Francisco De Jesus and Family

As a graduate of a Bible school pioneered by post war missionaries from the west, I have acquired western theology and ministerial methodologies that have provided resource for my ministry here in the

Philippines

. I have experienced to be a pastor for three years in a rural area and more than six years as a pastor/ missionary in an urban poor setting. With such training and experiences, I have grappled with issues on poverty like,  squatting, land grabbing, unemployment/ underemployment, drug abuse, prostitution, street kids/street dwellers and the like, accompanied by issues on graft and corruption and unfavorable (oppressive) labor laws etc. Experientially as one might say, actual ministry is different from what the seminary had thought. I wonder if it is really the case. Or it has only been a good excuse for the Americanized way of doing the ministry trying to be applied in the

Philippines

.

A starting point

I am a sojourner, trying to find my way through the theological journey of life, hoping to tread the right direction regarding the specific issues of my chosen ministry.  I am new to this kind of search and hoping to learn and gain more from the interaction of my experiences and biblical reflections. In my search I found a theological framework that almost speaks eloquently of the issues I have been exposed to and struggled in my own limited understanding of life and Christian living. Liberation Theology as a starting point in this search provides me with a fresh way of reflecting the very issues I have grappled with.

I also found that the Latin American context (although it is very unique) where liberation theology takes its roots is somewhat very similar to the context of the Asian and two thirds world, specifically the Philippines.

Theological movement specifically and uniquely situated in the Latin American context. Liberation theologians contend that their continent has been victimized by colonialism, imperialism, and multinational corporations. Economic "developmentalism" has placed so called underdeveloped

Third World

nations in a situation of dependence, resulting in the local economies of

Latin America

being controlled by decisions made in

New York

,

Houston

, or

London

. In order to perpetuate this economic exploitation, liberationists argue, the powerful capitalist countries, especially the

United States

, give military and economic support to secure certain political regimes supportive of the economic status quo.[1] 

In a striking parallel between the Asian and the third world context with the Latin American quest for a just and humane society, one can’t avoid to look into the liberation theology as a case in point (a model) in doing Asian theology. It has merits worth nothing even along with all the criticism to it as almost being equated with Marxism. Although remarkably, its uses Karl Marx’s social analysis in identifying class struggles as a hermeneutical key, its low Christology that rendered the death of Christ as a vicarious act of identification with the oppressed and not as a substitutionary death for the sins of the world[2], its definition of sin, its radical application revolution etc. (more discussion on these issues in the final paper), that can easily be pointed out as erroneous. On the other hand Liberation theology takes into serious account the poor and the oppressed up to the point that saying that the voice of the poor is the voice of God.[3]  As there can be many things to point out to disagree with liberation theology, I have found several elements from it that can be fundamental in laying down a foundation for a good Asian-evangelical theology namely;

1.      It locates a special place for the poor and the oppressed in the movement of God in history.

2.      Presents a personal God as seen in human history.

3.      Provides us a reminder that the Christ’s death on the cross has serious social and even political implications.

4.      Rightly exposes the reality of oppression in society and boldly speaks against the oppressors and take sides with the oppressed.

5.      Emphasis on the practical expression of faith.[4]

Asian Evangelical form of theology

And as a good student of theology and as an evangelical at the same time, I may trace my heritage to what Orlando Costas calls New Evangelicals.[5] As a New Evangelical and as what I think very much represented by Roger E. Olson in his article in The future of evangelicals in Christianity today, he articulating four minimum characteristics[6];

It looks to the Bible as the supreme norm of truth for Christian belief and practice—the biblical message enshrined in its narratives and its interpretations of those narratives;

—It holds a supernatural world-view that is centered in a transcendent, personal God who interacts with, and intervenes in, creation;

—It focuses on the forgiving and transforming grace of God through Jesus Christ in the experience called conversion as the center of authentic Christian experience;

—And it believes that the primary task of Christian theology is to serve the church’s mission of bringing God’s grace to the whole world through proclamation and service.

So in looking at liberation theology as a model for an Asian approach in doing theology I also have to affirm my Asian-evangelical stance. This is not however just to maintain my evangelical identity but also to arrive into a norm that will guide the process of my reflection as I engage my self in the Asian theology and at the same time the sources of liberation theology. The most crucial probably that will come into question over the four characteristics of an evangelical identity is the authority of the scriptures.[7] Costas in his assertion points out that while Asian evangelical theologian hold a similar concern over the authority of the scriptures. Costas states, “They however are not concerned over the formal authority question as they are over the material principle.”[8] To prove this point Costas referred to the three major theological conferences on evangelical theology in the Two Thirds Worlds, namely held in Thailand (March 1982), Korea August 1982), and Mexico (June 1984).[9]  Through these documents Costas presented a very Asian/ Third world expression of an evangelical affirmation of the scripture he states[10],

They express an unambiguous commitment to its authority not only in terms of the content of the faith and the nature of its practice but also in the approach to its interpretation. The scriptures are normative in the understanding of faith, life style of God’s people, and the way Christians go about their theological reflection. Yet the scripture are not to be heard of unhistorically. Indeed the normative and formative roles of scriptures are mediated by our context- context that are generally speaking, characterized in these documents as a reality of poverty, powerlessness, and oppression on the one hand and religious and ideological pluralism on the other. 

            

Costas argued for the distinctiveness of the Asian Evangelical character of theology he however affirms its fidelity to the authority of the scriptures. With such affirmation of the dynamics of the scriptures as the norm and of the Asian context as the object in doing theology, This paper hopes to see an articulation (in my own right) of an Asian-Evangelical liberation theology (with an already vast material written on it). That while pursuing the good and applicable elements of liberation theology as intently and specifically for the Asian context, still maintains a high view of the scripture as the norm for Christian life, conduct, practice and ministry.

Theological Method

            In Jose De Mesa’s discussion on Doing Theology as Inculturation he suggested the framework which he described as, the mutually respectful and critical interaction between the Judeo- Christian Tradition and Culture.[11] This can be taken as the interaction of the scripture (our Judeo-Christian Tradition as evangelicals, JCT) and the Asian culture (in our Asian context) mutually respectful and mutually critical. De Mesa stated that these two poles should affect and influence one another. Accordingly De Mesa stated that it is mutually respectful because both of which has something positive to contribute to the other. In doing so de Mesa adds that we are not only discovering the positive, life giving aspects of the two poles but also appreciates them. He further then to say that both derive its roots from God .[12] He also stated that it is mutually critical because both of which the scripture and the culture contain ambiguous and sometimes ideological elements in it.  It is both culturally bound and as in the scripture it is made available to us through a Semitic culture that as De Mesa’s example of the “ideologically structured perspective regarding the life and mission of women in the church.”[13]

According to De Mesa both poles the JCT (scriptures) and culture serves a source and a target. The pole of culture enables us to interpret fully the JCT (scriptures) as well as critically assess its present day cultural expressions. On the other hand the pole of JCT (scriptures) enables us to understand the culture in light of our faith.[14]

With this short effort (as I will expound more on this in my final paper) I hope to use this interaction to what is generally know as  Text / Context interaction but putting it in a mutually respectful and mutually critical interaction. The tension I think with this kind of framework with an evangelical regard to the authority of the scripture is putting it in a stance of equality with culture. This may need more further reflection and study on how concretely this dynamic be fully appreciated in an evangelical formulation.

Other References

I also would like to make use of the past experiences of Filipino (liberation) theologians and learn from what they have produced. As a start I have listed four Filipino (liberation) theologians found in the book of Dr. Rodrigo D.Tano as he made use of them in articulating the Theology in the Philippine Setting.

First of whom is Carlos Abesamis, a Filipino Jesuit priest. Father Carlos Abesamis articulation of his theology is the Total Salvation.[15]  Second is Edicio de La Tore a theology professor of The Divine Word in

Tagaytay

City

. Of whom, in the 1960’s became one of the most radical proponents of liberation theology during the height martial law repression. He was imprisoned in 1974 due to his involvement in organizing peasants for liberation movements. With the help of Father Luis Jalandoni, They articulated to what they call, Theology of the social reform.[16]

Another is Catalino Arevalo, a professor of Ecclesiology and Theology of Atonement at the Loyola School of Theology, Ateneo De Manila University. He also belongs to the Society of Jesus who lectures extensively on mission Theology and of Theology of liberation. His main work is called, the Theology of the Signs of the times.

It is with Father Catalino Arevalo I think I can benefit from reaping its laborious effort of constructing this theology otherwise known as the Theology of Development and Liberation. In this he stated his two main principles; one is that God is in the side of the poor. In stating this he is careful not to equate this with the Marxist and the Maoist, but ads in doing so God, takes sides also with the oppressors by struggling with them for their redemption from their own injustices and inhumanity. This in the process is redemption for both the oppressed and the oppressor. [17]

            Second, In Christ all will find its fulfillment. Unlike the Latin American liberation theology, Theology of Development fosters a Christology that advances a high regard to the

Kingdom

of

God

where Christ himself rule. In describing this in reference to the latter, Dr. Tano states,[18] “Arevalo is at the conviction that while Christian theology must motivate men to strive for a just society, it must constantly remind them that the coming of the

Kingdom

of

God

is not identical with the forward thrust of any economic, social or political movement in the world. Arevalo stresses that the realization of the age to come belongs to the freedom and power of God who has determined when and how it will be fulfilled.”

            Liberation theology is a very rich and very vast study to pursue, as vast as the books and materials and history that had witnessed its formulation and application. Re-locating its virtuous principles and in another vast discussion such as the Asian theological context is another humongous work. Albeit, the final paper hopes to concentrate on principles of the Liberation Theology that is in consonant with the evangelical position (ex. authority of the scripture) and in tune with the Asian context. That in somehow may arrive in to a Theology that is relevantly and meaningfully understood and practiced in

Asia

and the third worlds.

Bibliography:

·        Costas, Orlando E., Evangelical Theology in the Two Thirds World.

(Appendix)

·        De Mesa, Jose M. In Solidarity with the Culture, 

Mary hill

School

of

Theology

, Quezon City Phils. 1991

·        Elwell, Walter A., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology,

Baker Book House Company (Electronic Ed). Copyright 1984.

·        Olson, Roger E., The Future of Evangelicals,

Christianity Today (No available date)

·        Tano, Dr. Rodrigo D., Theology in the Philippine Setting.

New Day Pub,

Quezon City

. 1981.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 9th, 2005 at 11:00 pm and is filed under Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.