I have stated in previous writings that there is as much diversity in Liberation Theology as there is in classical Western theology. Liberation Theology is not monolithic by any stretch of the imagination. Those who undertake a rigorous and serious reading of Liberation Theology will discover that:
1. All Liberation theologians believe that theology should emerge from the "bottom up" rather than from the "top down." In other words, theology should emerge from whose who are alienated, marginalized, and powerless, not from those who are in positions of authority and power.
2. All Liberation theologians believe that those who are in a condition or position of powerlessness and subjugation, are in a privileged position to receive and understand God's revelatory acts in history.
3. All Liberation theologians believe that oppression and suffering should be the starting points for biblical interpretation and theological reflection.
This Puerto Rican minister/theologian and writer subscribes to the three principles listed above. While Liberation Theology was initially intended to address the issues of social class and political conditions in Latin America, it has taken on a life of its own in the U.S.A. in which we deal with additional issues of race and gender. Readers are encouraged to search out writings of Liberation Theology relative to issues of race and feminism.
Although Liberation Theology emerged within a Christian context, it offers a message of hope for the Puerto Rican Diaspora, regardless of the variety of religious practices within our community. It does not seek to demonize any particular religious expression, but rather to identify the liberating elements in all religions and to establish ties of solidarity with all those individuals and social entities whose goal is to dismantle structures of injustice and work for the construction of the Beloved Community. As a Puerto Rican Liberation theologian who believes that Jesus of Nazareth is the main agent in God's liberating and redemptive activity, I also believe that Jesus is the "Cosmic Christ," who is not only the "Christ of Christians," but of all those who are oppressed and seek to work for the benefit of all humankind, regardless of religious affiliations or labels. Our Puerto Rican sisters and brothers in the Diaspora, as descendants of our colonized parents, and as people who have been treated as second-class citizens in the U.S.A., have in Liberation Theology the call and hope for a society of full equality, justice, and peace.
To God in Christ be the glory! In the Name of the Creator, and of the Redeemer, and of the Sustainer. Amen!
Dr. Juan A.Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Wednesday, August 22, 2018
Monday, August 20, 2018
The Sovereignty of Taiwan: A Theological Perspective
This blog post is the conclusion of my book "The Sovereignty of Taiwan: A Theological Perspective."
As I conclude the writing of this book, we are faced with various options as to the position that we as a Church can take regarding the issue of self-determination. We can opt to engage in or disengage from the struggle and quest for the self-determination of the people of Taiwan. We can continue to perpetuate the false dichotomy between "political" and "spiritual" in deciding whether or not to participate in the struggle for self-determination. If we decide to engage, how do we do so? Do we resort, together with other people to armed struggle as a means of achieving our liberation? Do we take a stand of "neutrality?" Do we take a non-violent approach to social change and the quest for liberation?
It is this writer's conviction that the Church, operating in the power of the Holy Spirit, would bring about the best and most long-lasting results. This does not mean that we sit with our hands crossed and waiting "for Jesus to come." Nor does it mean that we play an idle role relative to the struggle of our beloved land. We are called to be pastoral, learned, and prophetic as we become protagonists in the struggle for human emancipation, and for the sovereignty of our beloved nation. It is my prayer, that you the reader, have heard the clarion call and will respond to it.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
As I conclude the writing of this book, we are faced with various options as to the position that we as a Church can take regarding the issue of self-determination. We can opt to engage in or disengage from the struggle and quest for the self-determination of the people of Taiwan. We can continue to perpetuate the false dichotomy between "political" and "spiritual" in deciding whether or not to participate in the struggle for self-determination. If we decide to engage, how do we do so? Do we resort, together with other people to armed struggle as a means of achieving our liberation? Do we take a stand of "neutrality?" Do we take a non-violent approach to social change and the quest for liberation?
It is this writer's conviction that the Church, operating in the power of the Holy Spirit, would bring about the best and most long-lasting results. This does not mean that we sit with our hands crossed and waiting "for Jesus to come." Nor does it mean that we play an idle role relative to the struggle of our beloved land. We are called to be pastoral, learned, and prophetic as we become protagonists in the struggle for human emancipation, and for the sovereignty of our beloved nation. It is my prayer, that you the reader, have heard the clarion call and will respond to it.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Rev. Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Saturday, August 18, 2018
Homeland Theology
The purpose of exploring Homeland Theology is to examine its role in addressing the issues of the oppression and suffering of the Taiwanese people (colonization. Kuomintang, land rights, human trafficking, etc.). These conditions and issues gave rise to the emergence of a home-grown theology in Taiwan. This paper focuses on the writings of Wang Hsien-Chih, who was a former professor at Tainan Theological College/Seminary.
The concept of doing theology in context was articulated and introduced by Chang-Hui Hwang (also known as Shoki Coe) and his colleagues of the Theological Foundation Fund of the World Council of Churches in the early 1970's, getting a positive response from Taiwan. Before serving as the director of the Fund, Hwang, the first Taiwanese principal of Tainan Theological College/Seminary, had already invited the churches in Taiwan and South East Asia to reflect on theological education in their own contexts in a paper entitled "A Rethinking of Theological Training for the Ministry in Younger Churches Today." Afterwards, Choan -Seng Song, in his inauguration as the first principal of TTCS after Wang, had advocated a theology of the Incarnation, proposing that the Gospel must be incarnated on the land and in the people of Taiwan. Obviously, the contextual theology was not new to the church in Taiwan. However, it was Wang Hsien-Chih, a theologian who suggested that Taiwanese Christians focus on the contextual issues, i.e. the issues of homeland at that time, and proposed a "homeland theology (Chen Nan-Jou, ed. A New Testament to Taiwan Homeland Theology:The Essential Writings of Wang Hsien-Chi. Yeong Cultural Enterprises Co..Ltd. August 2011, p. ix).
"Homeland" was taken as a theological issue in the time of "debate" on homeland literature" in Taiwan society in the 1970's, especially in 1977 and 1978. Those who identified Taiwan, not China, as their homeland, were severely censured and persecuted by the Nationalist totalitarian regime. Though the theological motives of Homeland Theology are ethnicity, land, power, and God, Wang stated that the core of these four motives was the people of Taiwan who strived to search for and to construct the Taiwanese identity, an identity denied by the Chinese government, both in China and Taiwan (Ibid., p. 22). In other words, we may say that the main concern of Homeland Theology was the issue of identification (Ibid., p. x).
The social-political situations have changed a lot in the last two decades. The martial law which lasted nearly 40 years was lifted in 1987. The Nationalist Party's regime which had ruled Taiwan for 50 years was defeated by the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004, respectively. However, the pernicious effects of the Nationalist totalitarian regime's egregiousness are still in existence. The issue of identification is still a crucial one in today's Taiwan. "Identification" has been a key word in the Taiwanese contextual theology. One of the impetuses behind the socio-political concern and involvement of the Christian churches in Taiwan is identification, i.e. identifying with the people of Taiwan (Ibid.).
To continue the spirit of the theological endeavor of the Homeland Theology, the contextual theology in Taiwan nowadays must be toward a theology of identification (Nan-Jou, "Contextualizing Catholicity: A Taiwanese Theology of Identification," in Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 17, No. 2, October 2003, and Nan-Jou, "Involvement of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan on the issue f the Future of Taiwan-A Theological Reflection," Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 9, No. 2, October 1995, pp, 256-262).
This theological construction can be described in the following three aspects:
1. Identifying with the sufferings and the hopes of the people of Taiwan, especially striving for the human rights of self-determination.
2. Identifying with the history and cultures of the people of Taiwan, i.e. discerning the theological meaning of Taiwanese history of cultures.
3. Participating in the building of koinonia to transform society, that is identifying Taiwan as the homeland (Nan-Jou in Wang Hsien-Chi, p. xi).
In fact, one of the main themes of the Bible is also identification. In the Old Testament, God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, saw their situation of being under oppression and was concerned about them. God's love and justice made God identify with the oppressed and suffering Israelites by sending Moses to them. In the New Testament, the loving God was revealed through the incarnation of Jesus. The incarnation means God's identifying with human beings, particularly the enslaved, the suffering, the suffering, the marginalized, and the oppressed. The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan also confesses that God is the Lord of history and the world, and to be a servant of God today means to do what Moses did. The Church must also imitate Jesus's incarnation, to identify with the suffering of Taiwan, so that the people might be liberated from oppression, and own a new identity to bring new life (Ibid.).
The motif of identification was the core of Wang's Homeland Theology and is still a key to doing theology in the Taiwanese context today. In order to participate in the Missio Dei (God's mission), to build a new Taiwan and to be part of the human community, Christian communities in Taiwan have to move toward a theology of identification (Ibid.).
Homeland Theology entails the theological exploration and exposition of nation-building arising from the peculiar context of Taiwan. Taking the book of Exodus as a paradigm,, nation-building, and exiles of Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures, Homeland Theology reckons that the issues of ethnicity (people), land, power, and God as the main theological themes for the Israelites and the Taiwanese as well. But in the New Testament, the theological focus of nation-building was transformed into the community-building (ecclesia) in the light of the reign of God proclaimed and realized by Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. This nation-building coexists with the community-building under the reign of God. The global conflicts among nations should be reconciled and redeemed through the sovereignty of God and neighbors as themselves (Wang Hsien-Chi, "Homeland Theology," in a Dictionary of Asian Christianity. Scott W. Sunquist, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, 2011, p. 345).
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
The concept of doing theology in context was articulated and introduced by Chang-Hui Hwang (also known as Shoki Coe) and his colleagues of the Theological Foundation Fund of the World Council of Churches in the early 1970's, getting a positive response from Taiwan. Before serving as the director of the Fund, Hwang, the first Taiwanese principal of Tainan Theological College/Seminary, had already invited the churches in Taiwan and South East Asia to reflect on theological education in their own contexts in a paper entitled "A Rethinking of Theological Training for the Ministry in Younger Churches Today." Afterwards, Choan -Seng Song, in his inauguration as the first principal of TTCS after Wang, had advocated a theology of the Incarnation, proposing that the Gospel must be incarnated on the land and in the people of Taiwan. Obviously, the contextual theology was not new to the church in Taiwan. However, it was Wang Hsien-Chih, a theologian who suggested that Taiwanese Christians focus on the contextual issues, i.e. the issues of homeland at that time, and proposed a "homeland theology (Chen Nan-Jou, ed. A New Testament to Taiwan Homeland Theology:The Essential Writings of Wang Hsien-Chi. Yeong Cultural Enterprises Co..Ltd. August 2011, p. ix).
"Homeland" was taken as a theological issue in the time of "debate" on homeland literature" in Taiwan society in the 1970's, especially in 1977 and 1978. Those who identified Taiwan, not China, as their homeland, were severely censured and persecuted by the Nationalist totalitarian regime. Though the theological motives of Homeland Theology are ethnicity, land, power, and God, Wang stated that the core of these four motives was the people of Taiwan who strived to search for and to construct the Taiwanese identity, an identity denied by the Chinese government, both in China and Taiwan (Ibid., p. 22). In other words, we may say that the main concern of Homeland Theology was the issue of identification (Ibid., p. x).
The social-political situations have changed a lot in the last two decades. The martial law which lasted nearly 40 years was lifted in 1987. The Nationalist Party's regime which had ruled Taiwan for 50 years was defeated by the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004, respectively. However, the pernicious effects of the Nationalist totalitarian regime's egregiousness are still in existence. The issue of identification is still a crucial one in today's Taiwan. "Identification" has been a key word in the Taiwanese contextual theology. One of the impetuses behind the socio-political concern and involvement of the Christian churches in Taiwan is identification, i.e. identifying with the people of Taiwan (Ibid.).
To continue the spirit of the theological endeavor of the Homeland Theology, the contextual theology in Taiwan nowadays must be toward a theology of identification (Nan-Jou, "Contextualizing Catholicity: A Taiwanese Theology of Identification," in Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 17, No. 2, October 2003, and Nan-Jou, "Involvement of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan on the issue f the Future of Taiwan-A Theological Reflection," Asia Journal of Theology, Vol. 9, No. 2, October 1995, pp, 256-262).
This theological construction can be described in the following three aspects:
1. Identifying with the sufferings and the hopes of the people of Taiwan, especially striving for the human rights of self-determination.
2. Identifying with the history and cultures of the people of Taiwan, i.e. discerning the theological meaning of Taiwanese history of cultures.
3. Participating in the building of koinonia to transform society, that is identifying Taiwan as the homeland (Nan-Jou in Wang Hsien-Chi, p. xi).
In fact, one of the main themes of the Bible is also identification. In the Old Testament, God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, saw their situation of being under oppression and was concerned about them. God's love and justice made God identify with the oppressed and suffering Israelites by sending Moses to them. In the New Testament, the loving God was revealed through the incarnation of Jesus. The incarnation means God's identifying with human beings, particularly the enslaved, the suffering, the suffering, the marginalized, and the oppressed. The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan also confesses that God is the Lord of history and the world, and to be a servant of God today means to do what Moses did. The Church must also imitate Jesus's incarnation, to identify with the suffering of Taiwan, so that the people might be liberated from oppression, and own a new identity to bring new life (Ibid.).
The motif of identification was the core of Wang's Homeland Theology and is still a key to doing theology in the Taiwanese context today. In order to participate in the Missio Dei (God's mission), to build a new Taiwan and to be part of the human community, Christian communities in Taiwan have to move toward a theology of identification (Ibid.).
Homeland Theology entails the theological exploration and exposition of nation-building arising from the peculiar context of Taiwan. Taking the book of Exodus as a paradigm,, nation-building, and exiles of Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures, Homeland Theology reckons that the issues of ethnicity (people), land, power, and God as the main theological themes for the Israelites and the Taiwanese as well. But in the New Testament, the theological focus of nation-building was transformed into the community-building (ecclesia) in the light of the reign of God proclaimed and realized by Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. This nation-building coexists with the community-building under the reign of God. The global conflicts among nations should be reconciled and redeemed through the sovereignty of God and neighbors as themselves (Wang Hsien-Chi, "Homeland Theology," in a Dictionary of Asian Christianity. Scott W. Sunquist, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, 2011, p. 345).
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Liberation Theology
In order to determine how Liberation Theology applies and relates to issues of colonization and social justice, we must first have an understanding of what it is and what it is not. What follows below is a description of what Liberation Theology is not and what it is.
WHAT IT IS NOT
There are many who base their conception of Liberation Theology on what they have heard from others. What they have heard is usually negative, and in many cases, the "others" themselves are not acquainted with Liberation Theology. Those who think negatively about Liberation Theology are getting second and even third-hand information about it and that is why their perceptions about Liberation Theology are so distorted and warped.
Contrary to what many people believe, Liberation Theology is not a school of thought that originated in the Roman Catholic Church. As a matter of fact, as will be pointed out below, Liberation Theology did not begin as a school of thought in any church, but rather is a movement.
Many people, especially those who are theologically-speaking uninformed, think of Liberation Theology as Marxism "in disguise." The reason for this is because Liberation Theology in some cases, makes use of Marxist categories in terms of social analysis. Many Liberation theologians are very conversant with Marxism and make use of Marxist terms in order to describe how they view the need for social change and transformation. But this writer (yours truly) humbly and respectfully submits that Liberation Theology is not Marxist at all.
There are those who believe that Liberation Theology is just another school of thought or even a mindset. But I say that it goes much further than that, and subsequently is something that will never cease, be irrelevant, or "go out of style."
WHAT IT IS
In a very general sense, Liberation Theology begins with the doctrines of Creation, the Fall, and Redemption. Liberation Theology takes seriously the divine initiative in all of the previously-mentioned historical events. Liberation Theology affirms God as the Creator of all things, the Liberator of humankind from the consequences of the Fall, i.e. slavery to sin, both individual and systemic, and the Sustainer of the universe.
In that same vein, Liberation Theology focuses on God's act of the liberation of the Hebrew people from physical slavery in Egypt. Yahweh God speaks to Moses and says to him "I have heard the cry of my people." God's hearing the cry of the people is the pivotal moment in history that engineers the process of liberation.
In the Exodus narrative, God identifies with the affliction, misery, and suffering of the Hebrews. God conveys to Moses that he is being called to be the agent through which God's liberation of the Hebrews from slavery will be accomplished. Moses would lead the people out of what at one time was the house of abundance, and then became the house of bondage.
The failure to acknowledge and recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology will result in a gross misunderstanding as to what it is, and cause many to demonize and even distort not only its contents, but also its thrust. In addition, if one fails to recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology, then the tendency will be to think of it as one school of thought among others and begin to equate it with secular ideologies and movements such as Marxism and political and social revolution. It will also result in placing Liberation Theology within the framework of extreme humanism which tends to ignore the divine initiative and overemphasize human achievement.
The task of defining Liberation Theology is a difficult and complex one. There is no one "Liberation Theology." Liberation Theology is a variegated affair, both in its motifs and the personalities involved (Rosino Gibellini, ed. Frontiers of Theology in Latin America. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979, p.x).
One will find diversity of thinking and methodology in Liberation Theology. It is not one particular way of thinking. There is as much diversity in Liberation Theology as there is in classical Western Theology. Nevertheless, there is an underlying unity in Liberation Theology's trend of thinking.
Liberation Theology offers us not so much a new theme for theological reflection, but rather a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history of humankind-gathered into ecclesia-and which openly confesses Christ. It does not stop with reflecting on the world, but rather tries to be part of the process through which humankind is transformed. It is a theology which is open in the protest against trampled human dignity, in the struggle against the plunder of the vast majority of people, in liberating love, and in the building of a new, just, and fraternal society to the gift of the Reign of God (Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. x).
Liberation Theology is an understanding of the faith, and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in the Christian community and other communities of faith. More than anything, it has to do with the communication of faith, and the proclamation of the Good News, which is that the Creator loves all people. To evangelize is to witness to that love; to say that it has been revealed to us and was made flesh in Christ (Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p. 5).
Liberation Theology is the "result of a new reading of the Scriptures in a particular historical situation." The experience of the Exodus becomes the key to a new perception of the Gospel. The Exodus story is a model for freedom,. Liberation Theology is a participation in that story (Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People. New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. 127).
Liberation Theology is seen as "a question addressed to the Christian obedience of our sisters and brothers in Christ, a question which only they can answer. Liberation Theology is a critical and committed Christian reflection of the people who have decided to join the struggle to construct a different society. It is not merely a "new school," nor a set of self-contained theological tents or positions. If Liberation Theology is made into a new school, it will have its day and be gone (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p. xx)."
Liberation Theology is a global way of articulating the task of the intelligence of the faith. It is not a theme among others in theology. It is done from the standpoint of captivity (Leonardo Boff, Teologia desde el Cautiverio. Bogota: Indo-American Press Service, 1975, p. 13
Liberation Theology is the "claim to view theology from the standpoint which the Christian fonts point up as the only authentic and privileged standpoint for arriving at a full and complete understanding of God's revelation in Jesus Christ. Theology must be validated by the choice which is made for approaches to social development (Juan Luis Segundo, "Capitalism Versus Socialism,: Crux Theologica," in Gibellini, p. 40).
As previously pointed out, Liberation Theology is not monolithic by any stretch of the imagination. There are differences in motifs and prisms through which different theologians engage in social analysis. The one thing that most, if not all Liberation Theologians have in common is their belief that biblical interpretation and theological reflection have oppression and human suffering as their starting points. While historically speaking, the Scriptures and the traditions have been considered as sources which shed light on the present situation, Liberation Theology does just the opposite, i.e. views the Scriptures and the traditions in the light of the situation. While that approach carries the risk of eisegesis (reading into the text), it also has the advantage of making the text and the tradition come alive. It allows for there to be interaction between the text and the traditions on the one hand, and the current situation on the other hand as continuous event.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen!
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
WHAT IT IS NOT
There are many who base their conception of Liberation Theology on what they have heard from others. What they have heard is usually negative, and in many cases, the "others" themselves are not acquainted with Liberation Theology. Those who think negatively about Liberation Theology are getting second and even third-hand information about it and that is why their perceptions about Liberation Theology are so distorted and warped.
Contrary to what many people believe, Liberation Theology is not a school of thought that originated in the Roman Catholic Church. As a matter of fact, as will be pointed out below, Liberation Theology did not begin as a school of thought in any church, but rather is a movement.
Many people, especially those who are theologically-speaking uninformed, think of Liberation Theology as Marxism "in disguise." The reason for this is because Liberation Theology in some cases, makes use of Marxist categories in terms of social analysis. Many Liberation theologians are very conversant with Marxism and make use of Marxist terms in order to describe how they view the need for social change and transformation. But this writer (yours truly) humbly and respectfully submits that Liberation Theology is not Marxist at all.
There are those who believe that Liberation Theology is just another school of thought or even a mindset. But I say that it goes much further than that, and subsequently is something that will never cease, be irrelevant, or "go out of style."
WHAT IT IS
In a very general sense, Liberation Theology begins with the doctrines of Creation, the Fall, and Redemption. Liberation Theology takes seriously the divine initiative in all of the previously-mentioned historical events. Liberation Theology affirms God as the Creator of all things, the Liberator of humankind from the consequences of the Fall, i.e. slavery to sin, both individual and systemic, and the Sustainer of the universe.
In that same vein, Liberation Theology focuses on God's act of the liberation of the Hebrew people from physical slavery in Egypt. Yahweh God speaks to Moses and says to him "I have heard the cry of my people." God's hearing the cry of the people is the pivotal moment in history that engineers the process of liberation.
In the Exodus narrative, God identifies with the affliction, misery, and suffering of the Hebrews. God conveys to Moses that he is being called to be the agent through which God's liberation of the Hebrews from slavery will be accomplished. Moses would lead the people out of what at one time was the house of abundance, and then became the house of bondage.
The failure to acknowledge and recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology will result in a gross misunderstanding as to what it is, and cause many to demonize and even distort not only its contents, but also its thrust. In addition, if one fails to recognize the biblical roots of Liberation Theology, then the tendency will be to think of it as one school of thought among others and begin to equate it with secular ideologies and movements such as Marxism and political and social revolution. It will also result in placing Liberation Theology within the framework of extreme humanism which tends to ignore the divine initiative and overemphasize human achievement.
The task of defining Liberation Theology is a difficult and complex one. There is no one "Liberation Theology." Liberation Theology is a variegated affair, both in its motifs and the personalities involved (Rosino Gibellini, ed. Frontiers of Theology in Latin America. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979, p.x).
One will find diversity of thinking and methodology in Liberation Theology. It is not one particular way of thinking. There is as much diversity in Liberation Theology as there is in classical Western Theology. Nevertheless, there is an underlying unity in Liberation Theology's trend of thinking.
Liberation Theology offers us not so much a new theme for theological reflection, but rather a new way to do theology. Theology as critical reflection on historical praxis is a liberating theology, a theology of the liberating transformation of the history of humankind-gathered into ecclesia-and which openly confesses Christ. It does not stop with reflecting on the world, but rather tries to be part of the process through which humankind is transformed. It is a theology which is open in the protest against trampled human dignity, in the struggle against the plunder of the vast majority of people, in liberating love, and in the building of a new, just, and fraternal society to the gift of the Reign of God (Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1973, p. x).
Liberation Theology is an understanding of the faith, and a re-reading of the Word as it is lived in the Christian community and other communities of faith. More than anything, it has to do with the communication of faith, and the proclamation of the Good News, which is that the Creator loves all people. To evangelize is to witness to that love; to say that it has been revealed to us and was made flesh in Christ (Hugo Assmann, Practical Theology of Liberation. London: Search Press, 1975, p. 5).
Liberation Theology is the "result of a new reading of the Scriptures in a particular historical situation." The experience of the Exodus becomes the key to a new perception of the Gospel. The Exodus story is a model for freedom,. Liberation Theology is a participation in that story (Ester and Mortimer Arias, The Cry of My People. New York: Friendship Press, 1980, p. 127).
Liberation Theology is seen as "a question addressed to the Christian obedience of our sisters and brothers in Christ, a question which only they can answer. Liberation Theology is a critical and committed Christian reflection of the people who have decided to join the struggle to construct a different society. It is not merely a "new school," nor a set of self-contained theological tents or positions. If Liberation Theology is made into a new school, it will have its day and be gone (Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing Theology in a Revolutionary Situation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975, p. xx)."
Liberation Theology is a global way of articulating the task of the intelligence of the faith. It is not a theme among others in theology. It is done from the standpoint of captivity (Leonardo Boff, Teologia desde el Cautiverio. Bogota: Indo-American Press Service, 1975, p. 13
Liberation Theology is the "claim to view theology from the standpoint which the Christian fonts point up as the only authentic and privileged standpoint for arriving at a full and complete understanding of God's revelation in Jesus Christ. Theology must be validated by the choice which is made for approaches to social development (Juan Luis Segundo, "Capitalism Versus Socialism,: Crux Theologica," in Gibellini, p. 40).
As previously pointed out, Liberation Theology is not monolithic by any stretch of the imagination. There are differences in motifs and prisms through which different theologians engage in social analysis. The one thing that most, if not all Liberation Theologians have in common is their belief that biblical interpretation and theological reflection have oppression and human suffering as their starting points. While historically speaking, the Scriptures and the traditions have been considered as sources which shed light on the present situation, Liberation Theology does just the opposite, i.e. views the Scriptures and the traditions in the light of the situation. While that approach carries the risk of eisegesis (reading into the text), it also has the advantage of making the text and the tradition come alive. It allows for there to be interaction between the text and the traditions on the one hand, and the current situation on the other hand as continuous event.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen!
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Past Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College/Seminary
Friday, May 4, 2018
The Role ofChristianity in Taiwan
In this paper, we will explore the role that the various Christian communities have played in Taiwan's history. As we engage with this history, we will have to decide for ourselves whether that role has been negative, positive, or a combination of both. We will also have to decide for ourselves as to whether the various Christian communities are promoting the self-determination of the people in Taiwan, or whether their theology merely serves to legitimize the status quo of international indecision and the eventual return to Chinese rule over Taiwan.
Amongst almost twenty-three million people on Taiwan, only three percent is Christian. The rest of the people, more or less, hold on to beliefs in folk religion, i.e. Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, etc. The folk religions are people's popular beliefs which consist of certain native elements mixed with the above-named religions, and are diffused into secular and social institutions. The folk religions have an entire pantheon of gods and goddesses: more than 243 deities are worshiped. In 1981, the number of temples and shrines was 5,539, while the number of churches was 2, 169 (Yu Kuang-hong, "Development of Taiwanese Folk Religion: Analysis of Government Compiled Data," in Bulletin of the Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica, no 53 (1982), pp. 67-103).
Besides these, there are tens of thousands of family altars of folk religions. Both the number of shrines, temples, and churches, is increasing year by year. In the traditional ethnic Chinese mind, Christianity is acknowledged as a foreign religion. But Taiwanese people of Chinese origin usually think that all religions are good for humanity, and that they teach people to do good. Therefore, Christianity can coexist with other religions in Taiwan, although Christian are an absolute minority group ("The Coexistence Between Christians and the People on Taiwan," in Christianity Among World Religions. Hans Kung and Jurgen Moltmann, eds. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986, pp. 90-95).
Christianity, besides being accepted as a religion of teaching good among many religions in Taiwan and China, is usually recognized as the most liberating prophetic religion. The leaders of two decisive revolutions in China, in the 19th and 20th centuries, Hung Hsiu-chuan and Sun Yat-sen, were considered Christians ( A.T. van Leeuwen, Christianity in World History, pp. 365-381, C.S. Song, The Compassionate God, New York, 1982, pp. 192-215).
Historically, the Protestant mission to Taiwan started in the year 1627, three years after the Dutch colonization of Taiwan. They were just a step ahead of the Spanish Dominican missionary effort. Both missions were confined to the natives of Malayan origin, at that time, the majority of the Taiwanese populace. The first wave of the Christian missionary effort had more or less come to an end with the conquest of Taiwan by the Chinese under Cheng Cheng-kung, a warrior of the Ming dynasty, and known to the West as Koxinga (1624_1663) in 1661. Christianity faded away quickly because both the Dutch and Spanish missionaries were too closely linked with the colonizing effort to be able to lay the foundations for indigenous church leadership. ("The Reflection and
Envisioning of the Missions in Taiwan.: Taipei, Taiwan, Oct. 31-Nov. 2, 1995).
The second wave of the Christian mission started with the Spanish Dominican priests in 1859 in Kaohsiung, then Presbyterian missions to South Taiwan in 1865, and Canadian Presbyterian missions to North Taiwan in 1872. Denominational diversity or chaos came into the picture when Chiang Kai-Shek (1887-1975) and around two million of his followers took refuge on Taiwan in 1949. Coming along with them were various denominational missions and independent churches initiated and developed in China. This marked the third wave of the Christian mission to Taiwan (Ibid.).
It is in the recent three decades that the idea of contextual theologies have developed in Asia and Africa, while at the same time, liberation theologies have flourished in Latin America. Therefore, it might be helpful to clarify the importance and meaning of context in the biblical-theologizing foundation in order to make use of the contextual analysis for missiological reflection and envisioning in Taiwan (Ibid.).
Christianity came to Taiwan with its colonial background. It usually has an ahistorical orientation. In comparison, main world religions, such as Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, which came from China, usually have a China-oriented historical view. Therefore, both Christianity and major world religions in Taiwan do not encourage Taiwanese people to build their own historical world view (Ibid.).
With the coming of Koxinga to Taiwan and the end of Dutch rule, little is known of the existence, nature, and significance of the surviving Christianity among the original inhabitants. Most of the aboriginal villages where the Dutch had promoted the Christian faith were in the plains. With the great increase of Chinese coming to the island after the fall of the Ming dynasty in 1644, and then 38 years later when the Ming survivors were finally defeated, the social situation was changed drastically. Gradually, the aborigines were pushed back from their fertile lands into the foothills and high mountain areas (Ralph Covell, Pentecost of the Hills of Taiwan. Pasadena, California: Hope Publishing House, 1998, p. 103).
By the 1860's, English and Canadian missionaries, as well as Catholic mission orders arrived to "claim Taiwan for God." The early Protestants had much more success among the Pepohoan-the "civilized aborigines"- then they did among the Chinese. After this movement waned and ministries among the Chinese became more responsive and stable, missionaries commenced to work among the various groups of "raw savages" in the high mountains and adjacent areas (Ibid., p. 104)
This continued even after Taiwan was annexed by Japan in 1895. In fact, it was Japan's success in pacifying the tribes, particularly the more rebellious Tayal and Sediq, that helped to prepare for the entrance of the Christian faith, not only to these two groups, but to all of the original inhabitants. On the other hand, the Japanese effort in the mid-1920's to push its own nationalistic Shinto faith and persecute Christianity led to a period of crisis (Ibid.).
When he gained power, Koxinga established his headquarters in Anping, the new name for Zeelandia, and his capital at nearby Sakkam, the present-day Tainan. He instituted Chinese laws, customs, and administrative procedures to replace the old Dutch ones. Inasmuch as Christian churches were found largely among the aborigines or the Dutch citizens, there was no witness, as far as is known, among the Chinese (Ibid.).
Koxinga, of course, had not been friendly to the Dutch missionaries or the aboriginal Christians. Whether this was due to his antipathy to the Christian faith or to his perception that these people seemed more to be Dutch civil servants and traitors than Christians is a matter of debate. After his death, his son, Cheng Ching, apparently following his father's policy, offered to release the Dutch magistrates, clergy and wives-about 100 in all-if the Dutch would agree to oppose the new Manchu government on the mainland. The Dutch preferred to work with the new government, and this offer was not accepted (Ibid.).
Koxinga became close friends with an Italian Dominican missionary, Vittorio Riccio, whom he had met in Amoy. He confided in him. With a hopeless ambition to take the Phillippines, he appointed Riccio to be both his ambassador to the Spanish governor in Manila. When these hopes were dashed after Koxinga's death, Riccio continued as advisor to Cheng Ching. Eventually he became the "vicar" of the Formosan mission and meridional China. It is said that "a European friar converted into an ambassador for a Chinese pirate was a novelty" (Davidson, The Island of Formosa, n.p., n.d., pp. 51-52).
Roman Catholics had indicated an interest in returning to Taiwan as early as 1847, but it was not until 1859 that two Dominican friars from Manila, accompanied by three Chinese catechists arrived in Takao (present-day Kaohsiung). Their initial contact with the magistrates was not cordial. Only by the intercession of a European opium dealer, then living on a barge in the harbor, were they permitted to stay and to commence religious work (Covell, p. 112).
The beginning of missionary work in Taiwan at this particular time after nearly 200 years of Christian silence is related closely to the situation in China. Modern Protestant missionary work outside of Europe and America, apart from that which grew out of the chaplaincy of the Danish mission in India in the early 1700's, and the Dutch in Taiwan in the 1600's, did not really develop until the late 1700's or early 1800's (Ibid., p. 113).
Since the prohibition of Christianity in 1724, and the temporary disbanding of the Jesuits in 1773, Chinese Catholic Christians had undergone periods of severe persecution. No new missionaries were able to enter the country. When Protestant missionaries, beginning with Robert Morrison in 1807, sought to evangelize China, they had to be content to build a "wall of light" about China from their bases in Macau, Canton, Malacca, Singapore, Penang, Bangkok, and Batavia. They were not able to enter China proper (Ibid., pp. 113-114).
English Presbyterians commenced their missionary activity in China in Amoy along the South China Sea coast in 1847. When by the treaties of 1858, Taiwan was "opened" to foreigners , Douglas Carstairs and H.L Mackensie, English Presbyterian missionaries in Amoy, made an exploratory trip to Tanshui in the north. They brought two Amoy Christians as well as a large supply of books and tracts with them. Since the language of Amoy and of the local Chinese on Taiwan was the same, it was easy for them to evangelize. They were unaware of the earlier Dutch efforts and assumed that they were preaching the Gospel for the first time there (Ibid.).
A question which is in order for us today is the following: If Christians comprise only 3% of the population in Taiwan, do we need to redefine what it means to "win Taiwan for Christ?" Does the Christian Church have to find a way to coexist with the other communities of faith on the island? Can Christians work in unity for the good of the people of Taiwan by putting aside their theological differences? In the next paper, we will seek to address how Taiwanese Liberation Theology addresses the issues of sovereignty, land rights, etc.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Dr. Juan A. Carmona
Visiting Professor of Theology
Tainan Theological College
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)