So as I thought of new paradigm concepts of mission, I also
wondered whether we should continue to use mission simply
because it is part of our inherited missionary legacy. Or,
whether we should come up with something totally new since
“new wine” requires “new wineskin” (Mark 2:21-23)?
Another problem that I have with mission is how it is
understood and carried out these days. According to the
Cambridge Dictionary, mission is “the action of sending
someone to a place to do a particular job, esp. one for a
government or religious organization, or the job they are sent to
do.” Mission also refers to “a group of people who are sent to
another place to do a particular job or to represent their country,
organization, or religion, or the place where they go to do this
work.” It is clear from these two definitions that mission is used
not only in a religious sense but also in economic and political
senses. Thus, mission can be for good or bad – such as the
mission to attack another country. It is also not a monopoly of
Christians; people from other religions also speak of their own
mission these days.2
So writing this paper and just thinking about new
paradigm concepts of mission has been a challenging exercise
for me. Nevertheless, I thank the organizers and planners of this
conference for the opportunity to think of this seriously and to
share my struggle with you.
2 Like Christianity, Islam is a missionary religion. Buddhism also
carries out mission like we do – in villages, in universities, in other places.
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 89
According to www.dictionary.com the word paradigm is
from Latin paradīgma; from Greek paradeigma, from
paradeiknunai, to compare: para-, alongside; + deiknunai, to
show.3
The same online dictionary notes that the word
Paradigm appeared in English in the 15th
century, meaning "an
example, model or pattern." Since the 1960s, paradigm has
been used in science to refer to a theoretical framework. In
1962, in a book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas
Kuhn attempted to map changes in patterns of scientific thinking,
noting that a given framework of thinking – which he called
paradigm – tends to dominate and direct research in a given
field.4
A paradigm shift happens when the old (previous)
paradigm is abandoned in favor of a new one.
The language of paradigms and paradigm shifts entered
theological discourse in the 1980s. David Bosch used this
language to great effect through his classic work, Transforming
Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission.5 This study
of the major paradigms of mission throughout Christian history
is capped with Bosch’s proposal of an “emerging ecumenical
paradigm.” However, this does not represent a new paradigm as
such but more of a bringing together of the good and desirable
elements in recent missiological thinking.
So perhaps, in theological discourse what we have to do is
to critically revisit and evaluate our old understandings and
practices – in order to see where we have fallen short or gone
against the radical (from radix, which is Latin word for the
‘root’) meanings of certain classical biblical concepts.
Moreover, in our search for new paradigm concepts of
mission, we should not immediately look at new models or
patterns or practices of mission. We should first look at the
prevailing understanding, view or framework of mission, which
3 www.dictionary.com accessed on 30 August 2008.
4 Cited by Robert Schreiter, Liberation and Reconciliation as
Paradigms of Mission (Sundbyberg: Swedish Mission Council, 2003), 10. . 5 David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology
of Mission (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991).
90 theologies and cultures
then gives birth to the patterns and practices. In other words, we
should not only look at how today’s zealous missionaries from
Asia strive to go on a mission trip, e.g. to Afghanistan, despite
warnings from their own government and the Afghan
government not to go there. Rather, we should also ask why
they actually insist on going there or what it is (i.e. the
motivation, inspiration, or mandate) that urges them to go there.
Towards New Paradigm Concepts: Proposal from Robert
Schreiter
One of the more recent articulations I have come across on
new paradigms of mission is from Catholic priest and educator
Robert Schreiter.6
In his lectures to the Swedish Mission
Council in 2002, he spoke of how theologies of liberation have
provided a paradigm for the conduct of Christian mission since
the 1970s. However, since the shifts in contexts – e.g. the
emergence of post-national security states in most of Latin
America, post-Communist states in Europe, and post-apartheid
societies in Africa – Schreiter feels that theologies of liberation
are not enough to meet the challenges of the post-conflict
situation. Therefore, he proposed that another paradigm of
mission that must go hand in hand with liberation is
reconciliation. He said that liberation and reconciliation share
more similarities than discontinuities:
Both are concerned about overcoming oppression. Both
place the pursuit of justice central to their activity. Both
presume God acting in our history here and now. Both
attend especially to the victims. Both seek the opportunity
to engender hope for a better humanity by reference to the
great biblical narratives. Both attend to the structural
dimensions of oppression and conflict which need to be
overcome.
6 Robert Schreiter, Liberation and Reconciliation as Paradigms of
Mission (Sundbyberg: Swedish Mission Council, 2003).
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 91
…Both attend to the symbolic and spiritual consequences
of social and political actions. Both are engaged in the
material realities of their world, but both have an eye on
the transcendent elements as well.7
According to Schreiter, the differences between the two
are that the rhetoric of liberation, in its interest in regaining
human agency for the poor, tends to emphasize the human role
in liberation while the rhetoric of reconciliation places emphasis
on God’s role in bringing about reconciliation. The liberation
paradigm promotes the dream of a future which creates new
agency among the poor and oppressed; while the reconciliation
paradigm sees coming to terms with a conflicted and traumatic
past as the key to that future.
Schreiter’s points are very important reminders for us in
Asia – where theologies of liberation have been indigenized and
contextualized to the point that we now have various theologies
of the minjung, Dalit, Indigenous people, struggle, women,
homeland and self-determination, etc. However, for many of
our nations in Asia, reaching a post-conflict situation is still a
far-off dream. Many of our nations are still controlled by
military and dictatorial governments, some in connivance with
the Empire. We still have Communist, Socialist and Maoist
states and/or governments in Asia. We still have our own share
of apartheid through the caste and patriarchal systems and
through ethnic conflicts that are so deeply-rooted. So we
definitely need to bear all these in mind in our search for new
paradigm concepts of mission.
Towards New Paradigm Concepts: Proposal from S. Wesley
Ariarajah + Mine I would like to borrow the words of Sri Lankan ecumenist,
S. Wesley Ariarajah, that the original vision of the missionary
movement that came out of the Edinburgh 1910 event “saw the
7 Schreiter, 24.
92 theologies and cultures
proclamation of the Gospel, with the invitation to become part
of the church, as the core of the missionary enterprise.”8
Usually called evangelization, this paradigm of mission is not
only rooted in the old colonial model (i.e. “to conquer the world
for Christ”) but it also constitutes a very limited and misleading
view of mission. In the words of Ariarajah, “It must be said that
from the perspective of challenges of our own day, its God is too
small, its perception of the Gospel – too narrow, its
understanding of mission – too limited, its theology – too tribal,
and its concept of community – sectarian.”9
Ariarajah suggests four shifts in mission thinking in order
for Christians to arrive at what he calls “an understanding of
mission that would be credible and meaningful as we stand at
the threshold of a new century and a new millennium.”10
He
proposes moving from the view of mission simply as a message
that we bring to or activities that we do in the world to mission
as participation with God and all others in bringing healing and
wholeness, justice and peace, and reconciliation and renewal in
the world.11
I came across these four shifts that Ariarajah
suggests when I was doing my doctoral research in 2001.
Although each shift was explained only very briefly, I would
like to expand them and build on them with my own critical
reflections and personal illustrations. I would also incorporate,
where possible, ideas from other theologians who have tried to
8 S. Wesley Ariarajah, “Wider Ecumenism: Some Theological
Perspectives” in Encounters with the Word: Essays to Honour Aloysius Pieris,
eds. Robert Crusz, Marshal Fernando, Asanga Tilakaratne (Colombo:
Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004), 19. 9 Ariarajah, “Wider Ecumenism,” 15.
10 S. Wesley Ariarajah, “Christian Mission: The End or a New
Beginning,” unpublished paper presented at the Meeting of the United
Methodist General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), October 1998. This
paper was used as a reference in Hope S. Antone’s Religious Education in
Context of Plurality and Pluralism (Manila: New Day Publishers, 2003),
from which this summary was taken. . 11
Ariarajah, “Wider Ecumenism,” 21, (bold and italics supplied).
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 93
address the question of what could be some new paradigms of
mission for us today.
(1) Ariarajah named the first shift in mission thinking as:
“from an exclusive to an inclusive understanding of God’s
mission.” This has to do with our basic framework of mission.
In the traditional paradigm, mission is understood as the task of
the church to bring God, in Christ, to the “unreached” peoples.
This traditional understanding of mission is similar to what
Indian theologian Dhyanchand Carr called the Noah’s ark model
of mission (Genesis 6-8).12
Like the ark of Noah, the church
comprises of people plucked out (the chosen ones) of the evil
world, which is set for damnation, and who need to be kept
undefiled and pure to enter their heavenly abode. As the saved,
it is now their task to prevent people from jumping out of the ark
and for rescuing a few others who may be drowning. This
understanding of mission however is very limited and has
effectively prevented the Christian community from making
meaningful collaboration and partnership with others, especially
those of other religious traditions or with an ideological
inspiration, in their active engagement of humanizing the world.
This understanding of mission also has an inherent negative
attitude to the world.
Ariarajah suggests an inclusive understanding of mission
which is premised on the affirmation that Christians are in
mission because God is “already present and active” in the
world, bringing it unto Godself. Christians therefore do not
have the monopoly of mission as if it is only for them to do and
protect. God’s mission (missio Dei), which God carries out in
many different ways, includes the creative and healing activities
happening in the world but which may not be under the umbrella
of the church. Through God’s participation in the sufferings of
the people, God is loving, reconciling, healing, and bringing
about justice and peace, even through those people and forces
12
Dhyanchand Carr, “Innovative Methods in Theological Education,”
in CTC Bulletin, Vol. XIX, No. 3 (December 2003), 79-86. Narrative on the
Noah’s ark is found in Genesis 6-8.
94 theologies and cultures
that do not necessarily belong to the church. This inclusive
understanding of mission therefore “places the loving, caring,
judging and compassionate presence and mission of God in the
heart of all human affairs, despite all its ambiguities.”
In addition to this, I want to add another dimension to this
inclusive understanding of mission. In the traditional paradigm,
mission is seen to be about saving people. Yet even the Noah’s
ark model includes animals that were also saved, pair by pair.
One day, when I was a pastor of a very small rural church in the
Philippines13
, we had a Bible study on the story of Noah
building an ark and a very clever youth leader of that
congregation suddenly said, “Pastor, I know why the flood
happened. It was because Noah had cut down so many trees to
build that ark.”
With our understanding now of environmental issues,
global warming and the ecological crisis, we know that there is
truth in what that youth leader was saying. So an inclusive
understanding of God’s mission must include a genuine concern
for the rest of creation. For a long time, humanity has regarded
creation as being there to serve and sustain us, and that
humanity is the ‘crown’ of creation. We need to make a shift
from such thinking as we are accountable to God for what has
become of nature, the environment, the whole of creation which
was entrusted to our care.
(2) The second shift: “from conversion to healing.” This
has to do with the goal of mission. The traditional paradigm of
mission has made conversion the ultimate goal of mission. This
narrow understanding of conversion is really proselytism – i.e.
winning of souls to Christ, or increasing in number of new
adherents or church attendees. It can even include the dragging
of persons from one religious community to another – or,
embarrassingly so, from one denominational community to
another (e.g. from Catholic to Protestant). It is this narrow sense
13
The small rural UCCP (United Church of Christ in the Philippines)
congregation that I used to serve is in the town of Zamboanguita in the
province of Negros Oriental.
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 95
of conversion that has rendered Christianity suspect in the eyes
of people of other religions, thereby increasing the mistrust,
animosity and hatred between religious communities.
Some examples of this traditional paradigm of mission,
with conversion strings attached, were exposed during the
rehabilitation and relief work being done to the December 2004
tsunami victims in Indonesia. For example, the effort of some
Christian groups to intentionally send the orphaned children of
Muslim families to Christian orphanages was severely criticized
and exposed as having conversion strings attached.
The new paradigm of mission challenges the narrow
notion of conversion. The new paradigm of mission regards
conversion as the transforming activity of the Spirit in the lives
of individuals and communities, to a life oriented towards God
and one’s neighbor (the very essence of the gospel as described
in Matthew 22:37-40) – regardless of religious or
denominational labels.14
In this sense, conversion really is the
work of God, not of people or of the church. It is therefore too
presumptuous for us to make conversion the goal of our mission.
Furthermore, what the church urgently needs today is to
engage in mission with God toward healing, reconciliation and
wholeness. There is so much brokenness, pain and suffering in
Asia – because of power domination exerted over the vulnerable,
those who are rendered weak and helpless – including women,
children (especially girl children), other marginalized groups
(e.g. ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, lower castes and
outcastes), and the rest of God’s creation. There can only be
healing if the power domination is shattered and transformed
into a sharing of power that empowers everyone to claim their
right to fullness of life (John 10:10b). But how can traditional
missionaries, raised in very patriarchal societies and bearing the
traditional mission orientation, help in breaking down this power
domination mindset and practice? One can only give what one
14
It is interesting to note that the Golden Rule (Matthew 7:12; Luke
6:31) can be found in more than 20 religions of the world.
96 theologies and cultures
has… and that is why there continues to be a big need for real
healing from all forms of brokenness, pain and suffering.
(3) The third shift: “from majority to minority.” This has
to do with our understanding of the nature of the faith
community in mission. Closely related to the traditional notion
of conversion (i.e. proselytism) is the imperialist and colonialist
aspiration to church growth and development. The resurgence
of denominationalism and the emphasis on church planting and
church growth in most of our seminary curricula point to this
desire to become the majority – as if strength can only be
measured by our size or number. Today’s mission practices
reflect this desire to be the majority, as we in Asia allow
ourselves to be spent in a minority complex that ranges between
a self-debilitating attitude of careless passivity and an aggressive
adversarial posture towards others.
Ariarajah however insists that we need to rediscover,
reown and relearn to be at home as a minority faith community
whose life is rooted in God and whose life is lived in, for and on
behalf of the world. The biblical image of the salt (Matthew
5:13) is a good reminder of this. The power of salt is not so
much in its quantity but in its quality – i.e. the ability to nourish
(fertilize) the earth, bring out the taste of food (not give taste to
food), and to preserve food.
Another helpful image for the Christian community that
reminds us against the tendency to be the majority, to have big
churches, and for our faith to be universal is the biblical image
of the remnant community. The word remnant is used in the
Bible in various senses, including as survivors of wars, plunder
and the exile (in the Old Testament). It is also used to refer to
the remaining faithful people (Romans 9:26-28) who are
steadfast in their faith. For me, the important thing that the
word remnant conveys is the reminder that strength is not in
number but in what God chooses to do with us, no matter how
small or few we may be. That is where the significance of a
motley minority group really is.
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 97
Therefore, in carrying out mission, we should not use the
increase in number of conversions, baptisms, or churches built
as the measures to determine success in mission – but how well
we have been able to witness to the embracing love of God so
that the community and the world we live in can be much more
loving and just, as God had intended it to be.
(4) The fourth shift: “from mere doctrinal issues to deep
spiritual concerns.” This has to do with the content of mission.
Traditional mission paradigm has been focused on Christian
apologetics – i.e. in trying to convince others, as much as
ourselves, that our religion is superior to others, that our religion
is the revelation; that it is through our religion that one can truly
come to the Truth. But as Ariarajah points out, mission that is
based on the usual Christian claims to uniqueness or superiority
and to absolute possession of the truth (which are latent in
traditional Christology) has no future. In fact, such only creates
more rivalry and animosity among different religious adherents.
Before I joined the Christian Conference of Asia, I was
working as Christian educator for the Dumaguete City UCCP
and also teaching at Silliman University in Dumaguete City,
Philippines. And because I did my MTh in Korea, a number of
Korean missionaries who came to Dumaguete would visit me at
the university for conversations. One time, one of these Korean
missionaries came looking so tired and tanned as he was just out
in the sun handing out leaflets to people and saying, “Jesus loves
you.” I asked him, “So how did your mission go today?” He
said, “Well, one old man tapped me on my shoulder and said,
‘Young man, I already know that Jesus loves me since a long
time ago.’” I explained to him that majority of the Filipinos are
Catholics and they already know that Jesus loves them just as
much as the Protestants do. “Jesus loves…”, “Jesus saves…”
are not new to Filipinos. The question is: what does that mean
for Filipinos today who continue to struggle for a decent life in a
land that is governed by corruption, injustice and paranoia about
people’s movement for social transformation?
98 theologies and cultures
In the wake of endemic poverty, massive injustice, the
widespread negative impact of economic globalization and the
senseless war on terror, the intense search for meaning and for
authentic spiritual life needs to be addressed. Basic to the cry
for economic justice, genuine peace and reconciliation, freedom
from violence and oppression, and for just dealings in
international relations is a deep spiritual longing. These deep
spiritual concerns that transcend religious or denominational
labels should comprise the content of our mission today.
As Christians coming from different denominations, how
do we witness to Christ Jesus who did not teach us to wave our
denominational flags in order to be faithful to him? As
Christians living among a majority of people embracing other
religions, how do we witness to the love of God in Christ Jesus
who came that all may have fullness of life – with no
precondition for any religious flag or badge?
(5) To Ariarajah’s four shifts I would like to add a fifth
shift: “from token partnership to genuine solidarity.” This has to
do with the spirit behind the methodology or practice of mission.
It is unfortunate to note that the mission being carried out today
by many zealous Asian missionaries simply promote the
traditional paradigm of mission.
In the Philippine experience, many of these missionaries
come with lots of money, buy land and build churches and
schools, using a Filipino “dummy” to fulfill the legal procedures
of owning property in the country. But many of these
missionaries set up their own enclaves, their own stores and
schools, their own NGOs, and their own communities which
then grow into country-towns. After learning English in the
Philippines, they set up their own schools which attract people
from their own country to study English intensively in the
Philippines. In all these, they generate income and profit for
themselves but not really contributing to the economy of the
host country.15
It is no wonder then that in one part of the
15
This was shared with me in confidence by a church leader in the
Philippines last March 2008.
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 99
Philippines, there is a growing dislike for some of these
missionaries and their people to the point that in one Indigenous
community, a sad sign has been put up: No Koreans allowed.16
In some places like China, these Asian missionaries go as
business people setting up noodle and other food factories,
taking advantage of the cheap labor and resources in China.
Therefore, mission today is ironically in connivance with
capitalistic business enterprise. How can there be genuine
partnership between people who are unequal right from the start?
How can there be genuine partnership in mission if it is in fact
driven by or couched in business or political interests?
The new paradigm of mission should challenge this
token partnership with its economic and political agendas and
strive to foster genuine solidarity with the people in their
concrete human needs. To be in solidarity means to be one with
another, to identify with the other, to feel strongly for the pain
and hurt of the other, and to share the burden of the other as if it
were one’s own. Solidarity implies the self-emptying mindset
and attitude of Christ (kenosis) in an effort to lift up those who
are downtrodden, oppressed, and dehumanized.
Cognizant that Christians in Asia constitute a religious
minority, solidarity should not only be limited among Christians
or among churches. Genuine solidarity should encompass
interreligious solidarity. Bishop Duleep de Chickera of Sri
Lanka called for interreligious solidarity and integration in his
presentation at the recent joint consultation of CCA and WCC
on revitalizing the ecumenical movement. He gave several
reasons why interreligious solidarity and integration ought to be
a serious vision:17
16
According to Rev. Fr. Rex Reyes, general secretary of the National
Council of Churches in the Philippines, who personally shared this incident
with me last March 2008 in Manila, this sign is found in a province in
northern Philippines. 17
Bishop Duleep de Chickera of Sri Lanka spoke of “interreligious
solidarity and integration” in his presentation at the CCA-WCC joint
consultation on “revitalizing the ecumenical movement,” 1-3 September 2008
in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
100 theologies and cultures
1. Interreligious solidarity is biblical and theological – for
God is eternal, omnipresent and ever dynamic.
2. Interreligious solidarity and integration is in a sense
Asian. It will capture the imagination of Asian
Christians as this is where they are already – whether in
relationships of harmony or of conflict.
3. Interreligious solidarity will impact the dehumanizing
experiences of Asia as there is a collective religious
conscience on issues such as poverty and environment.
4. Interreligious solidarity will impact the world church –
especially with the waning enthusiasm for it in some of
global organizations.
5. Engagement in interreligious solidarity will help us deal
with conflict and hope.
6. In interreligious dialogue, good and bad things emerge as
one raises questions and leaves it to others to discern for
themselves.
There is a lot that religious adherents share together.
There is also a lot that we need to face or bear together. Hence,
interreligious solidarity is the only way for us in Asia in order to
survive together.
(6) To Ariarajah’s four shifts I would further add a sixth
shift: “from overemphasis of one biblical passage to an
emphasis of the total biblical message.” This has to do with the
biblical basis for mission, which churches use as the mandate for
their mission activities. The traditional paradigm of mission
tends to overemphasize the so-called Great Commission
recorded in Matthew 28:19-20: “Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them… and teaching them
everything I have commanded you.”
There are many other commissioning statements by Jesus
which are found in the gospels and the book of Acts. But this
one in Matthew has been given the title of “The Great
Commission” by those who divided the texts into chapters and
verses, thereby making the other commissioning statements
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 101
seem lesser or lower than this. This commissioning statement
seems indeed to be the motivation behind the zealous mission
activities being done today by Asian missionaries.
Many seminaries in Asia do not only teach mission as part
of their theological curriculum. They have also set up special
mission training centers – where they train would-be
missionaries with some language skills, cultural studies, and
strategies in proselytism and church planting. Taking the so-
called Great Commission as the main mandate for mission, apart
from the overall biblical message, has made traditional mission
paradigm zealously aggressive and overly concerned about
numbers – of converts, baptisms, or of churches planted. Taking
the Great Commission as the main motivation for mission, apart
from the overall message of the Bible, has led to the neglect of
many important passages in the Bible.
One very helpful passage is Luke 4:16-21, which describes
the very essence of Christ’s life and mission – where mission
means bringing the good news to the poor, freedom to those
held captive, sight to the blind, and release to the oppressed.
While many churches would rather spiritualize the good news,
freedom, sight and release, we must remember that Jesus did
attend to the physicality of such conditions in his lifetime.
Matthew 25:31-46 describes how life in mission can be lived in
service to the least of God’s people, with whom and among
whom Christ is. The story of the Syro-Phoenician woman in
Matthew 15:21-28 (also Mark 7:24-30) shows Christ himself
becoming changed in his concept of mission through an
encounter with a woman of a different ethnicity and religion.
Mark 9:38-41 illustrates to us that the close circle of Christian
disciples do not have the monopoly of Christ’s mission. So why
should we stop them?
In March and April 2008, my desk (Faith, Mission and
Unity of the Christian Conference of Asia) organized two sub-
regional consultations on “Holistic Mission in the Context of
Asian Plurality.” The rationale for holding those consultations
reads in part:
102 theologies and cultures
Christian Conference of Asia affirms that our mission is
really God’s mission of proclaiming, sharing and living
out the good news of fullness of life for all children in the
household of God. We also affirm that the household of
God is the whole inhabited world (oikoumene) and thus, all
peoples, regardless of race, color, creed and faith, are
already members of that household, endowed with the
image of God within them, no matter whether they
acknowledge it or not. Hence, mission has to be holistic –
i.e. attending to the needs of the total person; affirming the
divine image within them; opposing the forces that distort
that divine image; and assisting the flowering or blooming
of that divine image into fullness.18
So in that consultation, we critically revisited the so-called Great
Commission and also looked at other biblical passages that have
not been emphasized but which can also inform our search for
new paradigm concepts of mission today. But it is not only a
matter of what passages of scriptures are emphasized or
neglected. It is also how the scriptures are read – and they must
be read from the perspective of liberation. Liberation
perspective includes analysis of context and relations of power,
concern for structural change versus caritative relief, seeing
things from the side of the poor, empowerment of the poor, and
capacity to engender hope.19
Conclusion
I have given in broad strokes some paradigm shifts
needed in order to have an understanding of mission that is
biblically grounded but also contextually relevant. I have
18
From the concept paper on the Sub-regional consultations-dialogues on
“Holistic Mission in the Context of Asian Plurality” organized by the CCA-
FMU desk in Manila (for Southeast Asia) and Bangalore (for South Asia),
March-April 2008. 19
Schreiter, 14-15.
New Paradigm in the Concepts of Mission 103
borrowed and expanded the four shifts articulated by S Wesley
Ariarajah, and added two more. To sum up, following are the 6
necessary shifts in mission thinking and practice: (a) from an
exclusive to an inclusive understanding of God’s mission; (b)
from conversion to healing as goal of mission; (c) from majority
to minority as a faith community; (d) from mere doctrinal issues
to deep spiritual concerns; (e) from token partnership to genuine
solidarity; and (f) from overemphasis of one biblical passage to
an emphasis of the total biblical message.
It is my hope that this paper has served its purpose of
outlining some possible paradigm shifts in mission thinking and
practice for us in Asia.
If we are serious about making these paradigm shifts, we
need to seriously evaluate and transform the mission orientation
of our churches and seminaries, and the curricula in our
seminaries and mission training centers. For as Christ Jesus
himself reminds us, the new wine will indeed require new
wineskin.
References
Antone, Hope S. Religious Education in Context of Plurality
and Pluralism. Manila: New Day Publishers, 2003.
Ariarajah, S. Wesley. “Wider Ecumenism: Some Theological
Perspectives,” in Encounters with the Word: Essays to
Honour Aloysius Pieris. Robert Crusz, Marshal Fernando,
Asanga Tilakaratne, eds. Colombo: Ecumenical Institute for
Study and Dialogue, 2004.
_______. “Christian Mission: The End or a New Beginning,”
unpublished paper presented at the Meeting of the United
Methodist General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM),
October 1998.
104 theologies and cultures
Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in
Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991.
Carr, Dhyanchand. “Innovative Methods in Theological
Education,” in CTC Bulletin, Vol. XIX, No. 3 (December
2003).
Chickera, Duleep de. “Revitalizing the Ecumenical Movement
in Asia,” an unpublished paper presented on 1-3 September
2008 in Dhaka, Bangladesh for the joint consultation of the
Christian Conference of Asia and the World Council of
Churches.
Schreiter, Robert. Liberation and Reconciliation as Paradigms
of Mission. Sundbyberg: Swedish Mission Council, 2003.
theologies and cultures, Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 105-127
The Church is God’s Partner
In Re-creation
Choan-seng Song1
Introduction
We begin with a story from the Analects of Confucius.
Confucius disciple Tsze-lu remarked, “The
ruler of Wei has been waiting for you, in order
with you to administer the government. What
will you consider the first thing to be done?”
The Master replied, “What is necessary is to
rectify names.” “So! indeed!” said Tsze-lu.
“You are wide of the mark! Why must there be
such rectification?” The Master said,… “If
names be not correct, language is not in
1 Prof. C. S. Song, a distinguished Professor of Systematic theology at
Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley California, is visiting Professor,
School of Theology, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Translation from Chinese by David Alexander. The paper was presented at an
Asian Mission Conference held at Tainan Theological College and Seminary
in October, 2008.
106 theologies and cultures
accordance with the truth of things. If language
be not in accordance with the truth of things,
affairs cannot be carried on to success….
Therefore a superior man considers it necessary
that the names he uses may be spoken
appropriately, and also that what he speaks
may be carried out appropriately. What the
superior man requires is just that in his words
there may be nothing incorrect.” (Analects 13:3)
Our concern here is “The Asian Mission Aftermath of the
1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference.” This question has
been around for a long time. It’s hard to imagine why we have
procrastinated for almost a hundred years, until 2008, to hold
this discussion, but I have several theories. Could it be that we
have not yet emerged from the era of Western missions? Or
maybe it’s that we are still entrapped by the attitudes of
Christian colonization. Perhaps we have not yet been
transformed by our own era. Of course, we are people of the
“post modern 21st century, but do we still hold to pre-modern,
pre 20th
century religious attitudes? Could it be that, having not
yet established our own faith and theology, we continue to use
the old Western inheritance? Have we taken the position that
faith and theology are like wine that is never renewed, that can
not change?
The Intersection of Old and New
We are familiar with Jesus’ saying, “No one puts new wine
into old wineskins; if he does, the wine will burst the skins, and
the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but new wine is for fresh
skins.” (Mark 2:21-22). In this metaphor Jesus puts a question
directly to his hearers. Sadly, the gospel writer did not record the
words of the question, which must have been, “Is your wine new?
And if it is, your wineskins, are they not also new?”
In discussing the intersection between new and old, we can
find four possible modalities:
Partner in Recreation 107
1) Old wine put into old wine skins
2) Old wine put into new wineskins
3) New wine put into old wineskins
4) New wine put into new wineskins
What is the shape of your organization? You need only
take a brief look at your Sunday sermons, scripture lessons,
Bible class teachings, the theological essays you choose to read
or write, and you will readily find the answer.
Jesus, of course, fits into the fourth modality, new wine put
into new wineskins. This is clear in the statement, “New wine
must put into new wineskins.” Do our own theologies
demonstrate new vision? If I am dedicated to Jesus from my
heart, do I reflect the heart of Jesus himself in my own faith and
theology? Regarding the intersection of old and new, I must
strive for the fourth modality, “New wine put into new
wineskins.”
I do not pretend to have already accomplished this. I may
whisper, though, that I strive without ceasing in this direction.
Let us turn, now to discuss the topic wherein we “talk the talk
but do not walk the walk,” mission.
“Modern” as an Historical Moment
The study of history often shows the past and reveals the
era or stage of those doing the study. So “history” has its own
history. But if we are not talking about the past, then what is our
topic? If history is not a record of the past, then what can we say
is actually historical? In terms of ethnic or national history, we
habitually use particular methods of discussion or research. In
discussion and research of religion we can apply some of the
same methods. The truth and suitability of historical research
methods applied to religion is hardly questioned.
But, have we no other methods? Events of the past are the
basic data for historical research. First-hand resources are good.
Second-hand resources are also good. But history must be
interpreted if it is to be understood. This moves us to questions
of epistemology. How then can we get our hands onto real
108 theologies and cultures
history in order to talk about it? Historians are like
archaeologists who dig up things that were long buried.
Archaeologists have budgets and tools for their work, and their
methods are useful for historians.
But archaeological artifacts are wordless. Voice must be
given to their silence. That is the technique and art of
archaeology. History is similar. The purpose in researching
history is to enable the happenings of “then” to speak
meaningfully to “now.” As we discuss history we seek to enable
each era to inform us regarding the affairs of every era; to see
how the things of any time influence things of other times. And
after the things have spoken, our discussion of them begins.
This begs the question, “Is this an eternally set form to which
there is no alternative?”
My own preference for historical research and discussion
of past events is to begin with “now” as the starting point, using
“now” as the central hinge of historical research. This, of course,
is not what we have been habitually taught.
Confucius disciple Tsze-lu remarked, “The ruler
of Wei has been waiting for you, in order with you to
administer the government. What will you consider
the first thing to be done?” The Master replied, “What
is necessary is to rectify names.” “So! indeed!” said
Tsze-lu. “You are wide of the mark! Why must there
be such rectification?” The Master said,… “If names
be not correct, language is not in accordance with the
truth of things. If language be not in accordance with
the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to
success…. Therefore a superior man considers it
necessary that the names he uses may be spoken
appropriately, and also that what he speaks may be
carried out appropriately. What the superior man
requires is just that in his words there may be nothing
incorrect.”
Six Chinese Idioms
Partner in Recreation 109
Historical research which starts from the “now” to look at
things has many strengths. Each is summed up in a Chinese
Idiom: First, “In knowing the new, we learn the old”. This turns
around the Confucian method of “learning the new by reviewing
the old.” It is a reaction. If one knows the nature of the current
problem, one can know the nature of past problems. If there was
wrong, where was it? A second strength comes from the
principle of “Switching the positions of the host and guest.” By
this method passive historical research is transformed to active
historical research. One respects the past, but becomes more
careful in the selection of current historical topics.
A third consideration is that “Circumstances change with
the passage of time”. Time passes and boundaries shift.
“Modern” is an era. Modern situations and past time situations
are not the same, so one cannot generalize about “the Modern”
based on the past.
A fourth consideration is that found in the phrase, “ Strike
out on a new path.” Why learn history? Is it not to correct our
direction, reveal the future? A conservative, die-hard approach
to affairs can only hamper our movement into the future.
The fifth phrase is “Revert to one’s natural self.” Recovery
of one’s historical true face is an important purpose of historical
study. History from the past comes to us heavily polluted. The
meaning of this pollution is taken from current environmental
protection thought. Our understandings of history are different,
and reveal to us how seriously polluted some past “histories”
have become in transmission to us. When we clean things up for
the sake of the future, we come to the sixth phrase, “break the
old and establish the new”. This is the meaning of Jesus’
statement about putting new wine into new wineskins. Meaning
is what we seek as we join to discuss history in this “fourth
modality” from Jesus’ parable.
110 theologies and cultures
Looking at World Mission Conferences From the Standpoint
of NOW
Starting from our “modern” worldview we must critique
the 1910 Edinburgh World Mission Conference and subsequent
world mission conferences to derive a better recognition of
today’s missional conundrum. We need to ask what kind of
world we live in, then we can see in what ways our predecessors
were blind and to what they were blind. Let the phrase “Know
what came before to know what comes afterwards” guide us.
The world in which we dwell in the 21st century is called
“postmodern.” It’s obvious that the 1910 Edinburgh World
Mission Conference, the 1928 Jerusalem World Mission
Conference, the 1938 Madras World Mission Conference, the
1947 Whitby World Mission Conference and the1952 Willingen
World Mission Conference took place in worlds that were“pre-
modern” or “modern.” These were the worlds of Western
colonization of Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific.
They were worlds wherein the Christian self-understanding was
that of being the “only” world religion. Reflection on that time
of colonization and “unity” from the standpoint of a holistic
world reveals the locus of problems in these “world” mission
conferences.
First, though these conferences begin with the term
“world,” that “world” was led by Western nations and Western
Christians. It is not the “world” we face today. 1,200 people
participated in the Edinburgh “world” mission conference. The
majority came from Europe and North America. Only 17 came
from non-Western areas. Of the 231 participants in the 1928
Jerusalem “world” mission conference one out of four (52) were
non-Western. In 1938 at the Madras “world” mission conference
there was a significant change. Nearly half of the 471
participants were not from the West. At subsequent “world”
mission conferences the non-Western area representatives
outnumbered representatives of Western churches. Nonetheless,
the Taiwanese proverb, “A change of form but not of content”
applies. The main topics of discussion were “mission”: “The
Partner in Recreation 111
Church in Mission”; “The World of Other Religions”;
“Christianization”, etc. The movement was from “Mission” to
“Church Mission” to “Other Religions” to “Christianization of
the World”.
Can we not sense deep foundational problem of historical
accumulation among these Christians? These “world” mission
conferences, from 1910 to 1952 focus on a single main point,
“non-Christian areas mission”, but the main speakers were
European evangelists, Euro-American mission board leaders and
Euro-American missiologists. What came from the Third-world
people who participated and contributed many ideas? Is this not
a mystery? Let a family situation illustrate the problem. Say that
you have problems. Some relatives and friends come to sit with
you, analyze your situation and help you find solutions. But you,
on the contrary, change your manner. They want you to hear
what they say, do what they tell you to do. If you disagree with
the opinions they offer, and act in ways that are not what they
direct, they become unhappy. Now return to the 1910
conference. Bishop Azariah from India spoke out the
frustrations of non-Western churches. He said that the churches
of India were eternally grateful for the sacrifices and
contributions made by Western missionaries. “You sacrificed
your lives, we still hope that you will offer us your love and
become our friends.”2 This statement at Edinburgh did not “steal
the show.” Western representatives failed to perceive the hope
of “friendship” in the bishop’s statement. This word contained
much of the third world churches’ grief and burden. Merely
looking at the main points of these “world” mission conferences
we can know the concerns of those who arranged them. It was
all about the policies of Western mission to the third world.
The main topic of the 1910 conference was “Concerns and
Problems of Mission to the Non-Christian World”. But where is
the problem? Was it in the so-called “non-Christian world” or in
2 T.V. Philip, Edinburgh to Salvador, 20th Century Ecumenical Missiology,
[Madras: SPCK, 1999], p.29)
112 theologies and cultures
the self-validating, non-cooperative and mutually deprecating
Euro-American churches and mission organizations? The
conference found it’s main focus located in Euro-American
church divisions and the ways to unite divided churches,
overcome sharp divisions of denominations and learn to
cooperate. “Unity” became the unceasing cry of ecumenical
church associations. But those churches and organizations
turned from original principles of Christian unity to strive for
structural unity. Though they made progress in superficial and
ceremonial aspects, the need for true church “unity” continues
as of old and is seen as impossible to attain. We hope that in the
future opportunities for everybody discuss “church unity” will
make it more than just a slogan. Standing for unity is truly
important, but the feeling behind it grows ever colder. From the
phenomenon of globalization in today’s world we must reflect
on the world as it was at the time of the 1910 conference.
Second, it is manifestly clear that globalization spread
like wildfire through the world in the later decades of the 20th
century and into the 21st. Globalization brings the world both
good things and disasters. It is not all one or all another. It must
also be said that the topic of the Christian Church as “a church
in mission” is not easily categorized either. In second half of the
20th
century, without preparation, the church and the world since
the Second World War rapidly became globalized. Because
nobody could have been sufficiently prepared for globalization,
we need to say something about “mission”. We need to move
beyond the idea that Jesus’ great commission recorded in
Matthew 28:10-20 can never change. Taiwanese Presbyterians
can see what has happened. Those who have repeatedly attended
General Assembly meetings have all experienced when a topic
was discussed for half a day, an entire afternoon or late into an
evening, and no consensus has developed. Then someone stands
and says, “This has gone on too long.” I suggest that the
Church’s original situation has changed. This affair has gone on
too long. The world is not in the same situation it was in at the
time Jesus spoke that commission. The world does not wait for
Partner in Recreation 113
the church, but leaves the church “in the dust” and moves ahead.
This is the situation of all churches. It is the “mission
bottleneck” that cannot be escaped. Churches are not only
unable to cooperate, but more and more serve as the sources of
the constriction.
At the 1928 Jerusalem World Mission Conference one side
opined that the non-Western church must be self-established,
self-governed and self-propagating. The other side stood for
Western churches continuing to act take a leading role.
Naturally the equality of non-Western churches was important,
but Western churches acted as “more equal”. This echoes the
situation of the book Animal Farm by George Orwell. In that
story, on a farm which had been abandoned by the human
farmer, the animals arranged to run things themselves. Soon the
comparatively intelligent pig rose up and began to drink up
everything, loudly proclaiming, “All the animals are equal, but
Mister Pig is more equal than the others.” Of course this is a
satire, and is even humorous, but it also represents the divided
relationships between Western and non-Western churches. After
many years some situations have changed. Non-western
churches are self-governing, and self-propagating, but in terms
of their faith, theology, renewal and psychology, most continue
to follow the lead of Western churches and to imitate Western
models. We need to examine this.
Third, globalization will bring many troubling questions
that will test our faith. Theology is related to church mission
and binds us to questions of different cultures’ relationships to
Christianity. This is not a new question for the church to face.
We can say that 2000 years ago when the church reached from
Jerusalem into the “gentile” world it began to face the problem.
At the 1938 Madras World Mission Conference the question
provoked fervent discussion, and concluded with a Western
answer. The Dutch missiologist Hendrik Kraemer led a zealous
assault and seized the advantage, asserting that only in the
Christian message and faith is there hope for reconciliation and
remediation in this divided world. In today’s Palestine and the
114 theologies and cultures
Islamist terrorists who brought down the World Trade Center in
2001 there is testimony that the 1938 debating point was
erroneous. The viewpoints of non-Western church
representatives at the 1938 conference were not merely ignored,
they were cast aside by the Western thought of those leading the
discussions. From a globalized worldview of the 21st century it
can be said that the 1938 conference was a waste of words
insofar as it had anything to contribute to discussion of the
relationship of culture and Christianity. It is sad that more than
half of non-Western churches in today’s globalized world
remain unable to break out of the theoretical and theological
confinement of past Western churches’ forms. This is true of
both “mainstream” churches and of the Pentecostals. All are the
same. The error continues. Reactionary trends prevail. On
display are the banners of “I, alone, am noble.” We who come
afterwards bear a theological responsibility knowing that “Our
load is heavy and the way is long”
What can be said of today’s globalized world? In
religion and culture it is pluralistic. But this is a pregnant phrase.
Isn’t globalization an obvious sign of world progress? Take the
economy as an example. Under the protection of globalization,
hasn’t the economy become unified? Right. But culture and
religion are not the same as economy. The more and more
obvious that unification of economy becomes, the more and
more division appears in culture and religion in this “post-
modern” world. Christians have not been transformed in terms
of the relationship of Christianity and culture by Bible scholars
and theologians. Traditional Western churches continue to
maintain dominance and to hold non-Western theologies in a
spiritual headlock.
Fourth, the world of globalization is one of conflict
between religion and culture. This conflict will become ever
more serious. We have already noted the many years of
bloodshed and suicide bombings in Palestine and in territories
where Islamic fundamentalism or Christian fundamentalism
prevail. It is very unfortunate that agencies like the World
Partner in Recreation 115
Council of Churches cannot protect anyone through position
papers and declarations. Actually, the World Council of
Churches through the process of “dialogue” has made not little
progress in moving differing cultures and religions towards
mutual understanding and respect, but the effect has been small.
“Mission” has not solved the problem or moved those in dispute
to think or act differently. To the contrary, “Mission” has
increased the number of theological problems, the greatest of
which is that old problems persist and new thought is not
brought to bear because of stubbornness. Bad reasoning goes
around in circles, and nothing comes to resolution.
In 1995 the World Council of Churches (WCC) issued a
proclamation in which Christian actions intended to convert
believers of other religions to Christianity was labeled as
“proselytism”. The proclamation pointed out that calling people
to conversion to Christian theology and principles causes many
problems and has many drawbacks. It carried an appeal for the
reconciliation of different religions and the taking up of “holistic
mission.”3 But the undefined “holistic mission” did not present
itself as a banner under which people might be moved to serve.
This type of declaration also failed to change the calls of WCC
member churches to people of other religious faiths to convert to
Christianity, believe in Jesus and get saved. The calls continue
in the mainstream churches that are members of the World
Council as they do in the Evangelical, Pentecostal and
Charismatic churches which have no WCC affiliation. In the
matter of conversion, mainstream, Evangelical, Pentecostal and
Charismatic Protestants all use the same measuring rods, which
are clearly described in the Church Growth Movement. It
becomes manifestly clear that declarations of international
ecumenical church agencies such as the WCC and the World
Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) have little impact in
this post-Christian world. As we discuss our churches’
3 Statements on Mission by the World Council of Churches, 1980-2005
(Geneva, 2005), pp.44-58
116 theologies and cultures
relationships with each other and with the world, we must admit
this truth.
Insofar as the world of globalization is one of conflict
between religion and culture, some historians and political
scientists have made statements that draw nodding approval.
Samuel Huntington (1927-2008) Emeritus Professor of Political
Science from Harvard University, often pointed out that under
economic globalization the conflict between culture and religion
would become ever more serious. But is this a conflict of
religions? If this is true (and we believe it to be so), we dare not
challenge the spirit and effort that has gone into many years of
inter-religious dialogue conducted through the WCC, the
WARC and others. We believe that “reconciliation” is at the
heart of the Kingdom of God as proclaimed by Jesus. This must
be the central emphasis of the church’s proclamation. But the
question remains, “How can reconciliation become rooted in the
message of today’s church?” Let us turn to one understanding of
Jesus and consider a few points for a later discussion of
partnership.
THE CHURCH AS GOD’S PARTNER IN RE-CREATION
Church Mission: Let us return to the central point of our
entire endeavor here. Where shall we start, from “mission” or
from “the church”? Does the church belong to the mission or the
mission to the church? Neither. The mission is God’s creation
(Genesis 1 & 2) and God’s re-creation (Rev. 21). In the church,
it is especially God’s re-creation, found both in incarnation and
in God’s dwelling among us (John 1:14). This is the nucleus of
this gospel’s message. The remainder of the teaching expands
on this nucleus. We must intentionally take our stand on the
second half of the statement: “the word dwelt among us.” This
is more important that the first half: “the word became flesh.”
This statement contains the theological high point of the writer
of the fourth gospel. None of us, not even that gospel writer,
knew the “HOW” of the word becoming flesh. This is a mystery
and secret that belongs to God’s act of creation. The purpose of
Partner in Recreation 117
the writer of the fourth gospel was that we must attempt to
deeply understand the word “dwelling among us” (humanity).
Too often we focus on the first half, the incarnation. My
personal view is that our focus on incarnation forms the main
reason that the church and theologians are unable to break
through the mission bottleneck. When someone is sick, and
receives a diagnosis, he or she may undergo treatment to assist
in a cure. We in the church need some “treatment” to help us
break through the bottleneck in pursuit of healing.
You may wonder why I don’t start with creation. Isn’t
creation the beginning of the church’s mission? Among the
books I’ve written there’s even one entitled Creation as the Key
to Mission Reconstruction. At many meetings of international
church agencies the vogue theological term is Missio Dei. More
and more we hear sloganeering that asserts “God’s Creation”
and “Incarnation” as basic mission models. This presents a big
problem to traditional theology. It is a problem of conceptual
deduction. Theology is subsumed into deductive
conceptualization for amusement. Many theological essays are
exercises in conceptual repetition. But repetition does not
necessarily lead to clarity. On the contrary, things become
increasingly turgid. Theology becomes an arrangement of
concepts that cannot be known. The term “Missio Dei” on
everyone’s lips at these meetings is merely a slogan.
I will set a different view. I say, let’s not speak of the
RULES of God’s mission. Let’s not begin from “God’s
Creation” but from God’s Re-creation” or from “Continuous
Creation” Let us also use “the word dwelt among us” from the
fourth gospel as the nucleus of God’s direction in re-creation.
This contains a theological trap that few people may perceive.
Let me show it to you.
First: That God is the creator is one of our basic faith
affirmations. The problem is that many Christians have turned
this affirmation into a factual relic. The resulting positions of
creationism and evolution oppose each other as oil and water
that cannot mix. To break through we need only ask, “Who saw
118 theologies and cultures
God’s act of creation?” Doesn’t the conflict solve itself then?
Nobody saw God create the cosmos, the heavens and the earth
and all things (including humanity). Strictly speaking, we
humans are not co-creators with God. We, like everything else,
are created. God needed no partners in the act of creation. To be
the creator is the sole prerogative of God alone. There is no
other explanation. All of creation, including human beings,
exists only after God has created. Of course, people are curious
of both the “how” of God’s creation and of the “when” it all
began. But these are questions of cosmology. Up to now the best
that scientists have been able to tell us is that many billions of
years ago the universe emerged from a black hole in a “big
bang.” We ask, “Where was the black hole?” and “Who made
the black hole itself?” (Genesis 1:1) Scientists are still working
on those questions.
From a theological point of view we must assert that people
and all created beings are not God’s partners in creation.
Religion itself must be understood to have come about following
creation. Our scriptures, both the Hebrew Bible and the New
Testament, emphatically testify that following creation of the
cosmos many things happened among people, most of them
were tragic! The flood (Genesis 5-9), and the saga of Joseph
(Genesis 25 and following), the Exodus, the stories of Israel and
Judah, the stories of the prophets, all contain human tragedies.
From a theological standpoint it can be said, and from a
religious faith standpoint it can be seen, that this is the story of
God’s continuous creative work through people, things and
events. In this the cosmos, nature, and all that is created
(including humanity) become partners in God’s continuous
creation. The story of Jesus’ crucifixion from a Christian point
of view can be said to be the story of all stories, the tragedy of
all tragedies, the incomparable story par excellence. Through
the suffering and death of Jesus comes new life. It is the story of
God’s re-creation of life.
Second: (also from John 1:14) “The word became flesh and
dwelt among us (humanity).” We must be careful not to stop at
Partner in Recreation 119
the first half of sentence “the word became flesh (incarnation)”
and persevere to the second part “the word dwelt among us
(humans”). Don’t you think so? Inquiring minds want to know,
so let’s look closely. “The Word became flesh (incarnation)” is,
like creation, God’s mystery. It’s something God did without
either inviting or needing us to participate in the act of
accomplishing it.
Our concern must be on “the word dwelt among us.”
This is God’s re-creation, the act of continuous redeeming of
people and concern for creation. In this work we are intimately
involved in conversation with God about salvation. Jesus is
God’s companion in the acts of redemption, salvation, re-
creation and continuous creation. In Jesus, ”creation” and
“incarnation” are connected. “Re-creation or continuous
creation” is bound to “the word dwelt among us.” In this way,
from “creation” to ‘’incarnation” to “re-creation (or continuous
creation)” to “the word dwelling among us” forms a broad circle.
We come at last to understand, from a Christian standpoint, how
it can be said that Jesus, this “word” is God’s re-creation. Again
and again in the cycle of three points, creation, redemption,
salvation the church and Christians are in supporting roles. We
are God’s partners in re-creation. This is the source of my
personal theology.
Let us regard Jesus as taking the lead role in God’s re-
creation. The church has a supporting role. In such an
arrangement the church, as the supporting actor, wants to listen
clearly to the leading actor, Jesus, and to support his every
action. So, what is at the very center of all that Jesus does? The
Kingdom of God. Not the Kingdom of God as you or I proclaim
it. Not the Kingdom of God as the church proclaims it, but the
Kingdom of God as proclaimed by Jesus Himself! Therefore, we
must rebuild the church’s mission from the Kingdom of God as
proclaimed by Jesus. Rigorously speaking, we must re-establish
the church’s ministry. In our traditional mainline churches,
“mission” is often seen as one aspect of the church’s work, not
as the whole thing. Because we do not locate the church’s
120 theologies and cultures
mission in the work of the Kingdom of God as proclaimed by
Jesus, we miss its wholeness, and confine the church’s mission
to what can be defined as “leading people to believe in Jesus and
be converted to Christianity. ” In so doing, we create a “church
mission” bottleneck. For nearly 2000 years now we have acted
on what we have received, and have created a binding cocoon of
church mission, encircling ourselves so tightly that we cannot
get out of this cycle. But the Kingdom of God as proclaimed by
Jesus can and will provide a way out of this confinement. In
breaking out of the cocoon, we will break through the bottleneck
of church mission.
The Church as the Partner in The Kingdom of God as
Proclaimed by Jesus
What is the Kingdom of God as proclaimed by Jesus? This
question is key for contemporary contextual church work
discussions. If we can come to a clear answer, then we can take
a long view of church ministry and proceed to re-create the
church’s “mission.”
Jesus’ “way” is the Kingdom of God. Jesus is the very
embodiment of the Kingdom of God. Jesus’ whole life, his death
on the cross, from beginning to end, demonstrates the Kingdom
of God. A few examples define the Kingdom of God as
proclaimed by Jesus for us. None will be new to you.
Jesus’ Mission Declaration From Luke 4:18-19
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has
anointed me to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed
go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." (NRSV)
Do our churches’ own mission statements conform to this
one of Jesus about himself? Certainly our churches do a lot of
the things that Jesus claimed for himself. The problem is that
many of us do not recognize these things as “mission”.
Partner in Recreation 121
The Prelude of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:3-12 and
Luke 6:20-23)
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom
of heaven.
"Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be
comforted.
"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
"Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.
"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called
children of God.
"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness'
sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
"Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute
you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my
account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in
heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets
who were before you. (NRSV)
The statements are fairly clear, but we have a problem in
that we link it to what follows in the chapter (in order to be more
righteous) and swallow it whole, then failing to understand it we
“spiritualize” the whole. This is our own interpretative problem,
and the result is that we spoil the text and fail to see the depths
of the meaning it contains. We often only assert the first verse,
(5:3) “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven” and ignore verses 4-9. We see “high spirituality” as a
personal thing, then ignore the starvation of the poor and neglect
questions of social injustice.
Not few believers also particularly excise the “before and
after” of Matthew 5:11 (Luke 6:22), assert that those who call
people to believe in the Lord and convert to Christianity will be
reviled, persecuted and falsely accused, but are not to lose heart
or retreat and must not be dismayed, because “your reward in
122 theologies and cultures
heaven is great.” Our churches have also committed the same
error and have covered it up. Don’t you know that Matthew 5:3
and Matthew 5:11, when removed from Matthew 5:4-9, cause
believers to fail to see the forest among the trees? Isn’t this a
distortion of Jesus’ meaning? This is a self-imposed limitation
that our churches must overcome in our speaking to the world in
“mission” world speaking. Otherwise we will be unable to break
through the bottleneck in “church mission.”
The Lord’s Prayer Matthew 6:9-13 (Luke 11:2-4)
Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come.
Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven
our debtors.
And do not bring us to the time of trial,
but rescue us from the evil one.(NRSV)
Jesus teaches that we must be concerned with things on
earth; that heavenly things are God’s affair. There is no use our
worrying about heavenly things. But we often want to wall
ourselves off from things on earth so as to be able to focus on
heavenly things. This is called “spiritualization”. When this
overtakes “mission” we fall into “mistaking the means for the
end” or “concentrating on the details but forgetting the main
purpose.” It is no wonder that we can’t break through the
“church mission” bottleneck. We must put first things first, face
each day’s physical and spiritual life needs, learn the way of
hungry people, and call on God to give us strength as we engage
with the tides of evil and violence without becoming polluted by
them. We must be careful not to become “false good believers”
who are unconnected to the world. This is the ministry of the
church, because this is the work of the Kingdom of God as Jesus
proclaimed it.
Partner in Recreation 123
God’s Re-creation Partner
Our traditions define “church mission” as calling people to
believe in the Lord and convert to Christianity. Seen from the
standpoint of the Kingdom of God as Jesus proclaimed it, this is
very one sided. It’s not very biblical and is theologically
illegitimate. If the church is to become God’s partner in re-
creation we must be converted from “The Great Commission”
(Matthew 28:19-20) to “Jesus’ Great Commandment” (John
13:34-35). Jesus “New Commandment of Love” must begin
from us and extend beyond the church. If we want to break
through the bottleneck of church mission this transformation
must not be neglected. “Church mission” traditionally speaking
equips the church to be God’s partner in creation. But the
church must become God’s partner in re-creation. This is the
rectification of the name “mission.”
Theology must lead a Christian “rectification of names”
movement. The 16th
century Protestant Reformation in Europe
can be seen in many ways as a rectification of the words used in
expressions of faith and theology. But any term, concept or
piece of specialized jargon, when used for too long, can suffer
two injuries. It can lose its original meaning and become empty,
or it can take on another meaning which is clearly different from
what it originally carried. This can be called “linguistic fate”.
When we encounter such a situation, we can attempt to hold
onto the original meaning as we use it, or create a new term to
express the meaning. Those who use words, either as producers
or receivers, must do so carefully so as to understand what
meanings are being expressed. Some cannot abide change. They
claim “this has forever been so, it can neither be changed or
amended.” The 16th
Century Protestant Reformation in Europe
can be seen as a linguistic and conceptual reformation. It had to
change Medieval Roman Church misuse of language from the
bottom up. This was really very good. But not long afterwards
the majority of the “reformation churches” relapsed to
“traditional” practices and concepts. For example, in reaction to
Roman “sacerdotalism” the Reformation churches posited the
124 theologies and cultures
principle of “the priesthood of every believer.” But today the
majority of Protestant churches, including the Presbyterian
Church in Taiwan, do not operate by this principle. This is but
one of our deficiencies.
The term or concept of Mission has been in use for a long
time, almost 2,000 years. It will take effort for any of us to insert
a new meaning into it without robbing it of all meaning.
Believers, hearing the term quite naturally understand it to mean
the responsibility of calling people to believe in the Lord and be
converted to Christianity. Preachers proclaim it to assert the
great responsibility of the church to influence people to convert
to Christianity. Of course, this understanding of “mission”,
strongly traditional in the church, will not die a natural death.
We must rectify the name, change its meaning, give it a new
nature. But what will this new nature be? Should we coin a new
term? I suggest that we keep the term, but change its content to
reflect “the responsibilities of the church” or “the tasks of the
church”. Conceptualize it as “the ministries of the church”. No
matter what change we make in its nature, whether we continue
to speak of “church mission,” or of “mission” or of “church
work”, that doesn’t matter. What is important is that believers
and church leaders come to experience the church as God’s
partner in re-creation and from this experience continue to live
out the action of the church as God’s partner in continuous
creation.
“Partner” The rectification of this term takes in five very
important things.
1) Partnership is not peripheral, but central. With
partnership at the center, other relationships are
established and ordered. The church’s main
partner is God as known in Jesus. We become the
partners of God through Jesus. We are not just to
renew the church for our own sake and do things
that please us.
2) The privilege of following God in the steps of
Jesus as partners is a glorious and difficult thing.
Partner in Recreation 125
God’s work in this human-ruined world, the
cosmos, is not easy. The word (Jesus) dwelling
among us, actualizing the Kingdom of God is a
difficult thing. To be God’s partner, Jesus’ co-
laborer in re-creation is necessarily a difficult task
3) God’s continuous creation, Jesus’ non-stop work
of saving humanity, is a mission of holistic
reconciliation. It includes the spiritual and
material lives of people. We who are material in
orientation can work towards spiritual
reconciliation. Another way of looking at it is to
say that spiritual transformation can bring about
material transformation. For example, our
participation in environmental protection work is
both material and spiritual.
4) Church ministries of partnership with God in re-
creation are universally applicable phenomena.
God through Jesus Christ has not given the church
special rights and privileges. It was this
universality, this lack of privileged status, that
brought Jesus into direct debate and conflict with
the religious cultus of his time. God, as I
understand God, has not given first place to the
Christian church. Jesus himself articulated the
principle of “the last shall be first.” Starting from
here we must re-examine much of what we have
been taught in the church; things like “election”
and “predestination”. We must look at the stories
of Esau and Jacob, of the Hebrew people and the
Abrahamic races, of Christians and non-Christians
and all other relationships that put people into
categories and produce relationship problems.
These need revision if not total rectification.
5) Being God’s partners in ministry calls us to
question the “success mission” measurements that
press much of church work. Are these not errors?
126 theologies and cultures
These measures have caused some to ask, when
the church works for environmental protection, if
it is good for growth of membership. When the
church stands alongside the weak, it has been
asked if this will help towards accomplishment of
the congregation’s strategic goals. If a church
speaks up for such things as freedom and
democracy, some wonder if this will help the
church to expand. The questions are not wrong,
but they are questions for the church to ask itself
about itself. They are not considerations of the
church as God’s partner in re-creation, as Jesus’
partner in God’s continuous act of creation. We
must ask, so let us do so: If the church lives as
God’s partner in re-creation, will it’s ministry on
the earth expand? Is the church of any help at all
in this pluralistic post-modern era? Is the church a
tool of God for the relief and support of this world
in which the strong continue to prey upon the
weak?
I recognize that the need for the 21st century pluralistic
post-modern world to be “Christianized” will take all we can
offer, and still may not succeed. Does that make me a defeatist?
No. My recognition is historically rooted. We need not look to
other nations. In Taiwan, Protestant Christianity has been
proclaimed in this land for more than 140 years. But Taiwan is
not “christianized”. Many from Taiwan look to South Korea,
which is said to have experienced rapid and phenomenal
Christian growth. Now one South Korean out of four is a
Christian. But the growth of Christianity there has stopped short
of even that country becoming “Christianized.” In the wider
context of Asia, Christianity was proclaimed in China as early as
the 7th
century, and Mateo Ricci arrived there in the 17th
Century.
In the 19th
century Western Protestant churches rose up and
entered Asian work, but Asia is not yet “Christianized.” In our
Partner in Recreation 127
current globalized world culture, religious conflict is pervasive.
Emphasis on world “Christianization” slights that which is
historical violates that which pertains to the church, and
produces danger. It throws oil onto the fire.
Conclusion
From now on the church in every corner of the world
must be transformed from the inside out. It must become the
partner of God in re-creation. It must be manifest as the word
(Jesus) dwelling among people. It must live out God’s
continuous creative recovery of the human heart, mending the
human-spoiled cosmos in partnership with God.
theologies and cultures,Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 128-150
Relativism and Difference:
Toward a Genuine Pluralism -The Multi-Religious Situation in Asia and
Its Challenges to the Mission-
Wang Shik Jang1
I. The Relationship between Relativism and the Pluralistic
Situation Today
Today religious pluralism is a scientific and
philosophical reality of life. The sciences and philosophy have
created a situation in which pluralism is unavoidable. A number
of contemporary philosophies these days, represented by process
philosophy or post-structuralism for instance, contend that
pluralism is a significant fact. Under the influence of modern
sciences based on quantum physics and relativity theory, it is
emphasized that reality is not one but many. Reality exists not
so much in itself but rather in relationship to other realities.
1 Prof. Dr. Wang Shik Jang is Dean of Graduate Studies and Professor of
Philosophy of Religion at Methodist Theological University, Seoul, Korea.
Relativism and Difference 129
Pluralism based on this vision of reality has become the
predominant force in our society. It is even praised as summum
bonum in this post-modern era and therefore, any positions
against it are to be regarded not only as the target of severe
criticism but also as an anachronistic behavior.
However, the reverse has been the case in the region of
religions. Especially, Abrahanmic religions, such as Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam, have always construed pluralism as a
kind of evil. The fight against pluralism has been viewed as one
of the most urgent duties for those Abrahamic religions. In this
way, while pluralism is considered a good virtue outside
religions, it is still considered to be an evil one inside many
religions.
This has been a theological burden for many Christian
theologians. If something that is regarded as a good virtue in the
world outside the church is continuously criticized as a vice
within the church, then it is tantamount to saying that the church
braves a danger of isolation from the world. Furthermore, it
implies that as the church is gradually alienated from the world,
it may finally become a ghetto in societies.
What is important here is that this is becoming a visible
phenomenon. Recently, a great number of intellectual minds in
the West have insisted that theistic religions, including
Christianity, are the ones that threaten world peace. Therefore, it
is said that theistic religions are not only meaningless
philosophically but also useless ethically. Some popular
scientists like Richard Dawkins and Edward Wilson have
produced books that attempt to undermine the value of
religions.2 They argue that theistic religions have done more
harm than good to the history of human beings. Some scientists
2 When it comes to atheistic and anti-religious movement, one of the
forerunners in scientific area is Richard Dawkins. See his books, such as The
Blind Watchmaker, (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1986) and The
God Delusion (London: Bantam Books, 2006). See also Edward Wilson’s,
Consilience: the Unity of Knowledge (Wilson: Vintage, 1999).
130 theologies and cultures
have even tried to start an anti-religious movement against these
religions.
In this essay, I will show that pluralism has been an
unavoidable element for the church and therefore, to adopt it is
not a matter of choice but rather a necessity. The church will
have little influence in societies, if it disregards the importance
of pluralism and keeps on dogmatically proclaiming their
absoluteness. Therefore, pluralism is an indispensable virtue for
Christianity, insofar as Christianity tries to remain one of the
living world religions.
Although pluralism has become an unavoidable fact even for
the Christianity, this does not mean that the church must accept
it without any conditions. First, since pluralism has been very
heterogeneous to the tradition of the church, a great number of
Christians may feel insecure when theologians try to embrace
pluralism. Therefore, in order for the church to embrace
pluralism, the first condition is that Christians should be
awakened to the new trend resulting from the philosophical and
scientific revolution. Unless Christians are accustomed to the
new trend, it is hardly possible to accept pluralism. Only as far
as Christian intellectuals are ready to assimilate the merits of
contemporary philosophies, such as Oriental philosophy,
Whitehead’s process philosophy, and the philosophy of post-
structuralism etc., will the church be able to feel comfortable
with pluralism. In what follows, I will first show how it will be
possible for the new methodologies of contemporary philosophy
to be integrated into today’s theology.
However, this does not mean that any kind of philosophy is
acceptable. In fact, the church could be damaged, if it is
misguided by a pluralism which has been affected by radical
relativism. Therefore, the second condition is to reject the
radical relativism caused by some secular philosophies today. It
is this radical relativism that has plagued pluralism and made
integration with the church difficult. Pluralism would not have
been detrimental to religion, including Christianity, if it had not
been based on radical relativism. Here, by the term “radical
Relativism and Difference 131
relativism,” I refer to the position that believes absolutely that
truth only depends on situations and contexts so that there is no
universal truth. Or, I am referring to the position that since there
is no absolute truth and every truth is relative and equal, we will
finally get the same kind of salvation no matter what religion we
take. From my own point of view, this type of relativism has
been of great harm to the notion of pluralism, because it has
misled many people into interpreting pluralism in the wrong
way. Moreover, it is needless to say that this type of relativism
has been, and is still, dangerous to the future of Christianity.
Unless we overcome the challenge of such relativism, Christian
theology will continue to suffer from the ills of pluralism.
After clarifying the problems of pluralism imbued by such an
extreme relativism, I will suggest an alternative which could
enable us to interpret pluralism in a more appropriate manner,
replacing the radical relativism. Based on such an alternative
type of relativism, which is influenced by the philosophy of
differentiation, I will suggest a new understanding of pluralism,
which I call “deep pluralism.” By deep pluralism, I am referring
to a genuine pluralism that appreciates the importance of
difference among religions and really emphasizes pluralistic
situations without falling into the pitfalls of relativism. With
this type of pluralism, I will show how we can talk about the
uniqueness of one religion even in the age of pluralism. In other
words, I will not only attempt to elucidate how a Christian
theology is able to contribute to the cooperation of religions; I
will also claim that such pluralism can still talk about theism and
carry out a Christ-oriented mission even in this post-Christian
era.
II. Radical Relativism as the Problem of Religious Pluralism
We are living in the age of relativism. Relativism is pushing
our cultural consciousness. Although people do not have any
specific knowledge about the content of Einstein’s relativity
theory, they all know that relativism has been strengthened by
post-modernism and has been applied to cultures, ethics, and
132 theologies and cultures
philosophies. However, people are well aware that the history
has often been critical of relativism. Especially, when it comes
to religions, believers have held that relativism has caused
several negative effects. Why do people think that relativism is
dangerous to religion and what are the issues?
First, the potential negative effect of relativism becomes clear
when the issue of truth is discussed. Some people think that the
concept of truth has begun to be threatened with the rise of post-
modern thoughts. According to post-modernism, truth is
nothing more than the product of contexts and situations that
surround the person who is talking about it. And those contexts
and situations are not free from a structure that has been the
framework of them. Since the structure merely serves as a
skillful means to maintain a context temporarily, it is true to say
that there is nothing to remain in truth after its structure is
deconstructed. A truth, whether it is about history, or about
reason, or about subjectivity, is the byproduct of a makeshift
reality and therefore a relativized reality. For this reason, there
is no truth that is always universal and objective. What is right
or wrong depends on the then-known multitude of variables that
make up a given situation or reality. In short, there is nothing
absolute. This is what relativism is all about.
However, relativism doesn’t stop here; it goes one step further.
It doesn’t just hold that there is no such thing as universal and
objective truth. It goes on to argue that truth itself doesn’t exist.
Therefore, the affirmation on the relativity of truth easily leads
to the rejection of the truth itself. Of course, it is not true that
relativism always ends up with the rejection of the truth itself.
However, it is quite reasonable to say that in most cases, the
relativization of truth results in the demise of truth, leading to
radical relativism.
Then, what is left in the long run when truth is relativized
through radical relativism? It is obvious that moral defaults
based on nihilism are merely left behind. When truth becomes
relative and finally rejected, people usually fall into a dilemma
in making a moral decision to do what is right. This may either
Relativism and Difference 133
hasten moral hazards at worst, or bring about ethical negativism
at best. In this way, a radical version of relativism often
becomes a threatening force to religions. This becomes ever
more evident if we consider the fact that nothing has been more
useful than religion, when it comes to solving the problems of
moral hazard and ethical negativism.
The second negative impact of relativism is related to religious
pluralism. Of course, no one would deny that relativism has
played a positive part in making religious pluralism effective.
When it is said that there is nothing absolute and therefore
everything is relative, relativism contributes to the spirit of
religious pluralism in which it is emphasized that all religions
are equally valid so that there is no one and only absolute
religion. This is why relativism functions positively for the sake
of religious pluralism in the sense that pluralism has facilitated
the cooperation of religions in peace-making. However,
relativism does not always play a positive part for religious
pluralism. On the contrary, it usually has brought about
negative consequences. Let us look at how this has occurred in
East Asian religions.
Relativism has played an important role in the philosophy of
East Asian religions, because a relational vision has been a key
factor of East Asian thoughts. For instance, it is well known
that the yin-yang thought in Taoism and Confucianism and the
doctrine of pratitya-samutpada (dependent co-origination, 緣起)
in Mahayana Buddhism have been derived from a relational
vision of reality. In these relational thoughts, it is claimed that a
thing does not exist independently of relationships with others.
This is why a relational vision easily results in a relativism that
construes everything to be relative. Up until this point, there is
nothing wrong with relativism in East Asian religions.
Problems arise only when such relativism based on a relational
vision leads to what I call “absolutizing relativism,” which is
another type of radical relativism. Why and how is such a
radical relativism problematic when it comes to religious
pluralism?
134 theologies and cultures
The point is that when relativism is related to religious
pluralism, it tends to go beyond the boundaries of its limitations.
Given that there is no absolute truth and everything is to be
relativized, some relativists begin to propagandize their idea as a
universal doctrine. They attempt to argue that there is nothing
that is exceptional to the principle of relativism. With that
argument, however, relativists are bound to universalize the
principle so as to absolutize it in the long run. Now, what I call
“absolutizing relativism” makes its appearance. By the term
“absolutizing relativism” here, I refer to the position which
absolutely holds that, since everything is so relative that its
existence is made possible only through its dependence on
others. Why is such relativism problematic? In addition, is it
really true to say that there is such relativism in East Asian
religions?
When the relativism based on such an absolutist type is
proclaimed, its principle does not merely apply to the dimension
of the mundane. For it is natural that the radical relativism as an
absolute principle is to be applied to the dimension of the trans-
mundane without an exception. As a result, the principle of
absolutizing relativism is so applied to the dimension of the
trans-mundane so as to assert that the dimension of trans-
mundane is to be relativized too. From the perspective of the
radical relativism, to say that the dimension of trans-mundane is
to be relativiezed is to say that it has never existed
independently. Furthermore, this leads to a radical type of
assertion that everything including the ultimate does not have its
own agency. In this way, the principle of universal relativity
applies to the dimension of the ultimate reality, finally insisting
that there is no difference between the ultimate as the
transcendent and what it transcends. This is apparent not only in
Kyoto School, which is one of the most radical philosophies in
East Asian Buddhism; it is also apparent in almost of all
Mahayana Buddhist Schools.
Francis Cook, one of the most famous philosophers in the area
of Hua-yen Buddhism in the West, says that he sees the ultimate
Relativism and Difference 135
even in his cat, Leo. Employing the Buddhist doctrine of
Emptiness, which is also the principle of universal relativity in
Mahayana Buddhism, Cook identifies the cat as the finite with
the ultimate as the infinite.3
From Cook’s perspective, the
dimension of the ultimate is merely the extension of the non-
ultimate. Transcendence is simply the by-product of immanence.
It is interesting to see that there are some philosophers who
interpret even Confucianism in this way. Edward Hall and
Roger Ames are the ones who subscribe to such an
interpretation. According to them, the notion of transcendence
is not relevant to the interpretation of religions in East Asia.
They insist that Tian (Heaven, 天), which has been traditionally
regarded as an ultimate in Confucinism and Taoism, is to be
seen in terms of what our world is. Tian is not independent of
creatures, because what is ordered, i.e., the creatures, are
constitutive of what orders, i.e., the transcendent. Tian is simply
the field of creatures.4 In short, according to Hall and Ames, a
“strict” transcendence cannot be discovered in the East Asian
religions. The only thing that is discoverable in them is
“immanent” transcendence.5
Of course, it is hardly deniable that an “immanent”
transcendence was the one that has been so prevalent that such a
concept of transcendence can be regarded as one of the salient
characteristics of East Asian religious thoughts. But it is also
fair to claim that what they call “strict” transcendence has been a
strong notion in the mainstream of East Asian religious
traditions. This is a significant fact that can be verified in the
Book of Shijing (詩經) and the Book of Shujing (書經), both of
which have been very influential in East Asian Confucianism.
Chu Hsi’s (朱熹) neo-confucianism is also a typical example
3 Francis Cook, “This is It”: A Buddhist View of Ultimate.” Buddhist-
Chirstian Studies 9 (1989): 127-142. 4 Edward Hall and Roger Ames, Thinking from the Han: Self, Truth, and
Transcendence in Chinese and Western Culture (New York: State University
of New York Press, 1998), 18-193, and 219-224. 5 Ibid. See especially chapters 9 and 10.
136 theologies and cultures
that emphasizes the importance of strict transcendence. For all
of them, it is not an exaggeration to say that transcendence
exists a priori apart from human beings in a sense.
Furthermore, nobody would deny that “what the Heaven
orders is called human nature,” which means that according to
Confucianism, human nature has originated from the Heaven (or
the Transcendent).6 In other words, transcendence is said to
logically proceed human nature. In addition, it is needless to say
that transcendence in Mahayana Buddhist philosophies is also
described as strictly transcendent of the dimension of the
mundane. For instance, Dharma-kaya (法身), which is regarded
as the transcendent in Mahayana Buddhism, can be said to be a
priori to Nirmana-kaya (色身 ), which is described as an
incarnated body of Buddha in this mundane world.
Therefore, it is an overstatement to assert that the
transcendence in the East Asian religions does not have its own
agency; it is also far from the fact that the transcendence is
merely the extension of the world and human beings. Hall and
Ames’ interpretation as such is rather one of relative positions
that should not be absolutized. Not only is their argument
problematic when it comes to the religious history of East Asian
religions, but it is also fatal to the future of religions, because
the greatest problem created by an overemphasis on immanent
transcendence is that it may lead to the denial of any kind of
transcendence. This is because there is no significant difference
between the statement that the existence of transcendence can be
denied and the statement that there is no “strict” transcendence.
This would mean that there is no basis for assuring that there
exists a transcendent reality that is able to care about what is
happening in this world. It is clear that this may lead to the
death of religions in the future.
However, as I said before, one of the most important
problems created by absolutizing relativism is related to the
6 This is written in Chinese as follows: 天命之謂性 , 率性之謂道 , 修道之
謂敎.
Relativism and Difference 137
issue of religious pluralism. What must be pointed out here is
that absolutizing relativism may become an obstacle to inter-
religious dialogue. A good many people are inclined to guess
that the religious pluralism based on relativism is undoubtedly
fruitful for the sake of inter-religious dialogue. However, this
has turned out to be wrong frequently, because every religion is
not only dominated by its own philosophy, but also ruled by its
system of faith. The system of faith is an important feature of
religion. Since the system of faith is usually dogmatic, it is not
easy for a religion to be tolerant of other religions. This can be
seen even in Buddhism, which has historically been noted as one
of the most tolerant religions. In the Lutus Sutra, one of the
most influential Buddhist Scriptures, this is expressed as follows:
In the Buddha-lands of the universe
There is only the One-vehicle Law,
Neither a second nor a third,
Except the tactful teachings of the Buddha.
But by provisional expressions
He has led all loving creatures,
Revealing the Buddha-wisdom.
In the appearing of buddhas in the world
Only this One is the real fact,
For the other two are not the true.7
What we have to be cautious about here is that “only this One
is the real fact.” For this is against what we usually consider the
spirit of Buddhism. It is well known that Buddhism has been
more tolerant of other faiths than any other religion. However,
here, we can see an exclusive attitude, when the Scripture
emphasizes that there is only “One” which is “the real fact.”
Furthermore, the Scripture also emphasizes that all others are
“not the true.” Nobody would deny that it is very easy for
Buddhists to accept religious pluralism, because the heart of the
7 The Threefold Lotus Sutra, tr. by Bunno Kato (New York: Weatherhill,
1975), 64.
138 theologies and cultures
Buddhist philosophy has always been associated with the
doctrine of dependent co-origination which leads to relativism.
However, the above Scriptural passage shows how a pluralistic
religion based on relativism can take an exclusive attitude
toward other faiths. Therefore, the real problem is not about
pluralism. It is about the relativism which is associated with
religious assertions whose tendency is dogmatic and therefore
absolutistic. In short, when relativism is applied to religion, it
easily turns into a vice, because it becomes vulnerable to the
lure of religious dogmatism. It goes without saying that this has
resulted in the conflict between Abrahamic religions and non-
Abrahmic religions in East Asia.
So far, we have seen how absolutizing relativism has brought
about some problems in East Asian religions. The rejection of
truth, the denial of the transcendence, and the failure of having
inter-religious dialogues with Abrahamic religions are the
problems that have been exemplified here. However, in short,
the most serious problem created by absolutizing relativism is its
tendency to absolutize its limited position. In other words, the
real problem caused by religious pluralism based on
absolutizing relativism is that while it appears to cry out the
importance of relativism, it virtually attempts to absolutize its
own position, which is limited and relative indeed.
In the next section, we will see in more detail how a new type
of pluralism can become an alternative to the general type of
religious pluralism. In what follows, I will propose such an
alternative and call it “deep pluralism,” which is considered
more genuine than the general one.8
III. Genuine Pluralism Based on Differentiation: an Alternative
So far, we have seen that the problems created by
pluralism are not caused by pluralism itself. They arise when
8 The term deep pluralism was borrowed from a Book, Deep Religious
Pluralism, (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), edited by David
Griffin. My essay entitled with “an Asian Christian Approach to Religious
Pluralism” is included there as one of the chapters (Chapter 11).
Relativism and Difference 139
pluralism is associated with absolutizing relativism. Therefore,
the issue to be discussed here is how to assimilate relativism not
in a radical manner but in an appropriate manner.
Deep pluralism can incorporate relativism in an appropriate
way and therefore, become a genuine type of pluralism. This is
possible because pluralism today is founded on an emphasis on
difference. By utilizing a philosophy of differentiation, it will
not fall into the pitfalls of radical relativism which is vulnerable
and highly susceptible to the tendency of absolutizing. In other
words, based on this philosophy, deep pluralism can fully
integrate relativism in an appropriate way without being trapped
by absolutizing. In understanding how this is made possible, we
need to look at some characteristics of the philosophy of
differentiation with regard to the issue of religious pluralism.
As we saw in the first section, the major movement in
philosophy today is being dominated by a new vision of reality.
It is quite a new one, because it differs from the traditional
concept of reality. It is widely accepted that traditional
philosophies have had a tendency to describe the world and
everything in terms of a fixed being. This tendency is strong not
only in the philosophers like Plato and Aristotle; it is also strong
in some scientists like Sir Isaac Newton.9
However, the
situation has changed today. The world and everything are
described mainly in terms of becoming, change and process.
Nothing is fixed.
As time goes by in the West, the concept of change and
becoming was gradually elaborated and intensified by many
philosophers. Under the impact of natural sciences, it has been
stressed that everything changeable is moving toward newness
in evolutionary processes. Such a vision of reality was
especially developed in the West several decades ago under the
influence of the process philosophy of A.N. Whitehead. Post-
9 Isaac Newton’s physics is noted for the assumption that our universe is
made up of absolute time and space that are fixed and unchangeable. Of
course, this assumption has been criticized since the appearance of quantum
physics and relativity theory.
140 theologies and cultures
structuralism in Europe has also embraced this vision of reality
and elaborated it in a post-modern way. Now, it is emphasized
that everything is not only becoming and in process, but also in
differentiation. Here, the term differentiation is employed to
emphasize both the importance of being changed and being
changed differently. In addition, the spirit of this vision can be
expressed like this in short: everything becomes different. Or,
simply put, everything is differentiation.
Then, how is differentiation made? And, in what way is it
related to religious pluralism? In understanding this, it is
important to keep in mind two principles. First, where there is
“differentiation,” i.e., “becoming different,” there is something
distinctive. Second, differentiation arises only when one is in
relationship with others. These two principles are key to
understanding how differentiation is related to religious
pluralism. And they will help explain how deep pluralism is to
become an alternative.
If we employ the first principle, then we can talk about the
uniqueness of every religion. To say that one becomes different
is to say that there is something distinctive. Differentiation
cannot be discovered unless there is something distinctive that
did not exist before. This leads to the fact that as soon as we
hold, for instance, that Christianity is differentiated from
Buddhism, the uniqueness of Christianity is to be affirmed. This
is because when Christianity has become differentiated from
Buddhism, it is presupposed that something distinctive owned
by Christianity has played an important role in making such a
differentiation. In other words, if the two religions had been
exactly the same, then they would not have been differentiated
from each other.
The second principle teaches us how to talk about the
importance of others in one’s existence. To affirm that
differentiation arises only when one is in relationship with
others is also to affirm that the role of other beings is necessarily
required for one’s existence in a sense. When it comes to the
issue of religious pluralism, this will help us to understand how
Relativism and Difference 141
other religions have made a great contribution to the existence
of a religion. Without the existence of other religions, any
religion would not be able to talk about its uniqueness. In other
words, uniqueness always presupposes the existence of others; it
does not exist in a vacuum. It is not solitary but relational, not
independent but interdependent. Uniqueness is not uniqueness
any more when others are pushed out of the picture.
If we have come to grips with these principles, we are now in a
position to understand in more detail how what I call “deep
pluralism” will be able to become an ideal type of pluralism
which can internalize relativism. When deep pluralism accepts
relativism, it really accepts relativity to the extent that other
religions are internalized in a genuine way. From the
perspective of deep pluralism, the existence of other religions is
necessary for the formation of one religion’s identity, because
even that identity would not have been a possibility without
making comparisons with other religions. In this way,
according to deep pluralism, one religion can assimilate
relativity in a serious way. This is why it is correct to say that
deep pluralism makes it possible for a religion to be engaged in
inter-religious dialogue more effectively.
Furthermore, deep pluralism can still get away from the trap
of an egalitarian approach, which says that every religion is the
same. As we know, this is one of the most serious mistakes a
general type of pluralism is usually faced with. A general type
of pluralism, which is usually based on radical relativism, is so
attracted by such egalitarianism as to proclaim that no matter
what religion we believe in, we will be saved any way. Or, it is
even affirmed that we will attain the same goal, no matter what
road we take. However, from the perspective of deep pluralism,
it is easy for us to avoid this problem. As we have seen, the first
principle of deep pluralism offers a logical method, through
which the differentiation among religions can be made. This
enables us to emphasize the diverse uniqueness of religions. Of
course, this does not mean that, for instance, Christianity has
something distinctive that is never apparent in Buddhism. In
142 theologies and cultures
more detail, some may insist that the love (agape) given by
Jesus may not be distinctive from the love (karuna) given by the
bodhisattva named Darmakara in the sense that both resulted
with the same consequence. And, of course, it is hardly
deniable that while Christians have been saved by their
performance of agape, Buddhists have been saved by their
performance of karuna.
Nevertheless, in terms of deep pluralism, it is equally
plausible to assert that something distinctive has played a
significant role in how people practice and internalize their
religion. In the case of Christianity, for instance, it is to be
emphasized that Jesus’ agape has always been performed under
the impact of God’s grace. By contrast, in the case of Buddhism,
the bodhisattva’s love did not have to be performed under the
impact of God’s grace, because it is obvious that there is no such
God in Buddhism.10
The point here is that religious pluralism
does not have to lead to the affirmation that all religions are the
same and therefore it does not matter which religion we take.
Let me put this in another way. A religion is limited by the
structure of a culture, and the limitation tends to make a
religion’s absolute position damaged and therefore relativized.
From this point of view, the uniqueness of a religion may
disappear. At the same time, however, the limitation also partly
plays a significant role in making the religion differentiated
from other religions. At this stage, the uniqueness of the
religion is retrieved. In this way, one religion’s identity is
defined by its uniqueness as well as its relativity. And this is
10
Some may argue that a Mahayana sect has posited an existence of a
personal deity even in Buddhism. Yes, this is true, for instance, in the case of
Pure Land Buddhism. But, even in this case, Amitabha Buddha, i.e., the
personal deity in Pure Land Sect, has to be distinguished from the personal
God of Christianity. This is because the personal deity of Pure Land Sect
cannot be described as the Ultimate Reality, which is identified with God in
the Christian case. In the case of Pure Land Buddhism, the Ultimate Reality
is Dharma-kaya (法身), which has to be distinguished from other deities that
are usually considered finite in Buddhism.
Relativism and Difference 143
why deep pluralism is distinguished from the general type of
pluralism in which the egalitarian approach is dominant.
Now, we are ready to see how deep pluralism is able to solve
the other two problems created by the general type of pluralism:
the denial of truth and the denial of transcendence. The
problems are to be solved again by utilizing the philosophy of
differentiation. The theory of differentiation holds that since all
things are limited and relativized, they have to be complemented
by others. This is why deep pluralism based on relativism
insists that all things are really relative so as to relativize their
own position. And, thanks to the relativity of everything, all
religions are doomed to be complementary. This makes us
understand why and how an atheistic religion needs to be
complemented by theistic religions. For instance, the Buddhist
doctrine of emptiness and nothingness should be complemented
by the doctrine of transcendence. Of course, in the case of
Christianity, the doctrine of God that is focused on God’s
absolute attributes may be complemented by a doctrine that
emphasizes God’s relativity. In this way, inter-religious
dialogue can be intensified if we employ deep pluralism. A
serious problem of religious pluralism based on absolutizing
relativism is, as we have seen in the case of East Asian religions
above, to deny the dimension of the transcendent. Owing to this
relativism, religious pluralism has failed to make some
Buddhists harmonize with other religions, i.e., with Abrahamic
religions whose theological characteristics are theistic. Deep
pluralism’s emphasis on the dimension of transcendence will
solve this problem too.
This is to say that the most essential contribution Christianity
can make in the age of pluralism is its emphasis on the
transcendence. As we have seen, almost all of the problems
created by relativism are related to the rejection of
transcendence. Therefore, many atheistic religions including
Buddhism, which are vulnerable to the problems created by
radical relativism, need to consider a theistic approach seriously.
144 theologies and cultures
Only with this approach, are they able to overcome the problems
associated with relativism.
In this way, deep pluralism, which can be integrated into a
Christian theology in our case, tries to be theistic. This is not
only to say that a pluralism based on theism will be worthwhile
for the inter-religious dialogue between Abrahanmic religions
and East Asian religions; this is also to imply that only a theist
type of pluralism can become an alternative to the religious
pluralism based on absolutizing relativism which has been faced
with the problem of contradiction.
An absolutizing relativism is hardly free from the problem of
contradiction, because it cannot help but relativize everything
including its assertions about relativism itself. The fact that
absolutizing relativism is bound to be contradictory has also
been the reason why relativism is in trouble with the issue of
truth. Therefore, I have emphasized that we need pluralism
based on a theistic position. With a deep pluralism, it will be
easier for us to adopt a theistic position, because deep pluralism,
whether it is Christian or Buddhist, cannot be called “deep”
unless it is so relative as to integrate other religions’ positions
into itself. In other words, Buddhist pluralism, for instance, may
want to adopt a theistic position, as far as it wants to become the
religion of a genuine pluralism. Buddhism is well prepared to
adopt such pluralism in the sense that Buddhist sect called Pure
Land has already offered the notion of a theistic ultimate. In the
Christian case, a genuine type of pluralism may be willing to
integrate the concept of impersonal Deity which is quite similar
to that of ultimate reality in Buddhist religions.11
IV. The Meaning of Mission in the Age of Religious Pluralism
One of the most intriguing tasks Christians are faced
with in the age of religious pluralism is to witness “the good
news” to the people of other religions. How is it possible for
deep pluralism to carry out that mission? In what way is it able
11
See Deep Religious Pluralism, in which some theologians, including me,
have asserted that God can be described as having both characteristics.
Relativism and Difference 145
to conduct the task of evangelization even in this post-Christian
era? In other words, with this kind of pluralism, is it still
possible for Christians to be committed to Jesus Christ?
These questions seem to be complicated. However, the
answer is quite simple. The main reason why it is possible for
Christians to be deeply committed to Jesus Christ in the age of
religious pluralism is that, thanks to the basic principle of deep
pluralism, Christians can emphasize the uniqueness of Christian
gospel. In order for us to see why this is so, suffice it to see
what we have discussed so far one more time.
We can recall that the most obvious fact all religions have
come to realize in the age of pluralism is that they are all limited
and relative. Of course, this has resulted in the rejection of one
religions’ absolute value. However, interestingly enough, this
has enabled us, thanks to the philosophy of differentiation, to
accept one religion’s unique validity. One religion is
differentiated enough from others to have its own validity.
As you remember, this is possible because one religion’s
relativity can finally bring about differentiation. Of course,
relativism pushes us to admit that all religions are not complete
and therefore, relative to each other. And, this is the reason why
they need to be complementary. Otherwise, the limitation of one
religion would no longer be corrected or improved. However, at
the same time, the relativism also makes us admit that a religion
can be sure of its own conviction too. For, as we saw above,
relativity not only talks about one’s limitation; it also talks about
one’s uniqueness. If we apply this principle, then Christian
believers can be sure of the validity of their gospel. This could
make it possible for Christian believers to proclaim the good
news of their religion to the people of other religions, because
the conviction derived from Christian uniqueness calls for the
mission to correct other’s weaknesses. In addition, this shows
why evangelization is still worthwhile in the post-Christian era.
In short, Christianity is able to intensify the mission even in the
age of religious pluralism.
146 theologies and cultures
Here, it should be remembered that the central idea of deep
pluralism is Christ-oriented. Since all religions are limited and
relative, they have to be complemented by others including
Christians. Thanks to this fact, Christians can emphasize the
uniqueness of Christian gospel. Now, it makes us understand
why pluralism can and should be Christ-oriented in terms of
Christians. This becomes assured when we are engaged in inter-
religious dialogue. When the validity of Christian gospel is
given, the dialogue is bound to be oriented, on the part of
Christians, toward Christ’s uniqueness. This is because when
people have inter-religious dialogue, they cannot help but start
with what they know best here and now. The best thing they
know about here and now is of course what they have convinced
themselves of, i.e., their own religions. This is why it is quite
natural for Christians to be Christ-oriented in inter-religious
dialogue. This also shows the reason why religious pluralism is
to be Christ-oriented on the part of Christians. In other words,
in terms of Christians, religious pluralism is always and
necessarily Christ-oriented.
The concept of Christ-oriented pluralism based on the
philosophy of differentiation can be extended to other
theological categories too. Traditionally, the central
characteristic of Christian religion has always been linked to the
concept of God. Therefore, the deep pluralism that has been
discussed as an ideal type here is to call for the fact that
Christianity will be responsible for changing the world by means
of its theological tools which are unique. It can be pointed out
that such concepts like God as personal, transcendent, and real,
etc… can be listed into the category of these theological tools
that make Christianity unique in this pluralistic age. And, of
course, these characteristics will continue to be able to
contribute even to non-Abrahmic religions in the sense that the
non-Abrahamic religions are lacking in those concepts in some
respects.
Of course, it should not be forgotten that the emphasis on
these concepts should, on the part of Christianity, be open-
Relativism and Difference 147
minded and therefore, complemented. In other words, these
Christian concepts have to be kept in balance with some
concepts of other religions. For instance, the Christian notions
of God as personal, transcendent, and real need to be balanced
with the non-Abrahamic notions of the Ultimate: for instance,
such notions like an Uitimate as trans-personal, an Ultimate as
immanent, and an Ultimate as non-real, all of which are not
usually salient to Abrahamic religions.
However, again, there is one thing we have to be cautious of
here. Proclamation and evangelization should not be carried out
without the recognition of other religions’ validity. In the age of
religious pluralism, which views every religion as having its
own validity, Christian’s proclamation and evangelization must
be conducted in a two-way process. Since it is true to say that
Christianity is also limited and relative, it must be enriched by
other’s contributions. Based on the assumption that other
religions have the positive values to share, Christians must
concede that they need to learn something from others, or even
to be corrected by them. This is why proclamation and
evangelization should be conducted on a two-way basis.
Mission is not about a unilateral proclamation. It is about
mutual transformation through dialogue.12
The dialogue based
on the bilateral basis should be extended to other religions too.
Believers, whether Christian or other, need to make an effort not
only to change the outdated religious concepts in their religious
tradition, but also to transform those of others.
Let us talk about the final question that might be raised with
regard to religious pluralism. What about conversion to
Christianity? Is conversion to Christianity from other religions
still available in the Christian community?
12
That the Christian concept of mission needs to be elaborated in this way
has been emphasized by many theologians. For instance, see John Cobb’s
Beyond Dialogue (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982). And see Paul
Knitter’s book, Jesus and the Other Names (New York: Orbis Books, 1996),
especially chapters 6&7.
148 theologies and cultures
Here, we have to approach this issue from two different
aspects. As far as the regions of the earth that are not dominated
by what we call “living world religions” are concerned, a
conversion-oriented mission has been successful so far. It is
phenomenal that a large number of people under local
indigenous faiths have been converted to Christianity and, for
this reason, a mission strategy focused on conversion might still
be effective. This is more likely to be true in the case of the
missionaries who are investing their sweat and blood on the
people who have suffered from the shackles of superstitious and
exploitive religions.
However, this is not the case for those who are serving in the
areas that are ruled by living world religions. The statistics
which show how successful the conversion model of mission
has been in those areas are really frustrating. Only a small
number of people living in the regions of Buddhism, Judaism,
Islam and Hinduism have been converted to Christianity so far.
It is not likely that the situation will change in the future. I am
not saying that conversion as such is no longer possible in these
regions. The point is that only when the conversion-oriented
mission meets some conditions, will it become a possibility in
the future.
First, the most significant thing with respect to the issue of
conversion is, from the Christian perspective, to understand that
it is the time to make the distinction between the conversion to
the church and the conversion to God. Of course, it is possible
to assert that the conversion to the church is still of great
importance for the sake of Christianity. There might still be
some cases in which the conversion to the church is worthwhile,
as I said above. However, even in this case, we should
recognize that priority should be put on the conversion to God,
because the purpose of mission is not the church itself but God.
It is more appropriate to say that the main function of the church
is to serve as a tool for the Kingdom of God. Therefore, a
Relativism and Difference 149
deeper conversion of all humankind toward God should be the
goal of proclaiming the good news to others.13
Second, strategically as well as morally, it is quite significant
to remember that the efforts to convert others to Christianity
must not be interpreted as aggressive or militant from the
perspective of the other believers. The process of converting
others should be performed only within the framework of
mutual enrichment and mutual transformation. In this pluralistic
world, the other believers will not listen to us at all, if they feel
that there is nothing of mutual benefit to be gained. If it is
perceived that there is nothing to learn or nothing to teach, then
the dialogue won’t even start. Unless this is presupposed, the
desire to convert others will be frustrated all the time.
Concluding Remarks
In this pluralistic age, we as Christian theologians need
to admit that it is Christianity that first has to reflect on its
exclusive attitude towards other believers. It is not
recommendable for us Christians to pinpoint other’s absolutist
attitude. We are the ones who are in need of change.
For us to change, the first thing Christians have to do is
to consider the value of relativism seriously. It is undeniable
that the solution to the problems caused by an exclusive attitude
is best met when Christians embrace a relativistic understanding
of truth.
However, there are some conditions to be made when we
incorporate relativism. Otherwise, relativism may be so
misused that it could bring about an inappropriate pluralism in
which both the relativity and uniqueness of one religion are to
be ignored.
This is why I have made an effort to propose a genuine type
of pluralism that is able to solve this problem. Deep pluralism
based on the emphasis on differentiation provides us with an
ideal methodology for establishing a better type of religious
13
A good discussion on this can be discoverable in Paul Knitter’s Jesus and
the Other Names. See especially 121-124.
150 theologies and cultures
pluralism. With this pluralism, it will be easy for us to
strengthen the affirmation that since all religions are limited and
relative, they have to cooperate with each other. This will
facilitate and promote inter-religious dialogue.
In addition, with this pluralism, we will be able to claim that
since all religions are equally valid, the uniqueness of one
religion should be affirmed. This will lead us to be committed
to Jesus Christ in this post-Christian era and to perform mission
even in the age of religious pluralism.
theologies and cultures, Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 151-180
Some Reflections on Tourist Evangelism
in Tropical Africa
J.N.K. Mugambi1
1. Introduction
Since the last quarter of the nineteenth century tropical
Africa has been a competitive destination for uninvited visitors
from Europe and North America. Their interests in Africa have
been varied. Some have come to conquest and build empires.
Cecil Rhodes was the most famous in this category. He wanted
1Prof. Dr. Jesse N.K. Mugambi, Ph.D, a distinguished scholar of Philosophy
and Religious Studies is Professor at University of Nairobi, Kenya. He is
Professor Extraordinarius, University of South Africa. Dr. Mugambi serves
as the Director, Programme for Ethics in Eastern Africa; Member, WCC
Working Group on Climate Change; Trustee, Kenya Rainwater Association;
Director, Kenya Literature Bureau, and Director, Acton Publishers, Nairobi.
<www.acton.co.ke>.
* This Paper was originally prepared for the AACC Consultation on"
Strengthening Theological Thinking for the African Renaissance" Silver
Springs Hotel, Nairobi, 7-12 August, 2006. It was revised for publication in
the Journal Theology and Cultures.
.
152 theologies and cultures
to build a British empire in Africa stretching from Cape Town in
the south to Cairo City in the north. Others have come to
plunder Africa’s valuable minerals, from gold to Uranium; from
oil to titanium. Others have come to hunt for Africa’s insects
and animals, from butterflies to lions, elephants and rhinos. Still
others have been attracted by Africa’s flora, from orchids to
tropical hard wood. Some came to settle and make tropical
Africa their adopted home, with their cultural roots in the North
Atlantic and their physical residence in Africa. Apartheid was
The ugliest result of this category of visitors was Apartheid.
There are those who have come to enjoy the beauty of Africa’s
mountains, valleys, plains and beaches. There are still others
who have come to study African peoples and re-confirm the
racial prejudices learned in high schools and universities back
home. Perhaps the most interesting of uninvited North Atlantic
visitors to Africa have been the Christian missionaries, whose
interest has been to “harvest” Africa’s souls for salvation in
heaven.
The competition for salvation Africa’s souls has been so
intense that almost every North Atlantic Protestant missionary
agency, and almost every Catholic congregation has sent
missionaries to tropical Africa. The reports of these agencies are
almost always reports of success, even when no converts are
‘harvested’. Since the 1960s tropical Africa has been a
competitive arena for tourist evangelists, whose ostensive
objective has been to “win souls for Christ”. It is ironical that
the Christian missionary invasion of tropical Africa from Europe
and North America has been in inverse proportion to the
secularization of the North Atlantic. It would have been
reasonable to expect that the tourist evangelists would be keen
to re-evangelize their countries before venturing elsewhere. In
practice, however, tropical Africa remains a cheap and attractive
destination for evangelists who might have nowhere else to go
so easily.
The growth of materialism and secularism in Europe and
North America may have something to do with this
Tourist Evangelism 153
“evangelistic outreach”. But why do they flock to tropical Africa,
rather than Mediterranean Africa, West Asia, South Asia,
Central Asia or East Asia? During the cold war, there was a
deliberate effort from the North Atlantic to spiritualize African
Christianity and protect Africans from the materialism and
secularism that was at that time associated with Communism.
The Christian missionary enterprise came to be openly
associated with Capitalism. Tourist Evangelists became at the
same time harvesters of African souls and promoters of Euro-
American values and virtues. There are plenty of studies
documenting this point, including my own works2 and those of
writers such as Paul Gifford,3 Gerrie ter Haar,
4 Stephen Ellis,
5
Jeff Haynes6 and others.
7 This paper is a critical exploration of
this category of Africa’s uninvited guests – the ‘tourist-
evangelists’.
What makes tropical Africa such a popular destination
for tourist evangelists? A wide variety of answers to this
question can be discerned. Some Tourist Evangelists come to
Africa posing as 'faith healers'. In a region where the majority of
people have no access to affordable medical care, it can be
expected that anyone who claims to offer 'free' treatment is
2 J.N.K. Mugambi, The Biblical Basis for Evangelization, Nairobi: Oxford
University Press, 1989; J.N.K. Mugambi, From Liberation to Reconstruction:
African Christianity after the Cold War, Nairobi: EAEP, 1992; J.N.K.
Mugambi, Christianity and African Culture, Nairobi: Acton, 2002; J.N.K.
Mugambi, Christian Theology and Social Reconstruction, Nairobi: Acton
Publishers, 2003; J.N.K. Mugambi, J.N.K. Mugambi, “A Fresh Look at
Evangelism in Africa”, in Paul W. Chilcote and Laceye C. Warner, eds, The
Study of Evangelism: Exploring a Missional Practice of the Church, Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2008, pp. 352-73. 3 Paul Gifford, The Religious Right in Southern Africa, 1988; New
Dimensions in African Christianity, Nairobi: AACC, 1992; African
Christianity: Its Public Role, London: C. Hurst, 1998. 4 Gerrie ter Haar, African Christians in Europe, Nairobi: Acton, 2001.
5 Stephen Ellis and Gerrie ter Haar, Words of Power, London: 2004.
6 Jeff Hynes, Religion and Politics in Africa, London: Zed Books, 1996.
7 Mika Vähäkangas and Andrew Kyomo, Charismatic Renewal in African
Christianity, eds., Nairobi: Acton, 2003.
154 theologies and cultures
likely to have an audience. Most tourist evangelists are
entertainers, with retinues of musicians, dancers and clowns to
hold the attention of their audiences. Most of them are also
populists, who deliberately focus on superficial topics which are
of concern ordinary people, especially the youth. The timing of
the 'crusades' organized by the tourist evangelists tends to
coincide with either the holiday season in their home countries,
or with the winter season. Thus the 'crusades' are combined with
'holiday' in Africa, or they are timed as an escape from the
wintry cold. There is also a business aspect of tourist evangelism.
Most tourist evangelists have business enterprises for selling
books, souvenirs, audio and video-casettes most of which are
recordings of the evangelists' preaching and healing sessions.
Some have training programmes and institutes into which
Africans are invited to enroll, either on payment of fees or on
'scholarships' donated by unnamed benefactors.
I first became aware of tourist evangelism when Billy
Graham made his tour of Kenya in the early 1960s. It was
around the same time that the British pop singer Cliff Richard
also toured Kenya, and I wondered what qualitative difference
there was between Billy Graham and Cliff Richard. Did they
compete or complement each other? My first direct encounter
with Tourist Evangelism was in 1968 when Oral Roberts staged
his healing crusade at Kamukunji Grounds in Nairobi. The
slogan advertising his tour was "Expect a Miracle". That
afternoon I left the high school where I was teaching Religion
and rushed to Nairobi city centre to witness the promised
miracles. I was disappointed, but I began to appreciate what the
manipulation of crowds can do. The Kamukunji grounds were
packed with people, obediently seated on the grass in rows with
aisles and passages as in an open theatre. The vehicle traffic on
the nearby road did not move. Everyone expected miracles to
happen. Oral Roberts began by declaring that he was going to
perform no miracle. Rather, he said, only God could perform
miracles. Like others who had come in anticipation, I felt
cheated through the advertisements which had promoted the
Tourist Evangelism 155
tourist evangelist rather than God. If it was God performing
miracles, and if we had come to witness the works and
utterances of the tourist evangelist, what was the relationship
between God and the evangelist? What was the relationship
between the Evangelist and Jesus Christ? The session that
afternoon did not provide answers to these and many other
questions, which continued to nag my mind for many years
afterwards.
During the 1970s another wave of tourist evangelists
invaded Kenya. The most maverick was Carl McIntyre in
August 1975. He had organized a conference ahead of the Fifth
Assembly of World Council of Churches (WCC) which was
scheduled for November that year. To confuse us all, McIntyre
called his meeting the International Council of Christian
Churches (ICCC). He addressed a Press Conference in which he
praised Ian Smith for his policies in Zimbabwe, and criticized
Africans who opposed Smith. According to him, the racist
regimes in Africa (South Africa, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique,
Guinea Bissau, Cape Verde and Western Sahara) were
upholding the "Christian Civilization" in this continent. When
he was asked to apologize for insulting African leaders, he
instead demanded an apology. He had to leave Kenya before his
conference was concluded.8 Since then many tourist evangelists
have visited Africa, including Harry Das, Benny Hinn, TD Jakes,
Joyce Meyer and Reinhard Bonke. The following reflections are
based on both my acquaintance with Tourist Evangelism and my
theological analysis of the phenomenon.
2. Literature Review
In 1971 Professor John S. Mbiti published his famous
book, New Testament Eschatology in an African Background.9
8 The story of Carl McIntyre in Kenya in August 1975 was covered in the
daily newspapers in Kenya including the Daily Nation and Target. 9 John S. Mbiti, New Testament Eschatology in an African Background,
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.
156 theologies and cultures
In that book he observed that millenarian tendencies had taken
roots in some areas in Africa, such as Ukambani (eastern Kenya)
where he had conducted his doctoral research. He opined that
perhaps this attraction to millenarianism might be attributed to
the excitement of African converts by the eschatological
promises of the Gospel. This hypothesis did not account for the
fact that millenarian Christianity was introduced into tropical
Africa from the North Atlantic, particularly from North America.
It was not invented in Africa. In the same year David B. Barrett
published an anthology of essays under the title African
Initiatives in Religion.10
The book classified African Christian
initiatives into to categories, "orthodox" and "unorthodox". The
"unorthodox" initiatives, according to this categorization, were
those which did not conform to the expectations of the modern
missionary enterprise. Thus the African instituted churches were
"unorthodox" while the East African Revival Movement was
classified as "orthodox". This categorization could not account
for tourist evangelism, because it had not yet become a
characteristic feature of African Christianity.11
The Congress for World Evangelization was convened at
Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1974. It was intended to become an
initiative in competition against the World Council of Churches
(WCC), which was viewed in some North Atlantic circles to be
too 'secular'.12
Ironically, both the WCC and the Congress were
based in Switzerland, on opposite sides of Lake Geneva. As
follow up to the Lausanne Congress the Pan-African Christian
Leadership Assembly (PACLA) was convened at the City of
Nairobi in 1976. The African Evangelistic Enterprise (AEE) was
formed as part of the same initiative. The sequence of these
10
David B. Barrett, ed., African Initiatives in Religion, Nairobi: East African
Publishing House, 1971. 11
Hannah W. Kinoti, 'Christology in the East African Revival Movement, in
J.N.K. Mugambi and Laurenti Magesa, eds, Jesus in African Christianity,
Nairobi: Acton, 1998, pp. 60-78. 12
John Stott, The Lausanne Covenant: An Exposition and Commentary,
Minneapolis: World Wide Publications, 1975.
Tourist Evangelism 157
events is instructive. Tropical Africa became a 'battleground' of
competing Christian lobbies and ideologies. Ecumenism was
supposedly inconsistent with evangelicalism. A true evangelical
was not expected to be associated with the ecumenical
movement. John G. Gatu rejected that dichotomy, and was
associated with both the ecumenical movement and the
evangelical initiatives. Being a member of the WCC Central
Committee, he attended the Lausanne Congress and strongly
advised that both the ecumenical and the evangelical thrusts
were essential for authentic expression of the Christian faith in
Africa and elsewhere.13
Many evangelical, charismatic and Pentecostal
organizations from North America infiltrated the campuses of
high schools, colleges and universities throughout tropical
Africa. The main objective was to spiritualize and individualize
the Christian students in order to distract them from socio-
political activism. It is important to remember that North
America during the 1960s was aflame with the civil rights
movement and the campaign against the invasion of Vietnam.
Likewise, Britain and continental Europe were aflame with the
student riots. The strategy to spiritualize African school and
college campuses was intended to prevent social activism from
spreading to the continent, especially in the context of struggles
against colonial rule and institutionalized racism. The Cold War
had made Africa a battleground for the competing ideologies.
Tourist evangelism openly campaigned for capitalism and
individualism, against Communism portrayed as "godless" and
therefore evil. Tourist Evangelism in tropical Africa since the
1980s has been a direct follow-up of that investment in
evangelistic individualism. The individual is encouraged to
deepen one's personal relationship with God. Whatever one does
at the social and institutional level is of no interest to this kind of
Christianity.
13
John G. Gatu, Joyfully Christian and Truly African, Nairobi: Acton, 2006.
158 theologies and cultures
During the 1980s Paul Gifford conducted research on
tourist evangelism in southern Africa, which was published
under the title The Religious Right in Southern Africa. He
observed that various organizations funded from North America
had been introduced into southern Africa to undermine the
struggles against Apartheid through the strategy of deflecting
the youth and students away from socio-political activism,
towards individualistic piety.14
3. Five Types of Ecclesiastical Structure
In my book From Liberation to Reconstruction (Nairobi:
EAEP, 1995) I have categorized Christian churches into five
types according to the way authority is exercised.15
The first is
the Episcopalian type, in which authority is exercised in a
hierarchy, with the bishop at the apex of the pyramid. This type
includes the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church and
the Orthodox churches.
These three groups of churches, though hierarchical,
differ from each other significantly. The Roman Catholic
Church is highly centralized, having the Pope as the supreme
head of a global organization and with Rome as the centre of
administrative authority. When a Pope dies a conclave of 117
Cardinals at the Basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican meets to
elect a successor. Cardinal Ratzinger from Germany was elected
Pope Benedict XVI in April 2005 after the death of Pope John
Paul II from Poland. In 1979 the conclave had met to elect the
Polish Cardinal Carol Woytyla, who became Pope John Paul II.
It is the first time in nearly five centuries that two consecutive
non-Italian popes have been elected into the papacy.
14
Paul Gifford, The Religious Right in Southern Africa, Harare: University of
Zimbabwe Press, 1988. 15
J.N.K. Mugambi, From Liberation to Reconstruction: African Christian
Theology after the Cold War, Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers,
1995.
Tourist Evangelism 159
The Anglican Church (of which the Church of England
is the parent) is organized in Dioceses with the bishop as the
head of each diocese. The Dioceses are grouped in provinces,
headed by Archbishops who are elected through a process
involving both clergy and lay leaders. An Archbishop does not
have jurisdiction over dioceses other than the one in which his
Cathedral is located. However, in ritual and organizational
matters the Archbishop presides over the Synod which
deliberates on policy and procedure of the Church. Since 1888
Anglican bishops have met every ten years at the Lambeth
Palace in London to deliberate on matters of mutual concern.
The Lambeth Conference does not have juridical authority over
bishops and dioceses, but the consensus affirmed by its
resolutions is authoritative. The Anglican Consultative Council
(ACC) meets between the sessions of the Lambeth Conference,
but its role is advisory rather than administrative within the
Anglican Communion.
The Orthodox churches, which are organized in dioceses
under bishops, function autonomously but in communion with
each other. Some are numerically very big, such as the Russian
Orthodox Church, while others are very small, such as the
Orthodox Church in Kenya. The Coptic Church of Egypt and the
Ethiopian Orthodox Church both belong to this confessional
family. Some of the Orthodox churches are predominant in
some countries (as in Russia and Greece), while others are tiny
minorities (as in Egypt and India).
The Second category is the Presbyterian type, in which
the Council of Elders (Presbyters) exercises the church authority.
From the local to the national levels there are layers of
representation, culminating in the General Assembly where
policy decisions are made. The Moderator of the General
Assembly is elected for a period ranging from three to five years
depending on the constitution of each national or regional
Assembly. At the world level Presbyterian churches are held
together in the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC).
This type includes such churches as the Presbyterian Church of
160 theologies and cultures
East Africa; Presbyterian Church of South Africa, Presbyterian
Church of Central Africa, Presbyterian Church of Ghana,
Presbyterian Church USA, and so on. The Church of Scotland is
the oldest in this category, and to a large extent it can be
regarded as the 'parent' of the family. Within the World Alliance
of Reformed Churches there are several denominations which
use the label "Reformed" as part of their name. The Lutheran
churches are Presbyterian in their chain of authority, but they
have established their own identity within the World Lutheran
Federation (LWF). The Methodist churches are also of the
Presbyterian type, and are brought together for consultative
purposes under the World Methodist Council.
The third category is the Congregational type. Authority
in churches of this type is vested in each specific congregation.
Once a year the congregation constitutes itself into a business
meeting and passes resolutions on the governance of all aspects
of the church. The pastor is hired, fired, remunerated and
disciplined by the congregation. Baptist churches are in the
congregational category, which also includes the churches that
use the label 'Congregational' in their name.
The fourth category is the Charismatic type, whose
decisions within the congregation are under the tutelage of the
charismatic leader. When the leader loses charismatic power, the
leadership role is immediately withdrawn and handed over to
another leader in whom the congregation recognizes significant
charismatic gifts. There are numerous charismatic churches in
Africa, each of which is associated with a specific charismatic
leader. In Kenya this category includes the Deliverance Church
and the Redeemed Gospel Church. There are many Charismatic
mega-churches today, particularly in the USA, tropical Africa
and South Korea. The Kimbanguist Church in the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC) also fits in this category. Also in this
category is the Church of Prophet Harris in West Africa. Many
African Instituted Churches (AICs) are of the Charismatic type,
Tourist Evangelism 161
cherishing the role of their founders and successors almost to the
point of veneration.16
The fifth category is the Pentecostal type, in which
authority is believed to emanate from the Holy Spirit. The
leaders of Pentecostal churches are recognized and obeyed as
long as the followers continue to witness manifestation of the
Holy Spirit in the leadership. When such manifestations dwindle,
the leadership role is withdrawn. Most churches having the label
'Pentecostal' in their name are included in this category. Most
African instituted churches are of the Charismatic and
Pentecostal Conflicts types, although there are a few which are
Episcopal, Presbyterian and Congregational.
Conflicts over leadership are common and frequent in
Charismatic and Pentecostal churches. Rarely are such conflicts
resolved, with the consequence that these two categories tend to
splinter and fragment especially as a result of wrangles over
power, authority and leadership succession. There is a tendency
to pass over the leadership to relatives of the founders of these
churches, creating 'dynasties'. Those who protest these
tendencies are often isolated and compelled to establish their
own churches, and the cycle is then repeated over and over
again.
There are African instituted churches in each of the five
categories. This fact is explained by the causative factors of
these churches. Most of the African Instituted Churches have
retained the ecclesiastical structure inherited from the
missionary denominations out of which they splintered. An
interesting case is the Legio Maria in Kenya, which splintered
from the Roman Catholic Church. It still retains many of the
rituals and beliefs in the "Mother Church" from which its
original leaders separated.
These five categories of ecclesiastical organization are
derived from New Testament references. However, none of
them can claim to replicate the apostolic church, because they
16
Allan Anderson, African Reformation, New Jersey: Africa World Press,
2001.
162 theologies and cultures
have been organized to suit the cultural and personal needs of
their respective initiators. The Roman Catholic Church places
great importance to central authority not only because it is
discerned in the New Testament, but more evidently because it
took over imperial authority when the Roman Empire declined.
Anglicanism began when King Henry VIII established the
Church of England in defiance of papal authority. The Church of
England remained 'Catholic' in liturgy and hierarchical
organization, but refused to be under the jurisdiction of the Pope.
The Church of Scotland in turn adopted the Presbyterian polity,
in conformity with a non-hierarchical Scottish culture within
imperial Britain. In the same way, African Instituted churches
have incorporated African cultural elements while claiming
faithfulness to the Gospel.
The Charismatic and Pentecostal churches tend to
fragment and splinter because their leaders often find it difficult
to accept mistakes of judgement and leadership. When rival
claimants to leadership emerge, the conflicts often deteriorate
into confrontation and some followers leave to join the leader of
their choice. This process is repeated many times over and over
again, with the authority is vested in individuals believed by the
members to have Charismatic leadership. Charismatic churches
have congregational autonomy. In the colonial period many
African Instituted Churches were formed in reaction against
missionary discrimination and patronage. In view of the
proliferation of missionary agencies and African responses to
them, tropical Africa, is now the area with the most diversified
ecclesiastical expression in the world. Almost every missionary
agency claiming to be involved in world mission has taken an
interest in winning the souls of Africans not for Christ, but into
its own fold. Hence the competition between missionary
agencies and the lack of commitment to ecumenical witness to
the world, especially among the Charismatic and Pentecostal
leaders and congregations.
During the 1960s most Protestant European and North
American missionary agencies withdrew their personnel from
Tourist Evangelism 163
Africa in response to the process of de-colonization. This
withdrawal was consistent with the resolution at the Third
Assembly of the World Council of Churches (New Delhi, 1961)
to absorb the International Missionary Council and establish the
Division of World Mission and Evangelism. Thereafter,
missionary work of the parent denominations in Europe and
North America was to be continued under departments of
mission within their respective administrative structures.
Missionaries would then come to Africa only under invitation by
the African leaders of the 'daughter churches', which had
previously been under missionary leadership and tutelage. The
change in mission policy did not end patronage and tutelage, and
this fact became a matter of great concern to some of the
African church leaders.
In the early 1970s the Presbyterian Pastor John G. Gatu
of Kenya was to become famous for suggesting that
missionaries and their funds should be withdrawn from Africa
for at least five years, so that African churches might evolve
their own identity and integrity. This Proposal, which became
known as the "Moratorium Debate" evoked much controversy,
especially in Europe and North America. The withdrawal of
missionary personnel and funds from Africa required
administrative and financial adjustments for which most
Protestant denominations in the North Atlantic were not
prepared. One of the reactions against the Moratorium Proposal
was a flood of North American and European evangelical
preachers, from 1975 onwards, into the capital cities of
independent African counties.
The number of North Atlantic Tourist Preachers flocking
to Africa increased in the 1980s and 1990s. Understandably, all
the new churches resulting from the rallies of these itinerant
preachers have been of the Charismatic and Pentecostal types.
Although the proclaimed objective of the itinerant preachers is
to spread Christianity in Africa, their efforts have not increased
the number African converts. Rather, they have attracted
African Christians, especially the youth from other churches into
164 theologies and cultures
their own camps. Thus Tourist Evangelists are involved in
proselytism rather than mission. Their attractions have to do
with the mode of delivery of their messages through show-
business, electronic music and theatrical performance. The
exodus of young men and women from the mainstream
denominations to these Charismatic and Pentecostal
congregations is a challenge with which the leadership of the
losing churches must deal; otherwise there will be a serious
church leadership crisis in the next generation.
4. Some Features of Tourist Evangelism
This section explores various aspects of the theology
presupposed by most North Atlantic Tourist Evangelists who,
since the 1980s, have exported to tropical Africa their pre-
packaged brands of charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity.
i). Evangelism as Tourism: From an African perspective, the
most striking characteristic of the North American and European
Charismatic and Pentecostal preachers coming to Africa is that
they are an integral part of the tourist industry. They normally
come during the tourist season, and they come together in the
same flights with the other tourists from their respective
countries. Before or after their evangelistic rallies they go to
enjoy the tourist attractions of the host country. They are happy
and proud to declare that their evangelistic itinerary includes
some days to see the wild animals, the beautiful countryside and
the hot beaches. What takes priority: preaching the Gospel or
enjoying the tourist excursion? One is left with the impression
that tourism is more important, because of the importance that is
attached to the tourist component of the visit. Jesus was not a
tourist. He travelled a great deal (mainly on foot) between his
village of Nazareth, the shoreline of Lake Galilee and the capital
city of Jerusalem. The trips he made were purposeful, and did
not include much of leisure. Likewise, St. Paul was not a tourist,
Tourist Evangelism 165
even though he travelled widely between Jerusalem and Rome
mainly by boat. He had no bank account, but was a skilled tent
maker. When he ran out of money he would stop and make or
repair some tents to earn some income for funding the next trip.
He was a guest of his friendly hosts who accommodated and
took care of his needs. On whose model is the tourist
evangelism in Africa based? It appears far from the norms set by
Jesus and St. Paul. Yet the Tourist evangelists claim to be
preaching 'the gospel'. Which gospel is it that they preach, if it
does not follow the examples of Jesus and Paul?
ii) Evangelism as Entrepreneurship: Evangelism in post-
colonial Africa has become increasingly associated with
entrepreneurship. Most of the Tourist Evangelists from Europe
and North America have their own " personal ministries" usually
bearing their own names with branded "products" and registered
trademarks. They advertise themselves and raise funds using
those trademarks. Thus evangelism has become one of the
"businesses" in which jobless people can establish self-
employment. Measured against the norms of Jesus and St. Paul,
this way of spreading the Gospel is a great deviation. Jesus was
a carpenter and Paul was a tentmaker. Each of the twelve
disciples had a trade. They did not turn preaching of the Gospel
into an enterprise for self-employment, self-enrichment and self-
aggrandizement.
iii) Evangelism as Show Business: The preparation for an
evangelistic rally is typically as elaborate as that for a pop music
concert or for a boxing match. The advertising campaigns
sometimes overshadow those for secular events. The stage
setting is often so clourful as to outshine a fashion show. The
dressing and make-up of the evangelistic team is often elaborate
and expensive. Questions arise whether the effective
communication of the gospel is dependent on such extravagant
stage settings. Jesus attracted huge crowds, but he did not
advertise his rallies. People followed him because he taught with
166 theologies and cultures
authority. His fame spread fast and wide, even though there
were no elaborate mass media as sophisticated as those in the
world today. The advertising campaigns for tourist evangelists
are often misleading and dishonest. They promise more than the
evangelists can deliver.
iv) Evangelism as Theatrical Performance: Tourist
Evangelism is crafted on the pattern of mass entertainment such
as the concerts of popular musicians, jazz bands, boxing and
wrestling matches, magic shows, and so on. Certainly this
approach attracts many people, perhaps more as spectators and
fans than worshippers. We do not know how Jesus performed
when he addressed the crowds that came to listen to him. What
is clear is that his rallies were not choreographed the way tourist
evangelistic rallies are.
v) Evangelism as Faith Healing: Among the promises included
in most advertisements for rallies to be addressed by tourist
evangelists is faith healing. People suffering from various
ailments are invited to come to the rally so that the evangelist
can pray for them. There have been cases of terminally ill
people going to these rallies with the hope of being cured.
Disappointment has resulted when the patients did not recover.
Some stopped medication and brought forward their deaths. It is
irresponsible for an evangelist to promise a cure to someone
suffering from terminal illness. It is also an abuse of the Gospel.
Visiting the sick and praying with them is a necessary and
integral part of pastoral care. But faith healing, which bypasses
or ignores professional treatment, is doctrinally erroneous.
vi) Evangelism as Altar Call: In all rallies by tourist
evangelists there is an "altar call" for those who have accepted
"conversion" to come to the stage for the evangelist to pray for
them. The numbers that come forward are important as a
measure of success. Jesus cared more for quality than quantity.
The tourist evangelists have their priorities in reverse order.
Tourist Evangelism 167
vii) Evangelism as a Game of Numbers: For tourist
evangelists the numbers they attract are more important than the
impact of the message they deliver. The follow up is not a
matter of concern to them, because this responsibility is left to
the "evangelistic team" which is assigned to counsel the
individuals who respond positively to the "altar call". It is
common to read triumphal newsletters from the ministry offices
of the tourist evangelists, celebrating the success of rallies in
terms of the thousands of people who have attended. Attendance
does not necessarily suggest acceptance or agreement. Curiosity
and the quest for entertainment ought not to be lumped together
with worship. The advertising campaigns for these rallies is such
that many of those who attend do so more for curiosity than for
genuine interest. Yet from the perspective of the tourist
evangelists anyone who attends their rallies is a "convert."
viii) Evangelism as Winning Souls: Tourist Evangelists
emphasize winning souls for eternal salvation as the main
objective of their work. There is so much emphasis on this
aspect that the physical, societal and institutional aspects are
neglected. The parables of Jesus are illustrative of the integral
quality of the Gospel. Jesus was interested not only in the soul
but also in the body. That is why most of the miracles on record
are on the restoration of health to people who had been ill. If
Jesus were interested only in the soul, he would not have
bothered to heal anyone. He would have encouraged them to
accept death as a quick ticket to heaven.
ix) Evangelism as Entertainment: Recreation and
Entertainment are two of the features, which attract young
people to the rallies, and congregations of Tourist Evangelists.
Typically, a rally and a worship service will begin with at least
thirty minutes of singing and dancing accompanied with loud
electronic music. Liturgical items are punctuated with similar
interludes. Each congregation has a musical band, and there is
168 theologies and cultures
competition between the bands with regard to the quality of
equipment and the calibre of musicians and singers. In
Charismatic and Pentecostal churches, harmonic choirs have
been abandoned in preference of electronic bands and pop music.
Thus secular tastes have influenced liturgy considerably.
Mainstream denominations have adopted hymns composed and
popular in the African instituted churches, which are normally
sung in unison with soloists leading the congregation. No
complicated instruments are required— hand clapping suffices.
Sometimes simple percussion instrumentation is in
accompaniment. Recreation and entertainment are certainly
important aspects of worship, and mainstream denominations
will continue to lose young people as long as these needs are
met more in the Charismatic and Pentecostal congregations.
x) Evangelism as Hypnotism: Tourist Evangelists leaders tend
to hypnotize their audiences into saying and doing what they
want to emphasize. Faith healing sessions, for example, are
characteristically hypnotic. From the perspective of an on-looker,
faith healing sessions appear comparable to sessions of hypnosis
and magic. It is not clear why faith healing sessions are
dramatized and exaggerated to the point of giving credit more to
the preacher than to Jesus Christ.
xi) Evangelism as Focus on Individuals: The appeal of Tourist
Evangelists is to individuals. An impression is created that the
individual is better-off following the instructions of the Tourist
Evangelist, whose credentials are self-authenticated. One must
take responsibility for accepting or rejecting the promises of the
Tourist Evangelist. Since the Tourist the country immediately or
shortly after the rally, there is no way for the respondents to
challenge Evangelist on any of the claims made either in the
advertisements or during the evangelistic campaign.
xii) Evangelism as Imitation of Role Models: Typically,
Tourist Evangelists portray themselves as role models to be
Tourist Evangelism 169
emulated. Yet their lifestyles— which are ostentatious,
extravagent and profligate—, cannot be replicated by the
majority of the people who attend the rallies as advertised. Some
Tourist Evangelists have been reported to be involved in
scandals pertaining to their private lives and also to the
management of their personal ministries. Some have been
compromised politically and ideologically. Some have been
compromised financially. These scandals are in conflict with the
role model-profiles of the norm-setters they claim to be.
xiii) Evangelism as Alienation: Tourist Evangelists tend to
promote alienation of their followers from their friends and
relatives in favour of devotion to the cult of the evangelist. In
the long-term, this alienation erodes the self-esteem of the
followers as they attach themselves more tightly to the
evangelist.
xiv) Evangelism as Fund-raising: Every rally of a Tourist
Evangelist is a fund-raising event. The whole programme is
geared towards the moment when the devotees are instructed to
dip their hands into their purses and "donate generously"
towards the support of the Evangelist's ministry. The "Jesus
Business" has become a competitive fund-raising enterprise. It is
a subtle begging enterprise, in which the benefactors are
destitute and desperate individuals who are invited to
'voluntarily' pay for their services. The Tourist evangelist never
personally interacts with most of the fans. However, through
the crafty fund-raising enterprises the evangelists manage to
accumulate huge sums of money.
xv) Evangelism as Speaking in Tongues: Speaking in Tongues
is associated with Tourist evangelism which has created the
impression that one is not Christian enough unless and until one
manifests the gift of 'speaking in tongues.' Apparently, speaking
in tongues was a problem within the churches within the first
generation of Christianity. St. Paul has very clear instructions
170 theologies and cultures
about it: "Now brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues,
how shall I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or
knowledge or prophecy or teaching? If even lifeless instruments,
such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes , how will
any one know what is played? And if the bugle gives an
indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? So with
yourselves; if you in a tongue utter speech that is not intelligible,
how will any one know what is said? For you will be speaking
into the air. There are doubtless many different languages in the
world, and none is without meaning; but if I do not know the
meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to the speaker
and the speaker a foreigner to me. So with yourselves; since you
are eager for manifestations of the spirit, strive to excel in
building up the church" (I Cor. 14: 6-12).
xvi) Evangelism as Extroversion: Tourist Evangelism
presupposes that every Chistian should be able to express
oneself in public. Some individuals are naturally outspoken, but
the majority of believers are generally quiet in public. It is unfair
to expect everyone to be outspoken, and to claim that the quiet
ones are not sufficiently Christian. Those who prefer to be quiet
in public are not worse off than the outspoken ones.
xvii) Evangelism as Rallies and Conventions: Since Tourist
Evangelists design their ministries in the context an itinerary of
rallies and conventions, it is tempting to define evangelism
exclusively in terms of holding rallies and conventions. Yet
there are may other ways of making the Gospel known other
than public oratory and theatrical performance.
xiii) Evangelism as Unquestioning and Unquestionable
Obedience: Tourist Evangelists insist on an approach to the
Gospel which is unquestioning and unquestionable. They expect
not to be challenged on any view they proclaim. Anyone who
challenges them to explain an aspect of their perspective is
condemned as satanic. They too maintain a literal reading of the
Tourist Evangelism 171
Bible, and are unwilling to reconcile biblical texts which are
contradictory or conflicting with each other. Take for example
Micah 4: 3-5 versus Joel 3: 9-10 on waging war; Matt. 5: 31-32
(Matt.19: 8-9) versus Mark 10: 11-12 on divorce; Matt: 6: 16-18
versus Matt. 11: 16-19 on fasting; and so on. How can literal
reading of the Bible reconcile such texts? The choice of one text
rather than the other in these pairs of texts is arbitrary. Thus it is
necessary to read the Bible critically, with comparison of
parallel texts in various books to discern the essence of the
intended message as a whole.
xix) Evangelism as Praying Aloud: Tourist Evangelism is
associated with amplified preaching at rallies and conventions,
where the participants are encouraged to invoke the Holy Spirit
in spontanous loud prayer with raised arms in supplication. In
contrast, missionaries in the mainstream denominations are
more restrained, and use formal prayer contained in the
liturgical books of their sending churches.
xx) Evangelism as Emotional outburst: Tourist evangelists
create the impression that emotional outburst is essential for
manifestation or demonstration of acceptance of, and
commitment to the Gospel. On the basis of this assumption
every 'crusade' includes an 'altar call' for the audience to
volunteer an emotional outburst. The biblical basis for this 'altar
call' is unclear. As reported in the second chapter of Acts, the
preachers did not demand of the audience to speak in tongues.
Nor did they demand emotional response. Pentecost was an
unrepeatable response, a miracle of the same kind as those
recorded in the gospels.
xxi Evangelism as Shouting: Typically, tourist evangelism is
associated with shouting and loud music which is great public
nuisance to onlookers and neighbours. The organizers of
evangelistic 'crusades' seem to be completely inconsiderate with
regard to the neighbourhood. They do not care about the
172 theologies and cultures
disturbance they cause and the likely offence of their utterances
to those who may be directly or indirectly mentioned adversely
in the songs and speeches. Although in a democracy everyone
should have the freedoms of association, expression and worship,
these freedoms are not absolute. They should be exercised
without interfering with the corresponding freedoms of other
individuals and groups. Theoretically, those who suffer
disturbance can sue for damages or injunctions. However, it is
selfish and irresponsible for tourist evangelists to breach peace
and harmony in a neighbourhood under the pretext of
proclaiming the Gospel and 'winning souls' for Jesus Christ.
xxii) Evangelism as Repetition of Mantras: Most tourist
evangelists have mantras to be repeated by their audiences. The
evangelist commands the audience to repeat a sentence or a
phrase several times over, with the promise that the repetition of
the mantra will have some magical impact on those who repeat
it. During the repetition of the mantra, the tourist evangelist is
elevated to the level of a liturgical leader, even though there is
no ritual link between the evangelist and the audience.
xxiii) Evangelism as Singing and Dancing: A 'crusade'
featuring a tourist evangelist will last a whole morning, a whole
afternoon or a whole evening. Most of the time is filled with
singing and dancing. The sermon takes very little time. Prayers
take even less time. The band takes features prominently,
performing songs and dances to which the audiences respond as
mere spectators, not as a worshipping community.
xxiv) Evangelism as Performing Miracles: Tourist evangelists
are advertised as performers of miracles. The 'crusades' are
popularized as 'miracle sessions'. From a biblical perspective,
this portrayal is erroneous, because Jesus rejected the temptation
of using miracles as means to win converts (Matt. 4: 1-11). Jesus
performed miracles in response to the needs of particular
Tourist Evangelism 173
individuals, families and groups. He did not advertise for people
to attend his rallies and witness theatrical tricks.
xxv) Evangelism as Invoking the Holy Spirit: Tourist
Evangelists invoke the Holy Spirit to come into the midst of the
crowd, via the mediation of the Evangelist. This self-appointed
role of 'spirit-medium' is unbiblical. St. Paul could have taken
that role, in view of the great respect honour he enjoyed in the
various Christian communities he nurtured. However, he
refrained from making himself a 'spirit-medium', and became a
teacher and instructor on how to express the Christian faith
rationally , effectively and constructively.
xxvi) Evangelism as Exorcism: Some tourist evangelists
consider all afflictions as manifestations of possession by
demons. They thus consider it their duty and responsibility to
'cast out demons', taking their cue from Jesus. It is important to
appreciate, however, that only a few of the healing miracles of
Jesus were associated with exorcism.
xxvii) Evangelism as Boasting: Most tourist evangelists are
boastful, arrogant and insolent. Their personality traits are the
opposite of those of Jesus whom they claim to emulate. They
portray themselves as the role models to be emulated, even
when their own lives are scandalous.
xxviii) Evangelism as Self-Advertising: Tourist Evangelism is
propelled by self-advertising comparable to political campaigns.
On radio and television they post paid advertisements for their
crusades and wares for sale. They even advertise the services
they offer, in the same way that entrepreneurs advertise
themselves and their goods and services. Jesus was not an
attention seeker, even though people followed him wherever he
went. People followed Jesus because he taught with authority,
not because he advertised his 'ministry'.
174 theologies and cultures
xxix) Evangelism as Criticism Against Mission: Tourist
evangelists parade themselves as competitors against
missionaries. They travel from their home countries to their host
countries to set up evangelistic campaigns often in conflict with
the values, norms, principles and practices cherished by resident
missionaries who have developed cross-cultural relations with
the communities in which they are guests. The quick-fix
technique of tourist evangelism is diametrically opposed to the
long-term missionary approach as articulated by St. Paul and
emulated by the great missionaries in the history of Christianity.
xxx) Evangelism as Open Confession of Personal Sins:
Tourist evangelists demand of their 'converts' to openly confess
their sins. In the Roman Catholic Church an opportunity is
offered for the priest to hear confessions, but this is done in
private and in confidence. For tourist evangelists the confession
of sins becomes a public affair. Even Lutheran doctrine— which
proclaims the priesthood of all believers—, does not go to the
extent of demanding open confession of personal sins. The
crowds to whom the personal sins are confessed are not all
members of the congregation, and the personal confessed are
often narrated more as a joke than as an act of contrition. They
are repeated over and over again, crusade after crusade, until
they become routine. It is almost as if the confessors enjoy
repeating the joys of pre-conversion existence.
xxxi) Evangelism as delivery of pre-packaged dogmatic
messages: Tourist evangelists sets of pre-packaged dogmatic
messages to proclaim. They do not expect to be challenged, and
anyone who challenges them is condemned as an agent of the
devil. There is no possibility to subject their messages to
theological reasoning, because in their view faith is supposed to
be above or beyond reason. It seems that the avoidance of
reason is a strategy for preempting criticism.
Tourist Evangelism 175
xxxxii) Evangelism as Crusade: By conducting evangelistic
campaigns as 'crusades', tourist evangelists have fomented
resistance especially among Muslim communities. Logically,
the Muslim reaction to Christian Crusade is Islamic Jihad. Jesus
was not confrontational in his public ministry. Nor were the
disciples and the first generation of the Apostles of whom St.
Paul was the greatest. The confrontational crusading mentality
of tourist evangelists is ideologically driven, rather than
biblically grounded.
xxxiii). Evangelism Altar Calling: The climax of an
evangelistic 'crusade' is when the tourist evangelist calls on the
crowd to volunteer to come to the front to receive prayers or
blessings. This 'altar call' is often pushed to the point of
desperation, especially when too few individuals volunteer to
present themselves. Why should the tourist evangelist demand to
see and count the number of souls which have been 'won' for
Christ? Is evangelism a matter of statistics? What about the
quality of faith? What of the role of the Holy Spirit in the
development of one's faith?
xxxiv) Evangelism as Defeating Satan: Tourist Evangelists
portray themselves as 'soldiers of God' fighting against the
'soldiers of Satan'. This dualistic approach makes it appear as if
Christianity is on the defensive end of the spectrum, since evil
often seems to triumph over evil.
xxxv) Evangelism as Defeating other Faiths: Tourist
Evangelists as a norm, consider themselves as crusaders for
Christianity against other faiths. The brand of Christianity they
peddle is also in competition and conflict with mainstream
denominations. For that reason, none of the tourist evangelists is
supportive of the modern ecumenical movement. They are
sectarian and isolationist.
176 theologies and cultures
xxxvi) Evangelism as Defeating Other Cultures: Tourist
Evangelism is associated with North Atlantic culture. Although
Tourist Evangelists are critical of modernity, they themselves
have already internalized modernist mentality. When they come
to Africa they present themselves as agents of civilization,
denigrating the African cultural and religious heritage as
demonic. By implication, they portray their own culture as
angelic and saintly, despite the shortcomings and scandals of
North Atlantic Christendom.
xxxvii) Evangelism as Defeating Other Ideologies: Tourist
Evangelists also associate themselves with Capitalism against all
other ideologies. By so doing, they become effective peddlers of
Capitalist ideology. As a result, tourist evangelism has caused
considerable concern among the Orthodox churches the former
Soviet Union. It is viewed as a strategy to destabilize Orthodox
Christianity by poaching the youth into the new transient
Charismatic and Pentecostal congregations.
xxxviii) Evangelism as Prophesying: Many Tourist
Evangelists consider themselves 'prophets' and regard their
utterances as 'prophecy'. Within the biblical tradition prophets
are social critics who, on behalf of the vulnerable sectors of the
population, caution the ruling elite against discrimination,
oppression and exploitation. Tourist Evangelists are highly
individualistic and deliberately shy away from making critical
comments about social policies and institutions. This stance
supports the status quo under the pretext of neutrality.
xxxix) Evangelism as Promotion of Material Prosperity: Most Tourist Evangelists attract followers by promising material
prosperity for their adherents. They demand tithes as a fee for
their services. Through thrift and austerity some of their
followers accumulate savings, and experience some elevation of
material well-being. Most, however, give up and move on in
search for other tourist evangelists who perhaps might be more
Tourist Evangelism 177
dependable in fulfilling unrealized aspirations. Jesus did not
promise that his followers would enjoy material prosperity.
Rather he challenged his followers to live authentically,
depending more on God than on political and economic
patronage.
xl) Evangelism as Proselytizing: Tourist Evangelists are
content to poach followers from existing Christian
denominations under the pretext of winning converts. For them,
conversion means joining their brand of Christianity,
irrespective of previous religious adherence. Normally, in
Christian missionary vocabulary conversion means the rejection
of one religion in favour of another, while proselytism means
the shift of allegiance from one denomination to another within
the same religion. Tourist Evangelists normally conduct their
crusades in areas in which Christianity is already established.
The word "conversion" is thus inappropriate for the individuals
they win to their respective brands of Christian sectarianism.
EVANGELISM AS: EVANGELI
STS MISSIONA
RIES
REMARKS
1 Tourism √ x Missionaries are
resident
2.
Entrepreneurship
√ x Missionaries are
funded
3. Show-
Business
√ x Missionaries don't
show
4. Theatrical
Performance
√ x Missionaries don’t
act
5. Faith Healing √ x Missionaries have
clinics
6. Altar Calling √ x Missionaries teach
7. A Game of
Numbers
√ √ Both want big
numbers
178 theologies and cultures
8. Winning Souls √ √ Both want to win
souls
9. Entertainment √ x Missionaries use
ritual
10. Hypnotism √ x Missionaries
convince
11.
Individualism
√ √ Both are
individualistic
12. Imitation √ √ Both demand
imitation
13. Alienation √ √ Both alienate
converts
14. Fund-raising √ x Missionaries are
funded
15. Speaking in
Tongues
√ x Missionaries loathe
it
16. Extroversion √ x Missionaries don't
mind
17. Rally Oratory √ x No Missionary
oratory
18. Blind
Obedience
√ √ Both demand
obedience
19. Praying
Aloud
√ x Missionaries don’t
care
20. Expressing
Emotions
√ x Missionaries keep
cool
21. Shouting √ x Missionaries prefer
quiet
22. Repetition of
Mantras
√ √ Both demand
repetition
23. Singing and
Dancing
√ x Missionaries use
hymns
24. Performing
Miracles
√ x Missionaries don't
25. Evoking √ x Missionaries don't
Tourist Evangelism 179
Holy Spirit
26. Exorcising
Demons
√ x Missionaries don't
27. Boasting √ √ Both are boastful
28. Self-
Advertising
√ x Missionaries don't
29. Condemning
Others
√ √ Both condemn
others
30. Oral
Confession
√ x Missionaries don't
mind
31. One-Way
Delivery
√ √ Both work one-way
32. Crusade √ x Missionaries avoid
it
33. Altar Calling √ x Missionaries avoid
it
34. Defeating
Satan
√ x Missionaries shy
away
35. Defeating
other Cults
√ √ Both concur
36.Defeating
other Faiths
√ √ Both concur
37. Defeating
Ideologies
√ √ Both concur
38. Defeating
Cultures
√ √ Both concur
39. Defeating
Poverty
√ √ Both concur
40. Promoting
Prosperity
√ x Missionaries train
5. Concluding Remarks
Tourist Evangelism poses serious challenges for
mainstream churches. Those involved in tourist evangelism do
not care at all about ecclesial identity. They are only interested
180 theologies and cultures
in the crowds they attract with their show-biz extravaganza.
Their interest in a particular audience ends as soon as the flood-
lights are switched off. When the improvised stage is dismantled
for the evangelistic show in the next town or city, that space
ceases to have any sacral significance. The next show on the
same space could have as its objective the advertising of goods
or services completely at variance with the values, virtues and
norms promoted by the evangelists. The same lack of concern is
evident in television evangelism, which is more akin to
advertising than to teaching. How can mainstream churches
retain the youth in their membership at a time when attention is
drawn to evangelistic populism and secular advertising? How
can mainstream denominations effectively respond to the
superficial teachings peddled by tourist evangelists? How can
the propaganda peddled by tourist evangelists in Africa be
countered? These and other related challenges require concerted
strategic response on the part of mainstream denominations,
particularly those associated with the modern ecumenical
movement. Tourist evangelism is related more to Tourism than
to Mission.
theologies and cultures, Vol.V, No.2
December 2008, pp. 181-191
Towards a Mission-Oriented
Theological Education
Chen Nan-Jou1
While rethinking the development in the theology of
mission, Gerald H. Anderson wrote that in the Edinburgh
Conference 1910, “the first truly world missionary conference,
the major question being put to the missionary enterprise was
simply ‘How missions?’”2
According to Gerald Anderson’s
analysis, the main concerns of the theological discussion on
mission in the ecumenical circle before the 1960’s could be
described with these six phrases, namely “How missions”,
“wherefore missions”, “whence missions”, “whither missions”,
1 Professor, Vice President and the Dean of Academic Affairs Yu-Shan
Theological College and Seminary The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan 2 Gerald H. Anderson, “The Theology of Mission among Protestants in the
Twentieth Century” in The Theology of the Christian Mission (ed. Gerald H.
Anderson; Nashville: Abingdon, 1961), 5. Anderson thought that Edinburgh
Conference 1910 was the “first truly world missionary conference”. However,
“there were only seventeen Asians, and these represented the whole of the
non-western world” among about twelve hundred participants at the
conference. See D. Preman Niles, From East and West: Rethinking Christian
Mission, (St. Louis: Chalice, 2004), 49
182 theologies and cultures
“Why missions”, and “What is the Christian mission?”3
This
change of the theological thinking in mission could arise mainly
from the fact that Christian mission was, on the one hand, aware
of the reality of religious pluralism in this world; on the other
hand, challenged by people of other faiths. It seems to me it is
for this reason that the discussion on “What is the Christian
mission” is still an ongoing issue today. For me, being
concerned only with mission strategy and methods without
clarifying the most fundamental question of Christian mission,
the nature of the Christian mission and Gospel, is “ben mo dao
zhi”, to attend to the lesser importance and neglect the essentials,
or “she ben zhu mo”, to concentrate on the secondary ones, but
overlook the primary. In fact, the understanding of mission has
been changing in the different eras and the different social and
cultural contexts. The new discourse of mission understanding
leads to the emergence of a new paradigm in mission. Therefore,
the shifting of mission paradigm is not a new thing in the history
of Christian mission.
Paradigm Shifts in Christian Mission
Numerous attempts have been made by theologians to
articulate new paradigms for mission. In this paper, I would like
to focus on the paradigms proposed by the following three
theologians, namely David J. Bosch, C. S. Song, and D. Preman
Niles.
David J. Bosch argued that a postmodern paradigm of
mission is emerging as is described in his book titled
Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of
Mission.4
Though Bosch did not give a name to this emerging
paradigm, he pointed out and discussed the elements of this
emerging ecumenical missionary paradigm. In my opinion,
Bosch did not try to categorize those elements under different
3 Gerald H. Anderson, “The Theology of Mission among Protestants in the
Twentieth Century”, 5-7. 4 See David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of
Mission, (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis, 1993), chapters 10-12.
Theological Education 183
sub-headings. In this emerging paradigm, Bosch pointed out that
mission is God’s mission, missio Dei.5
He said that “mission is
not primarily an activity of the church, but an attribute of God.
God is missionary God…….Mission is thereby seen as a
movement from God to the world; the church is viewed as an
instrument for that mission. There is church because there is
mission, not vice versa. To participate in mission is to
participate in the movement of God’s love toward people”.6
Regarding mission as theology in this emerging
paradigm, Bosch stressed that “It is for the sake of its mission
that the church has been elected, for the sake of its calling that it
has been made ‘God’s own people’. So mission cannot be
defined only in terms of the church--even of the church which is
mission by its very nature. Mission goes beyond the church…….
To say that the church is essentially missionary does not mean
that mission is church-centered. It is missio Dei”.7 Bosch went
on to say that “Just as the church ceases to be church if it is not
missionary, theology ceases to be theology if it loses its
missionary character…….We are in need of a missiological
agenda for theology rather than just a theological agenda for
mission; for theology, rightly understood, has no reason to exist
other than critically to accompany the missio Dei. So mission
should be ‘the theme of all theology’”.8 In addition to this,
Bosch stated, though somewhat ambiguously, mission has to be
contextual in theology, to take inculturation into account.9
In terms of ministry in mission, Bosch emphasized that
emerging paradigm concerns evangelism, to witness to people of
other faiths, and to struggle for justice and liberation.10 Besides,
5 David Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of
Mission, 389. 6 Ibid p. 390.
7 Ibid. p., 493.
8 Ibid p. , 494.
9 Ibid p., 420-32, 447-57.
10 Ibid p. 409-20, 474-89, 400-09, 432-47.
184 theologies and cultures
ministry of mission is carried out by the whole people of God,
the clergy and the laity.11
We may, therefore, reasonably conclude that Bosch
highlighted rightly the elements of an emerging paradigm.
Bosch said clearly that the new paradigm is “still emerging and
it is, as yet, not clear which shape it will eventually adopt”.12
It
was obvious that Bosch did not argue an effective paradigm for
the churches around the world. He is right to say that “We shall,
at best, succeed in outlining the direction in which we ought to
be moving and in identifying the overall thrust of the emerging
paradigm”.13
Without using the term ‘paradigm shifts’, C. S. Song, a
Taiwanese theologian proposed a new framework for the
reconstruction of Christian mission.14
He argued that Christian
churches have to place creation rather than redemption as the
central framework of God’s mission.15
C. S. Song urged
Christian churches to think of mission from the perspective of
God’s creation. He stated that the reconstruction of mission, the
Christian faith in the non-western lands, “may take place at least
in the four areas of culture, history, society and politics
corresponding to the four aspects related to God’s creation”.16
C.
S. Song stressed that there are “redemptive elements in cultures
and histories outside the direct influence of Christian faith”.17
He
continued to say that “God’s love and power have been at work
in the world since the beginning of creation. Human sin does not
destroy God’ work of creation”.18
He emphasized that there are
11
Ibid p. 467-74. 12
Ibid p. 349. 13
Ibid p. 367. 14
C. S. Song did use the term ‘paradigm shifts’ in a public speech recently.
Please see ‘Rethinking the Great Commandment from Jesus’ Great
Commission’, The New Messenger, No. 107, August 2008, 4-8. 15
C. S. Song, Christian Mission in Reconstruction, (Maryknoll, New York:
Orbis, 1977), chapter 2. 16
Ibid p. 23-24. 17
C. S. Song, Third-Eye theology, (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis, 1979), 113. 18
Ibid p. 114.
Theological Education 185
‘redemptive moments’ and ‘redemptive events’ which “disclose
God’s continuing presence in a society that has never been
shaped by Christianity”, and “reflect in some way God’s
redeeming love and power that have become incarnate in Jesus
Christ”.19
Song put his argument more plainly to say that “these
redemptive moments and events, in my view, result from what
St. Paul regards as God’s self-disclosure in creation since the
world began”.20
C. S. Song criticized the mindset of many
Christians who neglected the perspective of God’s creation in
mission and said that “God is worshipped as the redeemer of
only those who believe in Jesus as their personal savior. God the
redeemer negates God the creator. God the creator is abrogated
by God the redeemer. God becomes a truncated God.”21
C. S. Song suggested a ‘five stages’ towards a
theological reconstruction.22
Stage one is to ask fundamental
questions, such as ‘Did God work also outside the church’?
‘Does the profound spirituality demonstrated by people of other
faiths have anything to do with God’? Stage two is to affirm the
story of Jesus is the story of the Reign of God, and to ask
whether one can find stories of God’s Reign outside the
Christian church. Stage three is to listen to the stories of God’s
Reign in Asia. Stage four is to identify a theological problem,
namely what is the main theme of Jesus’ proclamation?
Salvation or the Reign of God? Stage five is ‘Jesus and stories
of people’. This means that we should equip ourselves with a
theological imagination that can help us image God and God’s
activity in the stories of Asian people, and to apply the same
theological imagination to the stories in the Christian Bible. A
theological space will be opened in the inter-penetration
between Jesus and the people of Asia in stories-the story of
19
Ibid p. 115. 20
Ibid p. 115. 21
C. S. Song, Jesus, the Crucified People, (New York: Crossroad, 1990), 160. 22
C. S. Song, “Five Stages towards Christian Theology in the Multicultural
world” in Constructing the Theology in the context of Taiwan, ed., by Chen
Nan-Jou, (enl. ed., Chiayi: Hsin Fu, 1995), 101-30.
186 theologies and cultures
Jesus and stories from Asia. It is clear that for C. S. Song, the
stories of Reign of God, the stories of people striving for peace,
justice, love, and truth is the criteria for us to discern God’s
activities in the world.
Placing especial emphasis on the Reign of God, C. S.
Song argued that in reconstructing theology and mission,
Christian churches should come to a Biblical and theological
shift, namely, shifting “from the great commission of discipling
all nations to the great commandment of love for God and for
the neighbor”.23
He challenged churches and said “Try, then, to
make a biblical and theological shift from ‘the great
commission’ to ‘the great commandment’. Reconstruct a
theology of Christian mission on this shift and reshape programs
and practices of Christian mission with God’s healing love at the
heart”.24
C. S. Song stated that Jesus in the power of the Spirit
“would not go along with the ways in which we Christians
dismiss other religions as having nothing to do with the saving
activity of God in creation. What he did was to bring the love of
God back into the human community and test what we say and
do in every sphere of life, especially in the faith we profess and
in the religion to which we belong, whether the love of God we
confess is translated into love of our neighbor”.25
In short, C. S. Song proposed a new mission paradigm
that is to articulate mission from the perspective of God’s
creation instead of redemption, and to do mission from
observing great commandment of love rather than the great
commission.
Preman Niles, former general secretary of the Council
for World Mission, proposed an alternative mission paradigm
which he himself called ‘the people of God in the midst of all
23
C. S. Song, “From the Great Commission to the Great Commandment: A
Biblical and Theological Shift”, The Way No. 23 (December 2004), 11. 24
C. S. Song, “From the Great Commission to the Great Commandment: A
Biblical and Theological Shift”, 13. 25
C. S. Song, Jesus in the Power of the Spirit, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994),
256-257.
Theological Education 187
God’s peoples’.26
Preman Niles also argued that in Asia, the
motif of creation rather than redemption history is the needed
theological framework for mission.27
He considered that within
the framework of creation, rather than any construct of
redemption history, the redemption of all people could be rightly
understood.28
Preman Niles stated that the paradigm ‘the people
of God in the midst of all God’s peoples’ is “a paradigm that
urges us to explore missiologically the interrelationships that
ought to exist between understandings of people as laos, ochlos,
and ethne”.29
From my point of view, the theological
presupposition of Preman Niles’ paradigm is “the task for
Christian mission more in terms of ‘being a blessing to the
nations’ than as ‘attempting to convert the nations’”.30
Based on this theological understanding, Preman Niles
proposed that “in addressing the situation of religio-ethnic strife
embodied in the political paradigm of the clash of civilization,
the challenge [of mission] is to incarnate the love ethic of Jesus,
‘Love your enemies; do good to them that hate you’. Our
contention has been that only a church that has managed the
plurality of nations within itself and that views itself as set in the
midst of and not over against all God’s peoples can take up this
costly missionary vocation, because it is a mission that will
attempt to go against the tide”.31
It is clear that there are some similarities between
Preman Niles and C. S Song’s paradigms. Both of them argued
that God’s creation, rather than the redemption, should be the
framework of our mission. They all stressed that to do mission is
to love your neighbors in today’s world situation, especially in
the context of Asian people.
26
D. Preman Niles, From East and West: Rethinking Christian Mission,
(Missouri: Chalice Press, 2004) p. 132. 27
Ibid. p.137 28
Ibid p. 137 29
Ibid p. 155 30
Ibid p. 133 31
Ibid p. 177
188 theologies and cultures
Towards a Mission-Oriented Theological Education
If the element ‘mission should be the theme of all
theology’ is accepted as a critical element in the new emerging
mission paradigm, all theological discussions should be thought
about from the point of view of the theology of mission.
Therefore, the teaching and learning of all theological subjects
should be mission-oriented. To put it more precisely, we have to
establish and to promote a mission-oriented theological
education.
If we are challenged to reconstruct our Christian mission
from the perspective of God’s creation, we are challenged to
read the Bible with new eyes that will enable us to discern
God’s activities in our world, and to know the people in our
neighborhood and their faiths. Theological education therefore
has to enable and to empower theological students to identify
with the history and cultures of the people to whom they belong.
Theological education should enable students to discern the
theological meanings of the culture and history of the people
whom they serve.
If we are invited to do mission from observing the great
commandment of love, we are challenged to articulate and to
practice Christian social ethics, the principles of love, justice,
and peace in this complicated world which is driven by the
values of globalization, filled with confrontations of different
cultures, religions, and ideologies. Theological education
therefore has to enable and to empower theological students to
identify with the sufferings and the hopes of the people to whom
they belong and whom they serve. It means that the theological
education has to share together the sufferings of the people, and
to struggle together with people for a society towards justice and
peace.
In order to respond to the challenges mentioned above, I
propose some preliminary guidelines for theological education.
Regarding the purpose and the structure of theological
education:
Theological Education 189
Emphasizing both the training of the ministers and
pastoral workers and of the lay. Christian mission is
done by the whole church, not the ministers alone. The
genuine understanding of new mission paradigm should
be understood by not only the ministers but also the
people on the pew.
Challenging and reforming the existing theological
educational structures that they may serve the new
mission paradigm better. A structure taking both
centripetal and centrifugal approaches should be
considered.
Enhancing the relationship between the theological
seminaries and the local congregations that theological
studies may on the one hand, reflect the real situation of
the local context, on the other hand, take root on the
grassroots level.
Regarding the methods of theological education:
Intensifying the relationship and the integration between
theological studies and the studies of other disciplines
The studies of other disciplines always bring impacts on
our theological understanding of the world and the Bible.
The theology will be contextual and relevant to the life
of the people only if the theology stands in relation to
other disciplines.
Encouraging the interdisciplinary study and teaching
among all theological courses, and enabling students to
grasp the basic missiological issues that each theological
discipline is concerned with.32
Doing theology and theological education in the living
social and cultural context to which churches belong.
32
See D. Preman Niles, ed., Critical Engagement in the Asia Context, (Hong
Kong: ACHEI, UBCHEA, 2005), 69
190 theologies and cultures
Regarding the contents of theological education:
Shifting our theology and praxis of mission program
from the concern of personal salvation to the concern of
the life of the whole person, whole society, and whole
creation. It means that we have to explore and to teach
all dimensions of Gospel which is relevant to the
individuals, the society, and the whole creation.
Replacing “Christian and church-centered” mission
practices with the “people-centered” practices, or at least,
emphasizing both practices, and enabling theological
students to identify with the sufferings and hope of the
people and to be aware that participating in people’s
struggle for liberation politically, socially, economically,
and culturally is participating in God’s mission.
Seeking dialogue and cooperation with people of other
faiths. In order to be peacemakers and for the sake of
participating in the building of a peaceful society,
Christians have to seek to dialogue with people of other
faiths that the misunderstandings among different
religions can be eliminated, and mutual appreciation,
acceptance, and cooperation can thus be built up.
Discerning the theological meaning of the culture to
which we belong and exploring the dynamic relationship
between the Gospel and cultures, both traditional and
contemporary cultures for “Culture shapes the human
voice that answers the voice of Christ”.
Emphasizing the co-relation of the study and practice
between mission and social ethics. The integration of
mission study and social ethics will enable the Christian
communities to equip themselves better to participate in
social transformation and to be a blessing of others.
Reading the Bible with new eyes, the eyes of the poor,
the oppressed, and the marginalized, that the five
Theological Education 191
dimensions of the missions, namely proclamation of the
Gospel, the nurturing and teaching of the people of God,
loving service, transformation of society, and the caring
of creation may be rooted in the Biblical teaching.
Conclusion
A mission-oriented theological education is to let the
seminary be a facilitator, the ministers be mission enablers of
the Christian communities that the people of God will be
empowered to be coworkers of the Reign of God.