Insights Spring 07

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N

Insights The Faculty Journal of Austin Seminary

SPRING 2007

J ENSEN • PARKER • L EE • B ANDA • L ORD • A HN • J ONES

Insights The Faculty Journal of Austin Seminary Spring 2007 Volume 122

Number 1

Editor: Cynthia L. Rigby Editorial Board: Allan Cole, David Jensen, and Randal Whittington Insights: The Faculty Journal of Austin Seminary is published two times each year by Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, 100 East 27th Street, Austin, TX 78705-5797. e-mail: [email protected]

Web site: www.austinseminary.edu

Entered as non-profit class bulk mail at Austin, Texas, under Permit No. 2473. POSTMASTER: Address service requested. Send to Insights, 100 East 27th Street, Austin, TX 78705-5797. Printing runs are limited. When available, additional copies may be obtained for $3 per copy. Permission to copy articles from Insights: The Faculty Journal of Austin Seminary for educational purposes may be given by the editor upon receipt of a written request. Some previous issues of Insights: The Faculty Journal of Austin Seminary, are available on microfilm through University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 (16 mm microfilm, 105 mm microfiche, and article copies are available). Insights is indexed in Religion Index One: Periodicals, Index to Book Reviews in Religion, Religion Indexes: RIO/RIT/IBRR 1975- on CD-ROM, and the ATLA Religion Database on CD-ROM, published by the American Theological Library Association, 300 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 2100, Chicago, IL 60606-6701; telephone: 312-454-5100; e-mail: [email protected]; web site: www.atla.com; ISSN 1056-0548.

COVER: “The Spirit of Lei Feng Vs. Monroe as a Model,” licensed by Ji Wenyu, ShanghArt Gallery, www.shanghartgallery.com; 2005, oil on canvas (4'5" x 6'4"). Reprinted with permission. “Consumerism becomes the new belief system in Ji Wenyu’s color and detail saturated images … In his emblematic paintings, Ji Wenyu contrasts communist propaganda imagery of workers and peasants in heroic poses with Western brand-name product logos. Here, political propaganda enters new alliances with Western marketing’s promises of happiness, which the artist (not without irony) holds up against the public of a radically changing China. By juxtaposing images and iconographies of the stereotyped oriental and the assumed occidental, Ji Wenyu questions the politics of cultural representation. Ji Wenyu’s universe is full of surprises and references to both political occurrences and cultural productions, focusing on the precise distortion of today’s spectacle society.” —from an introduction to the artist Ji Wenyu, ShanghArt Gallery

Contents 2 I N T RO D U C T I O N Cynthia L. Rigby

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N 3

T H E B I G M A C ™ A N D T H E L O R D ’ S TA B L E : A T H E O L O G I C A L I N T E R P R E TAT I O N O F G L O B A L I Z AT I O N David Hadley Jensen

12

D AVI D J E N SE N : G LO B A L W E A R I NE SS

AND

S A B B ATH R E ST

An Interview

16

REFLECTIONS A N E C U M E N I C A L C H R I S T I A N R E F L E C T I O N O N G L O B A L I Z AT I O N by Janet L. Parker T RINITARIAN OR T HEOCRATIC ? by Hak Joon Lee T HE A MBIGUITY OF G LOBALIZATION : A P RESSING C HALLENGE FOR A FRICAN C ONTEXTUAL T HEOLOGY by Lameck Banda

30

PA S TO R S ’ PA N E L Christine Eaton Blair, Laura Taylor de Palomino

34 REQUIRED READING P REACHING W ORDS : 144 K EY T ERMS IN H OMILETICS , written by John S. McClure, reviewed by Jennifer L. Lord; T HE S TRUGGLE TO U NDERSTAND I SAIAH AS C HRISTIAN S CRIPTURE , written by Brevard S. Childs, reviewed by John Ahn

37 CHRISTIANITY

AND

C U LT U R E

T H E W E S T E R N M I S S I O N A RY M O V E M E N T I N A N E R A O F G L O B A L I Z AT I O N Arun W. Jones

I N T RO D U C T I O N hen we first began working on this issue, we worried that “globalization” might come across as one of “those” words. I think you know the kind of words I mean: words like “postmodernity,” “epistemological,” “paradigmatic.” Words that many of our loyal readers might wish we would leave in the academy; words that can seem irrelevant to the concrete realities of our daily lives. As you will see in the articles and interviews you are about to read, we had nothing to worry about. “Globalization” is one of those words that means exactly as it sounds. And we can hardly go for an hour without encountering its perks and its challenges. This issue works to articulate exactly how we benefit from and how we are confronted by the dynamics of globalization. Each one of our authors seeks to articulate what it might look like to live faithful Christian lives in a world which seems to grow smaller and faster every day. In our centerpiece, Austin Seminary professor David Jensen invites us to explore the tensions we negotiate, as Christian believers in a globalized world, by juxtaposing the universal image of the “Big Mac”™ with that of the Lord’s Table. Dr. Jensen pointedly raises the question: How do we prophetically challenge the “economy of scarcity” driving our global existence with the “economy of abundance” which characterizes the Eucharistic banquet? Dr. Jensen’s provocative discussion is followed by three reflection pieces. First, Janet Parker—pastor, ethicist, and ecumenical consultant for the World Council of Churches—manifests great hope in arguing that there is an alternative to Empire. Economic justice in our globalized world is possible, she believes, and Christians all over the world are insisting on it. Next, Hak Joon Lee, ethics professor from New Brunswick Seminary, suggests that our trinitarian confession offers resources for defying the “unrelational and monistic” thinking characteristic of American supremacy. Finally, Lameck Banda, Zambian pastor and emerging theologian, invites us to consider what globalization looks like from the perspective of African contexts. This issue also features an interview in which Dr. Jensen discusses (1) what Christian worship has to offer in addressing the weariness characteristic of a globalized age, and (2) how congregations can respond to the challenges of globalization. In our regularly featured pastors’ panel, Christine Eaton Blair and Laura Taylor de Palomino discuss what it is like to minister to and with multinational congregations. The issue is rounded off by two book recommendations and a wonderful piece, written by our own Arun Jones, which challenges mainline Protestants to explore “the universal and transnational dimensions of the Christian faith” in their missional work. We trust that you will enjoy this issue. We hope it will spark new ideas and support re-commitments to faithful living in this age of globalization. In the meantime, our editorial staff will be working hard on our Fall 2008 issue, which will be focused on the theme of “Resurrection.” Our goal is to produce an issue that will be helpful to pastors and lay leaders as they look toward the planning of Lent in Spring 2008. Thank you, as always, for your reading and support of Insights. Please continue to send us your comments, criticisms, and suggestions.

W

Cynthia L. Rigby, editor W.C. Brown Professor of Theology Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary 2

T HE B IG M AC AND THE L ORD ’ S TABLE ™

A

THEOLOGICAL OF

I NTERPRETATION

G LOBALIZATION

D AV I D H A D L E Y J E N S E N To realize the full possibilities of this economy, we must reach beyond our own borders, to shape the revolution that is tearing down barriers and building new networks among nations and individuals, and economies and cultures: globalization. It’s the central reality of our time. –Bill Clinton If you are totally illiterate and living on one dollar a day, the benefits of globalization will never come to you. –Jimmy Carter

A NEW GLOBAL WORLD ORDER? hat is globalization? At the dawn of the twenty-first century, we are bombarded by the term, a buzz word in debates ranging from politics, business, popular music, the environment, even controversies over the food we eat. Heralded as a harbinger of democracy and mourned as the inaugurator of terrorism, it is hard to determine whether globalization is a boon or bane to the planet’s life. Perhaps it is no surprise that two former U.S. presidents—from the same political party— cannot agree on globalization’s benefits. What is globalization? For the purposes of this

W

David Hadley Jensen is associate professor of constructive theology at Austin Seminary. He received a BA from Carleton College, an MAR from Yale Divinity School, and the PhD from Vanderbilt University. He is currently among forty invited participants nationwide in the Workgroup in Constructive Theology. Jensen is the author of In the Company of Others: A Dialogical Christology (Pilgrim Press, 2001), Graced Vulnerability: A Theology of Childhood (Pilgrim Press, 2005), and Responsive Labor: A Theology of Work (Westminster John Knox, 2006).

3

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N : T H E B I G M A C ™

AND THE

L O R D ’ S TA B L E

essay, I suggest the following definition: globalization refers to the compression of time and space relationships between persons that results in intensified awareness of the interconnected and interdependent nature of life on planet earth.1 Globalization does not merely refer to the reality of global interconnection, but to the economic, political, and cultural forces that intensify connections already present. Human beings have long lived in a global world, where actions in one part of the globe have affected relationships in others. (Consider ancient trade routes, exploration, and Western colonialism as historical examples.) What is new in this century, however, is the increased speed and intricacy of these connections: where terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington D.C. have an immediate effect on policing in London and Riyadh; where a slight disruption in Wal-Mart’s supply chain ripples throughout the global economy, where computer connections allow persons to experience events across the planet as they unfold rather than waiting for the evening newscast or tomorrow’s newspaper. If global interconnection is hardly new, the immediacy of these relationships at this point in history is unprecedented. Global consciousness is hardly new to Christian faith. Hope for a communion that stretches to the ends of the earth is present throughout the New Testament. The conclusion to Matthew’s gospel offers but one example of Christian globalism: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Mt. 28:1920). A renewal movement that began among Jews rapidly spread to Gentiles in places as disparate as Spain, Ethiopia, Greece, and North Africa. Christian faith grew, moreover, during the reign of a global power. Jesus lived in a colony under the rule of a Roman Empire that sought to extend its influence throughout the known world. The early church, no doubt, was aided in its growth by the strands of interconnection that Empire wrought, even if that Empire tried to suppress the nascent church. This rapid growth of the church across cultures brought its own struggles and conflicts, which are amply recorded in the Book of Acts. In its pages we catch a glimpse of a church wrestling with its own global tendencies, guided by God’s gracious Spirit as it proclaims the Good News of Jesus Christ. One way of looking at the Book of Acts, then, is as an early Christian assessment of globalization, how faithfulness to Jesus Christ might be lived out in a diverse and interconnected world. Many of the church’s responses to globalization center on its practices of table fellowship: what foods are shared, how that food is distributed, and the language of hospitality present at table. The meals that are served in the earliest Christian communities make a world of difference.

TWO MEALS WITH DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS eals are always about more than food, for they instill practices and assumptions in those gathered around the food shared at table. Take the Christian practice of the Lord’s Supper as an example, a global meal that is celebrated wherever the Gospel is proclaimed. The patterns of this meal reveal many assumptions about food and others. We assume, for example, that there is always room for one more baptized person at

M

4

Jensen the table, no matter how small the loaf of bread and cup of wine. We believe that in breaking bread and pouring the cup, we do not merely host others, but that the Risen Christ is present as the true Host. We come to the Lord’s Table hungry and experience fulfillment at table, but also go away hungry, knowing that this food is not yet shared with all. In the bread and wine, we encounter the gift of God’s Son, broken and given for the world, a gift of life that also equips us to give of ourselves. When celebrated again and again, these patterns of the Lord’s Table—abundant giving, hosting, hungering, remembering, making room for others—become contagious, taking shape in our lives as we rise from the table. The food and drink at the Lord’s Table are by no means unique to a particular culture. Viewed broadly, the food constitutes the most basic staple across cultures. Each culture has its own unique form of bread—baguette, challah, tortilla, naan. The risen Christ, accordingly, does not come in a meal that is specific to one culture alone. Most Protestant churches, therefore, do not specify the kind of bread to be served during the Lord’s Supper. The drink, likewise, is not restricted to specific cultures; nor is it essential for Protestants that the cup contain fermented beverage. Each culture has its own festival drink. But this drink also constitutes the cup of sacrifice at the Lord’s Table. The Host who gives life to us is also the One who gives his life for us. So it is that this drink is both sweet and bitter, whether the cup is filled in Viet Nam, Venezuela, or the Vatican. The food and drink of the Lord’s Table always take shape in local cultures. They become a part of a global meal as they remember and celebrate the risen Christ who is present at all tables.2 At this table the food and drink are worth lingering over. Our peculiar North American culture has also bequeathed a meal for the world’s consumption, a meal that gorges a larger number of bellies every year: the Big Mac™, fries, and Coke. This meal also embodies distinct practices: of burgers packaged in individual containers that resist sharing, of a maddening rush to the counter, of empty calories rather than food that sustains, of convenience rather than hospitality, of intricate global supply chains ensuring that beef from Brazil arrives in Asia on time, of homogeneous tastes rather than regional adaptation, of scarcity that breeds overconsumption from super-sized portions rather than sharing that begets moderation. Convenience, price, and uniformity are prized in today’s McMeals. Whether one travels to China or Chile, one can always find the comfort of the familiar without waiting long for food. Such meals, in the end, enable us to devour all we can quickly without bothering to interact with those hosting the meal. When ingested again and again, this meal, too, inculcates patterns: consumption, scarcity, and minimal interchange with others. The meal becomes something we rush through rather than linger over. These two global meals offer distinct outlooks on the reality of global interconnectedness. Where the McMeal encourages hoarding, the Lord’s Supper fosters sharing; where the McMeal longs for a homogenous culture, the Lord’s Supper celebrates the diversity of God’s children. The practices of the Lord’s Table in a global world, therefore, are not merely the private rites for the church, but public acts for the sake of a public good. We offer this meal and these gestures of grace present within the meal not merely for our own sake, but because Christ desires all to be present at the Lord’s Table, to be caught up in the movement of grace for the world in practices of sharing and 5

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N : T H E B I G M A C ™

AND THE

L O R D ’ S TA B L E

abundance. How might our participation in these distinct meals affect our cultural and economic practices in an era of globalization? To those questions I now turn.

SCARCITY AND ABUNDANCE: ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS OF THE TWO MEALS he McMeal is about more than food; it carries with it a host of economic assumptions. First, the meal assumes that cost is the preeminent criterion of a good meal. Compared to other lunchtime options in the U.S., the Big Mac™, fries, and Coke™ is a consistently cheap option.3 The attraction of the meal, no doubt, lies in its comparative affordability: if you sell a cheap burger, they will come. To ensure low prices, McDonald’s has secured an intricate global supply chain, where potato farmers in Idaho are connected to cattle ranchers in Brazil, each filling the maw of an increasingly hungry world with food that leads to heart disease and obesity. Cost, in this case, takes precedence over the substance of the meal. McDonald’s ensures that each of its suppliers are gained at the lowest cost, and often farmers have little recourse. Lose McDonald’s as a customer and one can lose one’s livelihood. The intricacy of this global supply chain is, in itself, neither benign nor destructive, but when cost takes priority over people, then the supply chain tilts toward problematic assumptions: that I have to hold on to what I’ve got, lest someone else take it from me. As suppliers cling to their McDonald’s connections, McDonald’s also holds suppliers in its clutches. Is it no wonder that the Big Mac™ is designed to be clutched with both hands? When cost alone determines the value of a meal, it can result in patterns of scarcity and hoarding. The habits of the McMeal mimic some patterns of wealth distribution in the global economy. Who benefits from the whirring engines of this economy? Current trends, it seems, only confirm attitudes of hoarding among the wealthiest nations on earth. As the 2000 U.N. Development Report notes, “Before the onset of globalization in 1973, the income ratio between the richest and poorest countries was at about 44 to 1. Twenty-five years later it had climbed to 74 to 1. In the period since the end of the Cold War, the number of persons subsisting below the international poverty line rose from 1.2 billion in 1987 to 1.5 billion today.”4 Nations and peoples that were already welloff have continued to grow richer, while those left in the slow lanes of the global economic track continue to subsist on less. Even in those pockets of the developing world where globalization has proved a boon to local economies in select technological hubs—Bangalore, for example—the high-tech industry accounts for a mere 0.2 percent of Indian employment and often affects those outside its orbit rather little.5 Hoarding, on these levels, only occurs when we assume that there is not enough wealth to go around. But this assumption flies in the face of reality. North Americans are now living in one of the most prosperous eras known to humankind. There is more than enough food and resources to go around. But instead of living into that abundance, we have chosen to hang on to more, desire more, and spend more, creating unprecedented levels of personal debt. If we assume scarcity and hoard our meals—even in abundant times—we can never have enough.

T

6

Jensen How different the patterns of table fellowship in the Book of Acts sound to our ears: All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all as any had need. Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved (Acts 2:44-46). The assumption of this meal, these practices, and this table is one of abundance. These early followers of the Way were not possessed of the compulsion to share because there was little left to give; rather, they shared food and broke bread with each other because God provided more than enough to go around. The sharing at this table proceeded out of abundance and joy. These first converts, it seems, spent a lot of time in local, everyday activities infused with gladness: breaking bread at home, eating, praying, teaching, sharing, working. Granted new life in baptism, they were empowered to give to any and all who have need. The gifts at these meals kept on giving, as daily God added to the number of those being saved. At this point in the book of Acts, the Jesus movement is on the cusp of a global world. The early converts are all Jews who spent “much time together in the temple.” But these local practices of sharing and abundance have global significance, for they are the very practices that these early disciples bring to the world. These practices of table fellowship carry economic assumptions: In God’s economy we do not “earn” our blessings; they are simply given, abundantly, even recklessly with the expectation that we, too, might give. In direct contradiction to an economy of scarcity, giving in this meal increases the abundance of table rather than diminishes it. Such assumptions of abundance are contagious, empowering all who partake of the meal to give. At the Lord’s Supper, God’s gifts beget our own giving: God gives, we respond in thanks with tokens of bread and wine, while God keeps on giving God’s very self as Christ’s body and blood. Such a meal has global consequences, for it assumes that there is always enough for the body and that hoarding food leads ultimately to death.

HOMOGENIZATION OR HYBRIDITY? CULTURAL ASSUMPTIONS OF THE TWO MEALS n addition to economic practices, the McMeal also conveys cultural assumptions with its burgers and fries. An unexpressed goal of the global march of McDonald’s is cultural homogeneity. Unlike the Eucharist, the McMeal does not exhibit much regional adaptation. Devour a cheeseburger in Beijing and it tastes the same as it does in Boston. Big Macs™ and Quarter Pounders™ seem to hover above culture, unable to interact with local tastes and customs. In the name of efficiency, the Big Mac™, fries, and Coke™ are purveyed as hurriedly and predictably as possible: no variations, no attempts to meld with local cuisines. At McDonald’s, even bread tastes the same across the globe. Happy Meals™ construe otherness as a threat to the meal’s security and happiness, for at this meal no others are welcomed. If the Eucharist presents a banquet

I

7

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N : T H E B I G M A C ™

AND THE

L O R D ’ S TA B L E

around which all cultures are represented, the McMeal invites all to partake, but stipulates that only one kind of culture may be present. The McMeal is thus a parody of the Eucharist, extending an invitation to all, but embodying only one culture. Ideal consumers of McMeals are identical—each requesting the same amount of salt, a few pickles, and a dollop of ketchup. The meal represents the extension of American consumer culture—in its high-fat, low-fiber form—to the world. One effect of this meal and the homogenizing tendencies of American consumer culture is the flattening of regional tongues. Although “hamburger” and “cheeseburger” are translated into local dialects wherever McDonald’s may be found, the word “Big Mac™” never is. “Big Mac™” is inexpressible in alien tongues, and so must insert itself into local languages. This seemingly trivial example mirrors the rapid spread of English throughout the world as the language of business. No doubt, this “universal tongue” has done much to heighten communication and tear down barriers between cultures. But its use also comes with a cost: a rapid disappearance of regional tongues. “The number of spoken languages in the world has dropped from about 14,500 in 1500 to less than 7,000 in 2000. Given the current rate of decline, some linguists predict that 50-90% of the currently existing languages will have disappeared by the end of the 21st century.”6 From a Eucharistic perspective, such loss is tragic, for it diminishes the tongues present at the banqueting table. As languages disappear, so do textures of experience, other forms of seeing, knowing, and doing. Because Eskimo languages have multiple words for snow, the experience of snow in these cultures is far wider than the single word that English offers. Might we not say the same for love? Grace? Take and eat? That the world needs multiple languages to express the most basic Christian convictions? Something of the richness of our response to God’s gifts at table is lost whenever a language disappears from the face of the earth. If the McMeal doesn’t claim this as its goal, certainly one effect of the commerce that purveys the Meal may be the muffling of praise poured out at Pentecost. Cultural homogeneity is shunned in Christian practices of table fellowship. Consider Peter’s vision from Acts, which occurs at the cusp of the Gentile mission: [Peter] became hungry and wanted something to eat; and while it was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down, being lowered to the ground by its four corners. In it were all kinds of four-footed creatures and reptiles and birds of the air. Then he heard a voice saying, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.” The voice said to him again, a second time, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane” (Acts 10:10-15). Peter’s vision occurs as a shock to monocultural sensibilities—how can one kill, let alone eat, foods which have been declared unclean in the name of religion? Peter, at first, is right in asserting that his cultural codes of purity exclude him from participation in a disgusting meal. It is as unseemly as if the Gentiles, too, were to receive the Good News. But the very thing that seems unseemly is accomplished as Cornelius hears and believes the Gospel while the mission to the Gentiles is unleashed. This vision of a revolting banquet signals a transition in the Book of Acts: from followers of the Way 8

Jensen who share a common culture to an expansion of practices and peoples as foreigners, strangers, and undesirables are caught up in the Messianic banquet. The Peter who is revolted by the vision is the same Peter who orders strangers and Gentiles to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (10:48). Peter’s vision of a foreign feast leads to the inclusion of foreigners in the fold. At first glance, this teeming table seems little to resemble the Eucharistic feast. Instead of staple foods we encounter exotic creatures destined for slaughter. But the assumptions of this descending sheet resemble the global assumptions of the Lord’s Supper. Indeed, the vision marks the beginning of the Eucharist as a cross-cultural meal. In Christ, at this table, all persons are hybrid rather than homogeneous. At the Lord’s Table all baptized persons are welcomed. Try as the church has throughout its conflicted history, there is no way to erect legitimate barriers around the table. This is a supper where all are welcome, no matter what culture, no matter what language. As the invitation to the Lord’s Table reminds us, “Friends, this is the joyful feast of the people of God! They will come from east and west, and from north and south, and sit at table in the kingdom of God.”7 The Eucharist is a global meal that is not partisan to a particular culture, but allows each culture to express itself as Christ comes to redeem all cultures. The Supper does not impose a particular cultural standard upon all. This is why it is not essential what kind of bread or what kind of wine is used at the supper. Here no culture is at advantage or lacking because the meal takes shape in local practices. As it repeats Jesus’ gestures at that meal celebrated in Jerusalem—taking, blessing, breaking, and giving—a local meal makes Christ known to the world. In local practice Christ is present as the global Host. The Lord’s Supper reminds us that cultural identity, however essential, is not the ultimate marker of personhood. The fundamental truth of my life, in other words, is not that I am American, Samoan, or Zambian, but that in Christ I am a new creation. Baptismal identity does not obliterate culture, but gathers up that identity in the truth that in Christ I am a child of God. In this sense, Christian personhood is hybrid identity. One lie we tell ourselves is to reduce others (and ourselves) to a particular culture, gender, nation, means of sexual expression, or vocation. How many times have we convinced ourselves that we will only understand someone if we see them as “straight,” “African,” “female,” or “minister?” The Good News of Jesus Christ, however, is that all facets of our identity are redeemed by God’s grace in baptism. Paul’s claim that in Christ there is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female (Gal. 3:28) relativizes our own culture while it connects us with persons and cultures foreign to us. At the Lord’s Table, the children of God are American and Iraqi, gay and straight, rich and poor—those who are no longer reduced to these designations. This global meal does not erect boundaries around a particular culture or establish one culture at the expense of another. Rather, it invites all cultures to participate in the richness of a meal that takes shape in local practices, connecting the celebration of one meal to all meals where Christ is Host. The Christ who finds a home in all cultures of the earth invites us, then, to partake in culture’s riches, wherever they may be found. One of these riches is language itself. The Eucharistic banquet, like the dizzying spectacle of Peter’s vision of a descending sheet, invites us to hear many languages of 9

G L O B A L I Z AT I O N : T H E B I G M A C ™

AND THE

L O R D ’ S TA B L E

praise. The Book of Acts, after all, begins with the profusion of Pentecost. And, like the vision, this phenomenon, too, provokes astonishment: “And at this sound the crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in the native language of each” (Acts 2:6). The birth of the church signals not the imposition of one word or language poured out for many, but the assumption of the Divine Word in the tongues of all the earth’s peoples. The Word privileges no particular tongue—in direct opposition to global commerce that heralds the triumph of a single lingua franca—but gives rise to ceaseless praise in a multitude of speech, so that all might understand. The meal is global in the riches of each local tongue.

CONCLUSION hristian faith has long sought the global while holding fast to the local. The incarnation of God in the person of Jesus of Nazareth is not an acultural idea, but took place in a particular culture and thus gives hope for the whole world. The church is not an amorphous global conglomerate, but is embodied in local communities that witness to the world’s hope. The Lord’s Supper does not hover above culture, but embeds itself within diverse cultures as it proclaims Christ present now and forever. A Christian understanding of globalization, therefore, is not anti-global in the sense of a longing to return home, to the confines of the familiar. Jesus, after all, experiences rejection and threats of violence in his hometown (Lk. 4:21-30). Christ invites us to share in a meal where local identities are redeemed in baptismal identity and informed by cultures other than our own. Yet neither is a Christian understanding of globalization pro-global in the sense that the inexorable march of economic progress, global supply chains, and the proliferation of American consumer culture are assumed to be benevolent. Christian faith must name some of the trends of globalization captured in the McMeal as destructive, where cultural differences are threats to the market, where languages disappear, and where attitudes of scarcity beget overconsumption and hoarding. On the whole, the verdict is still out on the peril and promise of globalization. Market and political forces may lead to increased collaboration and understanding among cultures, or a renewed erection of fences on borders and closing fortresses of prosperity to migrants. A global society may recognize the hybrid nature of all human identity, or it may impose one culture at the expense of others. Wealth in a global world may be shared or hoarded. To this perplexing movement that we call globalization, Christians bring distinct assumptions as we eat and drink. Do we assume that there is enough food and drink to be shared? Do we assume that all cultures are welcome at Christ’s table? Do we invite profuse languages of praise as we give thanks for this meal? Or do we assume that one has to hoard and devour quickly lest one go hungry? Do we assume that other cultures and religions are a threat to our particular Christian identity? Do we assume that in the name of coherence we must settle for one kind of speech? The assumptions we bring to the table make all the difference, for they affect the kind of i meal that we celebrate and share with the world.

C

10

Jensen NOTES 1. In constructing this definition, I have relied on selected definitions of globalization gathered from other theorists. See Manfred B. Steger, Globalization: A Very Short Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 10-13. 2. For these reflections on the connection between local practice and the global meal, I am indebted to conversations with Arun Jones, associate professor of mission and evangelism at Austin Seminary. 3. The price of the McMeal, by contrast, is generally unaffordable in the so-called “developing world.” Dining at McDonald’s in these contexts is often a sign of privilege and comfort with American culture. 4. Steger, Globalization, 105. 5. Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, Updated and Expanded Edition (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006), 470. 6. Steger, Globalization, 84. 7. Book of Common Worship (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993), 68.

11

I N T E RV I E W DAVID H. J ENSEN :

GLOBAL WEARINESS AND SABBATH REST

In a nutshell, how would you explain “globalization”? I think “globalization” is a term that names an experience people have across culture, across income level, across religion—the experience of a shrinking planet. We now live in a world where events on distant continents often have an immediate impact on the life we live wherever we are. And “globalization” is not just about human relationships, it also has to do with the natural world. I think one of the distinct phenomena of globalization is that environmental pollution and catastrophe now are perceived on a worldwide level. Suddenly we are living in a planet where we are increasingly aware of our interconnectedness with folks and peoples and cultures in distant places, and the cycles of nature that sustain our lives. So is “globalization” more about increased awareness of our interconnectedness, or are we actually more connected than we were before? I think it’s about both. Of course there’s increased awareness thanks to mass media: the Internet, television, CNN: 24-hours a day, seven days a week. So we're bombarded by news and events from other places. But there is also more interconnectedness, simply because of the way that the economies of places are more interrelated. There’s no such thing as a self-sufficient economy anywhere in the world now. No matter how hard we try to isolate ourselves, we’re always going to be connected in some way, thanks to trade routes and the pattern of food and product distribution worldwide. When you and I go to buy an apple in Austin, Texas, the apple that we eat often comes from a place as far away as New Zealand. It’s truly mind-blowing when you think of that level of interconnectedness; that the food I eat to sustain myself every day is made possible because of agricultural production literally on the other side of the world. We often, in the United States, find the label, “made in the U.S.A.” appealing. But the fact of the matter is, almost nothing that we purchase is produced and assembled in one place. Dell computers, which is headquartered in Austin, draws from literally every continent of the earth in manufacturing its computers. What level of awareness and concern should we have of all this, as responsible Christian believers? What difference does “globalization” make to our lives of faith? I think one way of addressing that question is to remember a fundamental assumption

12

I N T E RV I E W of the Christian faith, namely, that God has created us to live relationally. God covenants with humanity and wills to save us in and through Jesus Christ. The relationship that God initiates with us, in and through Jesus Christ, relates us to one another and calls us to care for and attend to one another. The church is therefore called

THE PARADOX OF GLOBALIZATION IS THAT THE VERY RELATIONSHIPS THAT GIVE US LIFE AND SUSTAIN LIFE CAN ALSO BE TWISTED IN WAYS THAT SUCK US DRY OR WORK AGAINST LIFE AND DESTROY LIFE.

SO THAT APPLE FROM NEW ZEALAND THAT I EAT IN AUSTIN TO SUSTAIN MY LIFE MAY ALSO IN SOME WAYS BE CONNECTED TO MEANS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS THAT ENSURE THAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH TO EAT AND SOME DON’T.

to pay attention to how relationships intended to form and give sustenance can build up and destroy community. The paradox of globalization is that the very relationships that give us life and sustain life can also be twisted in ways that suck us dry or work against life and destroy life. So that apple from New Zealand that I eat in Austin to sustain my life may also in some ways be connected to means of agricultural production and global distribution patterns that ensure that some people have enough to eat and some don’t. And I believe Christians are called to dig really deeply into the complex character of the relationships globalization draws to our attention. So … should Christians commit themselves, for example, to buying “fair trade” coffee? I think we all need to be aware of how we participate in the structures I’ve been describing. I think Christian faith shows us the ambiguity of all the ways human beings set up systems and ways of living. All the structures we create in some way fall short of the glory of God. There are certain ways of living in light of God’s revelation of Jesus Christ 13

I N T E RV I E W that more closely approximate the kingdom than others. So certainly I would say that buying a cup of coffee that is “fair trade” comes closer to walking in light of the life of Jesus Christ than buying coffee that fosters exploitation of farm workers. But of course we are not just talking about coffee, here—we’re talking about everything. How do you avoid feeling helpless, even overwhelmed, by the fact that everything needs attention? I think we should be overwhelmed—there is no way around that. There’s a lot that’s overwhelming. The brokenness of the world is overwhelming. But let’s not forget that so is the grace of God. In light of God’s grace, I think Christian believers are called to be people of hope. But what does that hope look like, exactly? How do we hope, in an age of globalization? I try to suggest in my article that there are certain patterns of Christian worship that inform and shape our lives the more we partake of them. So when I share food at the Lord’s Table with those with whom I’m gathered on Sunday morning, I don’t just leave that pattern of sharing and abundance once I leave the sanctuary at 12:00. I believe we in some sense continue to partake of the Lord’s Supper as we move through the daily routines of our lives. And that doesn’t mean that I stop buying the Big Mac™ or start buying the fair trade coffee and say that I’ve done enough. What it does mean is that I am aware of the patterns of my life. I ask myself, for example, Are my daily activities and decisions characterized by a concern that I do not have enough, and somehow need to acquire more? Or are they characterized by an openness to using the gifts of God for the sake of others in the world? We as Christians need to realize that there’s no way to escape interconnectedness, and so there is also no escape from the patterns of good and ill that exist in the global economic system. But there are ways we can live in and out of that system without giving our ultimate allegiance to another lord. We need habitually to ask ourselves: Who do we belong to in life and death? My job? My economic security? There is no more radically free statement than that we belong to God in life and in death. That, I think, gives us hope in the midst of the profound ambiguities of the global society. And it may empower us to work in and through our everyday relationships to live toward the justice of Christ’s kingdom. But doesn’t our hope as Christians do more than keep us managing in the midst of the ambiguities that surround us? Doesn’t it compel us to take a prophetic stand? What about, for example, the boycotting of Taco Bell, a few years back? The boycott of Taco Bell is an example of a focused, distinct practice that sought to remedy specific injustices related to globalization. It was protesting the conditions of the agricultural workers that were supplying the tomatoes and other vegetables to Taco Bell. The protest used the criterion of justice that is certainly in line with Jesus’ vision of welcoming all to the table and sharing with everyone the abundance that is provided there. I believe Christians are called, in the name of Jesus Christ, to participate in protests like this.

14

I N T E RV I E W So do you think churches should actively seek to invest themselves in a couple of key causes, speaking prophetically against systems that we believe do not reflect an understanding of resources and fellowship consistent with the Lord’s Supper? For example, some churches have taken a radical stand on the immigration issue, giving sanctuary to people who are illegal aliens. It seems to me that they are insisting, to draw from the terminology of your article, that “this isn’t an economy of scarcity, there’s enough here.” Frankly, I think these churches are also saying to these illegal immigrants that, “even if there’s not enough, we’ll just cut the pieces smaller so you can be included, because even if we’re all a little hungrier, we would rather have you at the table and eat less bread.” All churches’ experience of the global world in some way begins in their local context. And so I think all churches are called to reflect upon their local ministry context. What are the fractures in the town, city, community in which my congregation is situated? And the more we reflect and think about and immerse ourselves in that context as parishioners, as ministers, the more we become deeply aware of the global world. And so I’m not saying that the phrase, “think globally, act locally” is the panacea for all Christian action, but one can’t be in the ministry without paying attention to how global injustices are reflected on a local scale. Can you say a little more about the Lord’s Table and how you think we could do a better job of engaging in our daily lives what we believe is going on in worship? Sure. I think Christian worship has a lot to say, for example, to the weariness of the globalized world. Ten percent of the global population is exhausted by an overabundance of power and means. We in the western world have over-programmed ourselves, over-committed ourselves. And then the ninety percent of the world that does not have access to excess is weary because of over-work in the name of sheer survival. So, maybe if there is one universal truth: it’s that we’re all tired. So how does Christian worship address our weariness? What we see in Christian worship is that on the first day, we rest. We give all that we are and all that we have back to God. We rest through the God who works on our behalf. So Christian worship, I think, draws on this practice of Sabbath. There is a day of the week in which we rest from our ceaseless patterns and celebrate God’s work on behalf of us. So part of where I get the energy to live comes from the rest I experience in Christian worship. However, rest isn’t the only thing Christian worship offers, in the face of our weariness. There’s something in Christian worship that celebrates the labor of human hands. I think it’s no coincidence that the bread and the wine of the Lord’s Supper are the products of human hands applied to the gifts of God. In other words, we don’t commune using the grapes and the wheat, the raw stuff of God’s creation, we celebrate the presence of Christ in bread and wine which are there because of our work in some way. While we rest in God in Christian worship from our ceaseless labors, we also celebrate the good that has come about because of our hands. And we pray that even in the brokenness of our work that God’s glory be somehow celebrated. The dynamic of work and rest that we practice in worship is sorely needed in an over-tired i world.

15

REFLECTIONS

A NOTHER WORLD

IS

P OSSIBLE :

AN ECUMENICAL CHRISTIAN REFLECTION ON GLOBALIZATION

J A N E T L. P A R K E R “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.” I Cor. 13:11-13 (NRSV)

IT’S A SMALL WORLD AFTER ALL o you remember the feeling of being a young child, and how big the world seemed? Do you remember looking at the horizon and feeling it stretch away infinitely before you, and wondering what you would find if you could walk all the way to the end of the horizon? To a child, the world seems unfathomably large, awesome, an inexhaustible place of infinite possibility. And do you remember the exact point at which that same infinitely large world began to become smaller, more intelligible, more connected to yours? And do you remember the moment when you first entertained a notion that had never before entered your mind, when with a poignant sigh you first knew that the world was not inexhaustible, nor full of infinite possibility, but rather a fragile, limited, small globe? Do you remember when you first gasped at the realization of what a slender oasis of life our earth is, this tiny blue orb that bears all our human hopes and fears and loves and sorrows? This issue of Insights is about that realization; it is a sustained theological reflection

D

Janet L. Parker is pastor of parish life at Rock Spring Congregational United Church of Christ in Arlington, Virginia. She earned the MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary and the PhD from Union Theological Seminary in New York with a focus on economic and ecological ethics. Following the September 11th attacks, Parker served the Presbytery of New York City as Coordinator for Disaster Relief. She has taught at Chicago Theological Seminary and was a postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University’s Center for the Study of Religion. An advisor to the World Council of Churches, Parker consults on the theological issues relating to terrorism, human rights, and genocide in the United States and abroad.

16

Parker upon that gasp of insight that globalization has pushed us out of the childhood of our species into a forced adulthood in which we see that we have become intricately connected with one another in a myriad of ways that affect our lives, and the life of our beloved planet as a whole. In this issue of Insights, we reflect on the reality and the meaning of our newfound globality, the condition of being global citizens, and the profound impacts which we are having upon one another because of the interwoven nature of our global economy, global society, and the global ecological effects of our vastly increased exploitation of the natural world. I write to you as a pastor, a Christian ethicist, and an ecological and ecumenical theologian who has been struggling with my own “aha” experience about the impacts of globalization on human life and God’s creation for the past decade and a half. I can’t name the exact moment when the revelation came to me, but sometime in the early 90s, as I was entering my doctoral program in Christian Ethics at Union Theological Seminary in New York, I realized that my passion for economic, gender, and racial justice—in other words, justice within the human realm—had to be linked to my longstanding love for God’s creation, because without a healthy planet, questions of human justice and equality were moot. A few years before I had my own “aha” moment, the World Council of Churches, a global body of Christians which represents the largest manifestation of the worldwide ecumenical movement, had crystallized a similar revelation into a new phrase which defined their work during the 1980s and 1990s. In the 1980s, the World Council of Churches began to speak of the call to Christians to work for “justice, peace, and the integrity of creation.”1 Christians around the world were waking up to the fact that concerns for justice and peace were tied inexorably to the health of planetary ecosystems. Not only human welfare, but the integrity of God’s entire creation, is under threat of unraveling. In the meantime, since these early revelations in the 1980s and early ’90s, our world has experienced a massive acceleration of a process that we have all come to know by the name “globalization.” Or more particularly, economic globalization. Or more specifically still, a particular form of economic globalization rooted in an ideological commitment to “free markets” and “free trade” and unregulated investment, in the service of ever greater global economic integration with ever lower barriers to the flow of capital, goods, and services (but not labor). This process of corporate-led economic globalization has in effect made our world vastly smaller, more tied together, and more ecologically and socially fragile. Not all globalization is bad, of course. Becoming more connected across cultural and geographical lines can be empowering, liberating, and enlightening. The ecumenical movement itself is a fruit of a certain kind of globalization. I have been blessed to grow spiritually and theologically from my own interactions with Christians from around the world in ecumenical forums organized by the World Council of Churches. We need to listen to one another deeply across our lines of difference in order to learn to live peacefully together as the body of Christ, and more broadly, as one human family. But it is precisely through my opportunities to gather with Christians in global settings that I myself have learned more about the impacts that economic globalization is having on my brothers and sisters in Christ and on God’s 17

REFLECTIONS creation. From a decade of involvement in ecumenical work and from my own deep theological reflection upon the realities of economic globalization and our global ecological crisis, I seek to lift up in this essay voices which American Christians rarely hear—the voices of Christians from other parts of the globe who have a message that we need to engage, for the sake of life itself.

ANOTHER WORLD IS POSSIBLE f you were asked to name the most dangerous illusion currently besetting the human race, what would you say? I’m sure there would be many good contenders, but one that would be at the top of my list is the famous phrase of Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of Great Britain, who declared that “there is no alternative” to corporate-led, free-market style economic globalization. It’s absolutely remarkable how many people from all walks of life, all faith traditions, and all countries have bought into the myth that no alternative exists to our current global economic system. No matter that global warming may destroy the conditions for life as we know it on earth; no matter that economic inequality is growing both within and between nations, squeezing out the middle class; no matter that humans have increased the rate of global extinctions a thousand-fold over the “natural” rate typical of Earth’s long-term history, or that 1.1 billion people lack access to clean water—regardless of the “wild facts” of our time, many people seem to have contracted a paralysis of the imagination, or perhaps a form of amnesia.2 We forget that the current form of global capitalism is not a physical law of the universe, but a humanly constructed system. Fortunately, however, our uniquely human capacity to imagine other worlds is making a comeback. The last decade has witnessed an extraordinary rise in people’s movements around the globe that are committed to the belief that “another world is possible.” Coalitions of farmers, indigenous peoples, grassroots women’s organizations, environmental organizations, youth, human rights activists, and others have converged to mount fierce resistance to the hegemony of the free-trade and free-markets regime. This diverse movement rejects any system which prioritizes profits over people and the earth, or capital accumulation over communities. Even more remarkable is the recent emergence of Christian voices joining this cry for “another world.” I myself witnessed this when I attended the World Council of Churches Ninth Assembly in Porto Alegre, Brazil, last year. The Assembly endorsed the AGAPE call—a call for “Alternative Globalization Addressing People and Earth.” The call describes a seven-year process of study and dialogue leading up to the Assembly, and concludes the following: This process has examined the project of economic globalization that is led by the ideology of unfettered market forces and serves the dominant political and economic interests … Meeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil, the home of the World Social Forum (WSF), we are encouraged by the constructive and positive message of the movements gathering in the WSF that alternatives are possible. We affirm that we can and must make a difference by becoming transformative communities caring for people and the earth.3 Meeting a year and a half earlier in Accra, the 24th General Council of the World

I

18

Parker Alliance of Reformed Churches launched a similar challenge to the project of economic globalization. Drawing upon a Reformed tradition invoked only during times of serious crisis, the General Council called member churches to enter into a processus confessionis, a “process of recognition, education, and confession,” intended to result in a faith commitment to global economic justice as “essential to the integrity of our faith in God and our discipleship as Christians.”4 In Accra, the representatives of the world’s Reformed churches recognized that saying “yes” to global economic justice (and ecological sanity) also required saying “no” to a prevailing economic system that is becoming totalitarian in nature, through the relentless squeezing out of all alternatives and the drive to incorporate the entire world into its globalizing market logic. Remarkably, both the World Council of Churches and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches are using the language of “Empire” to describe the totalitarian tendencies of the dominant form of globalization. According to the 24th General Council: As we look at the negative consequences of globalization for the most vulnerable and for the earth community as a whole, we have begun to rediscover the evangelical significance of the biblical teaching about Empire … Today, we define Empire as the convergence of economic, political, cultural, and military interests that constitute a system of domination in which benefits are forced to flow from the weak to the powerful.5 Modeling their statement after the famous Barmen Declaration, the 24th General Council proceeded to enumerate a series of confessional statements spelling out what Christians are called to affirm and reject. At the heart of the statement is the following confession: We believe in God, Creator and Sustainer of all life, who calls us as partners in the creation and redemption of the world … We believe that God is sovereign over all creation. “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof ” (Psalm 24:1). Therefore, we reject the current world economic order imposed by global neoliberal capitalism and any other economic system, including absolute planned economies, which defy God’s covenant by excluding the poor, the vulnerable, and the whole of creation from the fullness of life. We reject any claim of economic, political, and military empire which subverts God’s sovereignty over life and acts contrary to God’s just rule.6 To Christians in industrialized nations, the language of empire may seem inflammatory or overblown. Many of us do not perceive ourselves to be living in an “Empire.” Yet we would be wise to listen to the voices of Christians in other parts of the world who are speaking out about the impact of the global economy on their communities. These Christians are not seeking to condemn us but to enlist our solidarity and our aid. They are crying out for us to wake up to the pain that the global economic system is causing billions of people and countless other species on our planet. In order to wake up, however, we must reject the Thatcherist myth that “there is no alternative.” For, as Proverbs warns us, “where there is no vision, the people perish” (Proverbs 29:18).

19

REFLECTIONS

“AND NOW FAITH, HOPE, AND LOVE ABIDE, THESE THREE; AND THE GREATEST OF THESE IS LOVE” f we are to achieve the course corrections we need in order to avert global catastrophes of ecological destruction, increasing poverty and disease, and spiraling inequality, we will need to draw upon the faith that moves mountains, and the wellspring of Christian hope that closes its ears to the counsels of despair. But most of all, we will need the spiritual gift of love. The World Council of Churches in its AGAPE process envisions an alternative form of human economy that is grounded in God’s call to love one another. The call is for an agape economy which honors God and serves life: Agape relationships reflect that all life has its common root in God’s free grace and life-giving love. Grace is God’s power to sustain and renew creation, and to turn us from death to life. Discrimination, exclusion, and an unequal distribution of wealth and power deny the values of the agape community and violate the commandment to love God and neighbor.7 Ultimately, the question that looms before us as Christians is, “Whom shall you serve?” Do we serve an economic system oriented towards ensuring the welfare of the few at the expense of the many? Or do we serve the God who gifted us with this good, green earth, who calls us to sacrificial love for one another, and who charged us with the responsibility to care for God’s creation? Listening to the voices of Christians from around the world, I have learned that we are all kin—not only humankind, but “otherkind” too—in effect, all living beings are the “neighbor” that Christ calls us to love. If we are to survive and thrive together on this beautiful planet, we must eschew all totalitarian tendencies, economic or otherwise. Christian freedom, and God’s love for i all creation, demands no less.

I

NOTES 1. Larry Rasmussen, Earth Community, Earth Ethics (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1996): 98103. 2. For a description of the dire ecological threats facing our world today, see the report of the Board of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, released by the United Nations in 2005 and entitled, “Living Beyond Our Means: Natural Assets and Human Well-Being.” Available at http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.aspx. For analysis of the growing economic inequality between and within nations, see United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2005 (New York: United Nations Development Programme, 2005), 3. For statistics on lack of access to clean water, see Peter Gleick, “The Human Right to Water,” Water Policy 1, No. 5 (1999): 487-503. 3. World Council of Churches, “Alternative Globalization Addressing People and Earth— AGAPE: A Call to Love and Action,” in Programme Book, Ninth Assembly, Porto Alegre, February 2006 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 2006), 111-115. 4. World Alliance of Reformed Churches, Covenanting for Justice in the Economy and the Earth, par. 1, 16. 5. World Alliance of Reformed Churches, “Mission Section Plenary Report,” 24th General Council meeting in Accra, Ghana, July 30-August 13, 2004, par. 1.1.

Continued on page 29 20

TRINITARIAN

OR

THEOCRATIC?

HAK JOON LEE ne telling feature of globalization is interdependence. Globalization has brought different peoples, cultures, and religions together into a single arena, making mutual contact and interaction inevitable. Despite the increasing interdependence of the world, however, morality and a reliable social order are not on the horizon yet, thus creating a vacuum for power manipulation, exploitation, abuse, and conflicts to fill. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “Through our scientific and technological genius, we have made of this world a neighborhood. It is urgently true that now we are challenged through our spiritual and moral commitments to make of this world a brotherhood.”1 How has America been responding to the expanding reality of interdependence? As the only superpower after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Americans have enjoyed the privilege of influencing the directions of international affairs and issues. Then the 9/11 tragedy happened: this defining moment in American history revealed that the entire world is not content with American influence. Nineteen Al Qaeda members, recruited from different countries, attacked the Pentagon, the twin towers of the World Trade Center, and presumably intended to attack Camp David or the White House— all symbols of American military, economic, and political power. America hit back hard with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Five years after 9/11, however, the world has become even more dangerous through America’s inappropriate responses to that well-choreographed terrorist attack. Bush’s “War on Terror” has generated more terrorists. The Guantánamo military camp and Abu Ghraib prison have become symbols of U.S. imperial supremacy, inflaming world opinion against the American nation, and feeding the recruitment of terrorists. The U.S., usurping all

O

Hak Joon Lee is associate professor of ethics and community at New Brunswick Theological Seminary. Lee received his MDiv (1990) and PhD (1997, summa cum laude) degrees from Princeton Theological Seminary. A member of the board of editors for Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought, Lee is the author of Covenant and Communication: A Christian Moral Conversation with Jürgen Habermas (University Press of America, 2006), We Will Get to the Promised Land: Martin Luther King Jr.’s Communal-Political Spirituality (Pilgrim Press, 2006), Bridge Builders (The Doorae Publishing Company, Korea), and numerous articles.

21

REFLECTIONS moral support in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, has now become one of the most disliked nations. What may be the reason for such a failure? A striking possibility is the attitude of the Bush government in dealing with globalization and religious terrorism, in particular its confusion of the global and the local in the way is thinks and acts, as exemplified by its overwhelming sense of American supremacy and its doctrine of preemptive strike. Rather than subjecting themselves to the study of the highly complicated international situations created by globalization, and calling for the support of other nations, the Bush team’s response was a completely inappropriate, simplistic, and local response to a problem that is global and interdependent in nature. Bush’s doctrine aimed at the imposition of a local ideology and interests of America, over the complex reality of a global society and the common good. Deceived by a supremacist ambition, the Bush administration acted globally while thinking locally rather than having the wisdom of doing the opposite: “think globally and act locally.” Supremacy, whatever form it may take, tends to glorify and romanticize the local—my tribe, my race, my religion, my nation, etc., at the expense of others. Supremacy is a more extreme variety of an unrelational, monistic thinking, grounded in a belief of one’s religious and nationalistic superiority. Although U.S. supremacy and Islamic religious terrorism seem to lie on opposite sides, upon close scrutiny, they tend to reveal similar logic and dynamics: the rejection of human solidarity and interdependence, supported by a fear of assimilation and loss of identity. Supremacists refuse to treat other human beings as equal to themselves. In an “Us vs. Them” state of mind, supremacists think of themselves as righteous, while demonizing the opponents as evil. And labeling the opponents as evil has the effect of covering up all their own culpability and shortcomings, ascribing the responsibility for all wrongs to the enemy. American supremacy is historically associated with Christian theocracy, which has been expressed through the ideas of manifest destiny, with the theological notions of election and a privileged covenant: the United States believes and promotes its own mythological status as a nation chosen by God to redeem the world, to bring Western civilization to primitive peoples, if necessary by using military means. The Bush government’s close political alignment with the Christian Coalition and Christian fundamentalists shows that this historical association is still alive. The unrelational and monistic thinking of supremacy cannot effectively solve the complex problems of a global society. In this new world order, an individual nationstate becomes just one of many locals; it can no longer behave as a self-sufficient, allencompassing entity. No matter how strong its military and its economy may be, the U.S.A. cannot exist alone. Supremacy is a fanciful myth in a global society because it is an attitude based on an aversion for difference, a fear of otherness, and the desire to control others. World peace is possible only when the fundamental interdependence, reciprocity, and equality of humanity are radically affirmed. We are so interdependent that the success of our struggle against terrorism depends on the support of the peoples of those other nations where terrorists operate. The solution to the problem is not more violence or revenge, but mutually respectful dialogue and the removal of injustice in combination with absolutely necessary military actions. 22

Lee Globalization requires a change in our fundamental thinking about approaching the changing world: we must move from unilateral and monistic to holistic and relational. Christians are no exception in this case. We must acknowledge and affirm the fundamental interdependence of humanity in God. As King said, “In a real sense, we must all live together as brothers or we will all perish together as fools. We must see this sense of dependence, this sense of interdependence. No individual can live alone, no nation can live alone; we are made to live together.”2 In this respect, a Christian doctrine of the Trinity has a new relevance and significance for us. The Trinity tells that the heart of Christianity is relationship. The triune God does not exist as a self-sufficient supreme individual or a monarch, but as the community of the three distinct persons of Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Perichoresis, an ancient theological term that literally means “dancing together,” aptly captures this interdependent nature of the triune God. The trinitarian persons are eternally in mutually loving, interrelated, and interpenetrating unity without losing distinctiveness. In a manner analogous to the trinitarian hypostasis, human beings are understood to be related but distinct, particular but not isolated. Trinitarian thinking overcomes the dichotomy between monism and relativism, and between absolutism and subjectivism.3 In trinitarian thinking, relationality is constitutive of one’s identity and being; I am who I am in relation to others, just as Father is Father in relation to Son, and vice versa. Christian theocracy aligned with US supremacy is a complete contradiction of the Gospel, which says all human beings are created free, equal, and interdependent by the triune God, and affirms that Christ came and died for the whole of humanity. The mission of Christian churches is to teach and share the mystery and blessing of the triune God with humanity: that God’s will for humanity is love and mutuality. It seems that two paths are before us: the monistic, unilateral, fear-driven thinking of “Us vs. Them,” or the dialogical, reciprocal, and ecumenical way of living together. i For me, it is a wonderful time to be trinitarian. NOTES 1. Martin Luther King Jr., “Gay Lecture,” Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, (The King Center Archives, April 19, 1961), 4. 2. Ibid. 3. See Colin Gunton, The One, The Three, and The Many (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993).

23

THE AMBIGUITY

OF

GLOBALIZATION:

A PRESSING CHALLENGE FOR AFRICAN CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY

LAMECK BANDA INTRODUCTION t is commonly said almost world over that “the world is becoming small” or “the world has become small.” This view seems to sound so positive that one easily gets overwhelmed. Of course, the statement intends to refer to the fact that due to the booming global market, people easily interact and can get to one another in the shortest possible time. However, the scenario needs to be perceived with a critical eye and mind. Is the world really “becoming small—small for all on the global scene”? Inasmuch as we appreciate the reality and the benefits thereof in globalization, it needs to be made clear that it is a fact that the “smallness” of the world is for the elite and the powerful, economically speaking. For me, globalization is ambiguous and poses a pressing challenge to African contextual theologies. As an African theologian and minister, I do not see the ambiguity of globalization as a threat, so to say, but a challenge which has to be approached seriously and critically in order for theology to be sound in the African context.

I

DUAL-FACETED AMBIGUITY ow then is globalization ambiguous? The ambiguity lies in the fact that the current scenario portrays a disparity in the way globalization is manifested. I call this disparity “dual-faceted ambiguity.” Globalization seems to present itself with two faces of one reality. On the one hand, it seems to be promising a Paradise on earth so full of progress and development that optimism is the order of the day. On the other hand, it presents itself with a gloomy face of global retardation and retrogression which results

H

Lameck Banda is an ordained minister in the Reformed Church in Zambia. He holds the Bachelor of Theology from Justo Mwale Theological College in Zambia and the Master of Arts in Theological Studies from Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Currently, he is serving at Railways Congregation of the RCZ and is a lecturer at Justo Mwale and is engaged in PhD studies at the University of Free State in Bloefontein, South Africa.

24

Banda in passivism on some of the anticipated beneficiaries of globalization, especially the underprivileged and marginalized. The positive and brighter face of globalization revives hope. Let me cite a few prominent components of this glittering face of globalization. The world today is experiencing the explosion of technology. The coming on the world scene of computers, cell phones, Internet, and improved media, to name a few, has made communication and work not only easier but also improved. One can easily convey the message in a simple but effective and efficient manner, unlike a situation where you only use the ordinary postage system. For instance, this article is conveyed to the editor from Kabwe, Zambia, to Austin in the U.S.A. through the Internet within minutes over a distance of thousands of miles. What a blessing of globalization! The same technological system permits that a single person can do a huge amount of work effectively within a short time. Indeed, there is a “small world” of technological boom. Another promising component which is taking deep roots on the world scene is democratization. Democracy, coupled with capitalism, which started in the West, is not only gaining momentum in the third world, but it has also spread to many countries on the African continent. Among the positives of democratization is the promotion of human rights which were grossly violated by many tyrants. There are also related issues inclusive of improved economies, huge investments, privatization, democratically elected national leaders other than the formerly self-imposed dictatorial systems, etc. In short, we would say that there is an improved quality of life in the world which in a way has been brought about by democracy and capitalism. Globalization has to some extent contributed to the abolition of superstition on the global level, though in some corners of the world superstition is still strong and prominent. One can safely say that the human mindset is so technologically oriented that most people are caught up in the business of the world. In fact, in globalization there is a sense of competitiveness. Everyone is aiming to top the rest in the world in social, economic, political, and religious spheres. This competitiveness in the world has led to the expansion of global capital, benefiting some more than others. Globalization promises a brighter future. However, for some of the global masses, especially in Africa, globalization is a nightmare. It is not “a small world” but “a huge world” in that they do not see light at the end of the tunnel. The “darkness of globalization” is still overshadowing many poor, marginalized, and voiceless masses. There are many pressing issues which are real in the African context which clearly define the darkness of globalization. Disparity in global economic progression in Africa is readily perceived by any open-minded person. The minority rich are continuously becoming richer at the expense of the majority poor masses. Just a few days before writing this article, I read in one of Zambia’s print media that one of the multinational powers in the Southern African region which had invested in my country intends to pull out of the country so as to avoid paying tax. This simply means that after making huge profits they would go and invest elsewhere, leaving many of the local employees, who have contributed a lot to those profits, in the cold of joblessness and wallowing in poverty. The employees will in the end fail to contribute to the economic development of the nation, which in will retard national economic progression. 25

REFLECTIONS In the global world, the African identity of communality is suppressed by Western individualism. Africans by nature are social and communal. Globalization suppresses this rich and unifying identity of African culture by fostering an environment in which individuals are aiming at individual prosperity. The relations of the community are neglected to the point of oblivion. Related to individualism is urbanization. Urbanization has deprived rural established settlements of a much-needed able and reliable work-force of young people who have instead migrated to seek greener pastures in the cities. This, in the end, has resulted in overpopulation of urban settlements. Overpopulation has birthed an increase in a number of vices such as crime, spread of HIV/AIDS pandemic, prostitution, ever-spreading number of street kids, and ever-increasing levels of unemployment and poverty. The global scenario has seen the growing generation gap. The non-materialistic, naturalistic older generation in Africa is left out by the fast-moving, energetic, and materialistic younger generation. What matters most for the African older generation is their relationship with the spiritual world and in the community. This is not as true for the young in the globalized Africa. What counts is progression and adventure of an individual in the new and material world for the sake of personal prosperity. To illustrate this point, I offer this example. Our son, Naphtali, knows more about the operations of a computer than I do, and yet he is only twelve years old—more than two decades younger than I am. What a fascinating child! Sometimes I imagine how my father, who died in 1988, would be perplexed and shocked if he could see how the world has grown. Yes, there is a gap between me and my father, but there is even an ever-growing gap between me and our son. How will it be ten years from now? The other component on the dark side of globalization is the continual increase of the ecological crisis. With the optimism of economic expansion, globalization poses a challenge to humanity’s relationship with nature. The sad part of this challenge is that it is not only a threat to the natural world, but more so to the human species’ existence. Massive industrial investments in Africa have displaced the much-needed natural resources for human co-existence and survival. For example, we need oxygen for respiration, but we have devastated the vegetation which produces the needed oxygen. Though I may not be a scientific expert, I think it is right to associate the increase in the number of respiratory diseases with the ecological crisis, considering what is happening in the world now. Globalization, as analyzed above, is indeed ambiguous in that it portrays itself on the world scene as a dual-faceted entity. It is this ambiguity that poses a challenge to the African context. In fact, it is within the African context, of course not sidelining other contexts, where the ambiguity is mostly and clearly notable. How then is an African contextual theology challenged by the ever-perplexing ambiguity of globalization? What follows is a brief illustration of the challenge that the ambiguity poses to African contextual theologies.

26

Banda

CHALLENGE OF THE AMBIGUITY TO THE AFRICAN CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY frican theologies have to face and address several obstacles, in the process of contextualization. The reality of the ambiguity of globalization is one consideration that must not be ignored. It is now the call in theological circles that African contextual theology must consider the historical-cultural norms or cultural thought-forms of the locals in the context within which that theology is pursued. Theology must not ignore the local historical, religious, political, and social heritage—the way people live, their linguistic patterns, the way people think, and the way the locals relate to one another. But then, the ambiguity of globalization poses a challenge in that African contextual theology cannot afford to bury itself in “the sand” of the historical-cultural norms of the locals. It has to find a way of making theology real to the locals in their cultural thought-forms, but within the ever-changing global scenario. In the process, African contextual theologies face the challenge of fusing the dual-facets of globalization’s ambiguity—both the brighter and darker sides, the promising and gloomy faces of globalization. Contextualization has to do with the theological heritage of the Christian faith and community. African contextual theologies are not isolated entities—they are part of and exist in the global scope of the Christian theological conceptualization of the supreme reality called God, to whom we relate our faith. The challenge then is: African contextual theology has to make the theological heritage a reality in the ambiguity of globalization. Some of the concepts in the Christian theological heritage seem not to be of value on the global scenario. For instance, they seem not to be addressing the disparity between the rich and the poor. In short, one would say, they were relevant during the time of our forefathers. Their relevance has become questionable in the globalized world. African contextual theology must ponder how to make these theological heritages relevant in the ambiguously globalized African context. Africa has been considered a dark continent for a long time. With the surfacing of the gloomy face of globalization, a large population of Africans have undergone unfavourable conditions such as poverty, poor health care, unemployment, economic neo-colonialism, and many more. The challenge for African contextual theology is that it has to be mindful of the experiences of the local people. Theology should penetrate the status quo by bridging the gap between the elite and the underprivileged in the context where it is situated. African theology outside scripture is not theology at all. Without scripture, African theology faces the danger of falling into fictitious conceptualizations or African syncretism. Any Christian theology is born and progresses from scripture because the Word of scripture attests God’s own self-disclosure in Jesus Christ. Therefore, the challenging task of African contextual theology is to make this revelation a reality and meaningful to the situation of the ambiguity of globalization within the African context. The disparity in the world seems to make the reality of the Christian God questionable though Christians affirm the reality as attested to by scripture. The challenging question which African contextual theology should seek to answer is, How can the Word of scripture

A

27

REFLECTIONS be presented to the African community in such a way as to make it appealing to the globalized African context?

MAPPING THE FRAMEWORK OF AFRICAN CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY WITHIN THE AMBIGUITY

ow should the framework of African contextual theologies address the ambiguity of globalization? This is the core issue in the last section of the article. Here I suggest a sketch of how African contextual theologies can be pursued. My approach should be taken as one among many suggested possible solutions to the ambiguity. I think it can be of help to some, especially the emerging African contextual theologians. Here are some guidelines in the framework which need to be taken into consideration as an African theologian ventures to do theology not only in the African context, but also in the context of the ambiguity of globalization: Consider the centrality of scripture—maintaining the biblical soundness. African contextual theology should keep the scriptural base and tone ablaze. This theology must reflect the trueness of the gospel of God’s own self-disclosure in Jesus Christ as attested in scripture.

H

Be sensitive to the needs and problems of the locals in the African context. In fact, theology does not emerge from a vacuum, it is influenced by the life experiences of the local people of a particular context in time and space. Therefore, African contextual theology has to be sensitive to such life experiences. Be realistic about the experiences of the African situation or context. In doing theology in a particular context, there is always a temptation to exaggerate the intensity of the needs and problems of that context. While we should not be naive in considering the situation, we must also adopt a sensitive and realistic approach to doing African contextual theology. Study the global social, economic, and political mega trends and how they influence the African continent. An African contextual theologian should be conversant with what is going on in the world and how these events are impacting the African context. Allow the global realities to influence the locals. Change is inevitable, and we are affected by changes. Therefore, African contextual theology must always be sensitive and attentive to global changes. Be an ecumenical-minded theologian. African contextual theology must interact with other theologies to enrich, evaluate, cross-examine, dialogue, ventilate, and share with each other. In this way, African contextual theology takes into account the wisdom of the wider ecumenical community. Co-ordinate Christian (and Reformed) identity with African identity. African contextual theology must allow the Christian theological heritage to interact and dialogue with the African context. Assimilate the interdisciplinary and holistic approach. African contextual theology should involve other non-theological disciplines such as sociology, eco28

Banda nomics, accounts, political science, etc. Work closely with expatriate theologians. Inasmuch as African theologians need to take the lead in doing theology in context, expatriate theologians can as well provide expertise in an advisory role.

CONCLUSION lobalization is indeed a pressing challenge to African contextual theology because, as seen in this article, it presents a dual-faceted ambiguity; the brighter and promising face as well as the darker and gloomy face. African contextual theologies need to face such a challenge holistically. They need to consider a multi-faceted framework if they are to successfully, effectively, and efficiently face and address the chali lenges posed by the global scenario.

G

Another world Continued from page 20 6. Covenanting for Justice in the Economy and the Earth, par. 17-19. 7. World Council of Churches, Alternative Globalization Addressing Peoples and Earth (AGAPE): A Background Document (Geneva: World Council of Churches Justice, Peace and Creation Team, 2005), 14.

29

PA S T O R S ’ PA N E L

We asked church leaders to reflect on the reality of a shrinking world and its consequences for their ministries. Here is what they told us:

How has the shrinking world, the increasing contact between persons of different cultures and nationalities, had an impact on your ministry? CHRISTINE EATON BLAIR, ASSOCIATE PASTOR, AMERICAN CHURCH IN PARIS The American Church in Paris is in the unique situation of providing English worship in a French-speaking context. As a result, English-speaking Christians from all over the world join this congregation in worship and ministry. In the last decade, the number of Americans in Paris has dropped considerably. At the same time, the number of Africans and Asians has increased dramatically as a result of waves of immigrants coming to Europe to escape war, disease, and extreme poverty at home. This movement is made possible as the world “shrinks” and borders are more easily reached and crossed. At the American Church, approximately fifty nations are represented in worship on Sunday morning, with 2/3 of our members coming from the “2/3 world.” With an average Sunday morning attendance of 550 to 600, this means that over 300 of those present come from Asia and Africa (including the Middle East). A second factor is that those who worship with us very often come from home churches that were started by American and British missionaries. They have a deep Christian faith and they find it natural to worship in an American-style church. Thirdly, for many peoples of faith from other countries, whether they be diplomats, business people, legal immigrants, or illegal refugees, the church is often the one place where they receive an honorable welcome and they can feel at home. As a result, a major ministry of this church is that of care and support that is both spiritual and physical. It includes the ministry of prayer and Bible study, on the one hand, and of providing food tickets, loans for rent, and free legal advice, on the other hand. Our parishioners highly value both of these ministries, ministries of soul and of body. LAURA TAYLOR DE PALOMINO, PASTOR, CHRIST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, HANOVER PARK, ILLINOIS Between a fourth and a third of my congregation consists of members who have come to the U.S. from other countries and cultures. It is an important part of our identity as a congregation to celebrate and embrace the diversity among us. During Advent, we listened to a Christmas carol in Arabic that was translated by a member who is from Lebanon. Another week we heard a Christmas carol sung in Twi (and translated) by a member from Ghana, and a couple from the Philippines sang a carol in Tagalog. We also have music in Spanish and Portuguese and have used creeds of faith from other cultural expressions of Christianity. In addition, we prayed for the family of a church member who had been affected by the typhoons and mudslides in the Philippines and 30

PA S TO R S ’ PA N E L other families whose members had been affected by political violence in the Philippines and Lebanon. We are keenly aware of immigration concerns, from the perspective of hard-working immigrants who make contributions to society and still suffer from antiimmigrant attitudes in people around them. We are able to benefit from a wider variety of news sources, knowing more languages, and having family and friends around the world. What resources in the Christian tradition do you draw on as you help others grapple with the realities of globalization? CHRISTINE EATON BLAIR I have found that the faith of peoples from Asia and Africa is deep and strong, based in a wide knowledge of the Bible and an unquestioning trust in the power of prayer. This makes a powerful impression on others as they spend time with these Christians who come from other parts of the globe. The meeting places in church life become important centers of encounter and community building: Bible studies, fellowship times, mission projects, teaching Sunday School, to name a few. A key resource is the faith of the members: sharing personal faith stories and individual experiences of God’s support and presence plays a major role in uniting this diverse body. Theologically, I draw on the Reformed understanding based in Scripture that God calls into being Christ’s Body. To witness an international and diverse congregation such as this one is to see a more accurate representation of Christ’s Body. Therefore, the people who are called to worship and minister with us are God’s gift to us. The differences among us, sometimes very visible as we discuss biblical interpretation or the church’s mission, are God’s challenge to us to listen and grow and to hear God’s call to us as a community of faith. I Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 have become fundamental texts in these discussions. Matthew 25:30ff (the parable of the sheep and goats) is also critical, guiding the mission outreach of the church to those who are hungry and thirsty and alien in the land. LAURA TAYLOR DE PALOMINO Compassion and sharing what you have are Christian values that I believe are even stronger because of the multi-cultural nature of our congregation. We benefit from the spiritual and theological richness of the Christian church around the world, and the members of my church aren’t so easily swayed by the barrage of consumerism and false sense of “need” as those of us who are of a white and middle-class background. It is a policy that ten percent of the church’s income—right off the top—is given to mission support, in addition to supporting the four regular annual special Presbyterian Offerings, the Heifer Project, CWS, Presbyterian Disaster Relief, and local ministries. We are a growing congregation (sixty members) of mostly blue collar families, but we prefer to live simply, do our own landscaping and cleaning of the church and save money in other ways so that we can give to missions. We draw from other cultural expressions of Christianity, especially Reformed Christianity—such as music—in our worship and our Christian education. Because of the diversity in our congregation, it is not so difficult to accept a person who seems 31

PA S TO R S ’ PA N E L “different.” There is more tolerance in hearing differing perspectives and ideas, a willingness to try new things and patience in learning new ways. We realize that not everyone thinks, acts, or believes the same way—and that’s o.k. Today, in general, in the U.S. there seems to be much less tolerance and acceptance of differing political, social, or religious views. As a nation, I think we tend to be rather provincial—in spite of the barrage of news and information at our fingertips, I believe we still lack a lot of appreciation of how people live and think around the world in other cultural settings. As Christians, we are part of the Church Universal—which, ideally, should enable us to be more open, accepting, appreciative and willing to learn from histories, dreams, and faiths of other people. In what ways is the phrase “think globally, act locally” a useful slogan for a Christian vision of the Kingdom of God? In what ways is it not? CHRISTINE EATON BLAIR I confess that in this context of extreme diversity in nationalities, cultures, and economic situations, this slogan seems trite. Working and praying with people from more than twenty African nations, as well as from Asia, America, and the Pacific Ocean island nations, leads one to recognize how interwoven we all are around the world. When disastrous mudslides strike the Philippines, the members of the Filipino Fellowship—and therefore the rest of the congregation— are plunged into fear for loved ones not heard from. When famine hits north Kenya or Nigeria, our African Fellowship mobilizes into action. When hurricanes ravage the United States, Africans, Asians, and Europeans join efforts to bring help. Prayers in Sunday worship and in group meetings naturally include specific issues from home countries as well as personal concerns here in Paris. For us, global and local form an interwoven tapestry of concern and care supported by God’s love for every person on this planet, no matter their nationality or economic status. LAURA TAYLOR DE PALOMINO It can be overwhelming to consider the awesome amount of needs and problems around our fragile globe, and so fall in the temptation of thinking “what could I possibly do to make a difference?” To remember that acting on a local level has an important impact on the people around us and can contribute to solutions on a larger scale can keep us from giving up in tackling problems of global proportions. Just because we feel “small” in the face of global warming, or multinational corporations, or wars, doesn’t mean we can’t have an impact. Jesus likened the Kingdom of God as starting out as a tiny seed or a bit of yeast, but growing into something larger and “other”—a seed growing into a large bush that houses birds, a bit of leavening that ends up in loaves of baked bread. We are called to be the salt of the earth, to be leavening—God doesn’t call us to start out as the end product, but to be faithful and available for God to work with and through (and in spite of ) us. The phrase is not helpful when we think it is enough to simply stay at the “local level,” or, worse, when we lose sight of the fact that how we act locally can have a broader impact globally—purchasing luxury goods that are produced in slave labor or war settings, for example; or, contributing to pollution and global warming with the kind

32

PA S TO R S ’ PA N E L of automobile we drive or lawn mower we use. We, as a society, are still too willing to sacrifice the well-being of other peoples, economies, and environments in order to uphold the standard of living we enjoy in the U.S. As long as we can pay lower prices for imported goods, it is too easy to not think about the labor conditions or low wages for workers in other countries. What are the most pressing concerns of your parishioners? Are these concerns related in any way to the global world that we hear so much about? CHRISTINE EATON BLAIR As with any group of people, concerns vary widely—from parenting issues to work or unemployment concerns, from health to relationship problems. Personal and family issues are almost always central. In this congregation with its many nationalities, family concerns become global issues for almost everyone: the mother dying back home in another country; the nieces and nephews who need money to go to school; the uncle whose business was destroyed by flood waters; the sister with an abusive husband back home where beating wives is considered normal. Immigrants and refugees have the added concerns of legal status and employment. In addition, people of color from former French colonies often experience the adverse effects of colonialism and racism. Although they speak of this rarely, they will describe in detail many such experiences when asked. American minority groups, on the other hand, such as African-Americans, gays and lesbians, along with American intellectuals and artists, find more freedom and support; their concerns, then, are to find legal and economic ways to remain in France. LAURA TAYLOR DE PALOMINO It’s interesting that in my church, there is the gamut of political perspectives, ranging from very conservative to more liberal and many shades in between. But, the general stereotypes that have been applied to “conservatives” and “liberals” don’t apply in Christ Church. Whether someone gets their news from Fox, BBC, or Univision, regardless of how anyone voted in the last elections, we are united in being passionate about growing spiritually and working for peace and justice. It isn’t always “smooth sailing” in communication or sharing perspectives, but, we consider our diversity to be a gift, and we recognize how rare a gift it is. Anticipating the new year, spiritual growth, leadership development, and mission outreach are priorities for our church, and we are deliberate in seeking ways that those priorities are understood and lived out through i the rich multi-cultural resources we share.

33

REQUIRED READING Books recommended by Austin Seminary faculty narrative character, comparison, description, image, metaphor, simile, metonymy, parable, plot, sequence, synecdoche” (110). It is a brief entry. But it accomplishes these things for the reader: it provides a succinct definition; it designates cross-references (seven of these fourteen elements are marked by an asterisk to show that they are other entries in the book); and it gives enough of an overview that the reader should be able to tell that there are whole schools of thought related to the entry. Each entry has a bibliography that references the authors cited in the entry, other main works relating to the entry and, showing how widely read the author is, citations of recent articles and related books that are not necessarily mainstream in a homiletical bibliography. By way of another example, the entry for “Narrative Preaching” is four pages in length plus a three-quarter-page bibliography. It includes cross-references to the following entries: inductive method, identification, textto-sermon method, plot, metaphor, image, development, synecdoche, illustration, idea, collaborative preaching, mythic communication, parabolic communication, postliberal preaching, semiotics, structure, and theology and preaching. This entry is a minicourse in the history and development of narrative preaching and how it and related terms are used in the field of homiletics. It is what one might hear, simplified, in an introductory course. It is a helpful starting place for those who want to deepen their understanding or to be led to further reading on the topic. With the entries McClure gives definitions, and comments on trends and recent debates. He is also sure to include interdisciplinary partners, as seen with the entry “Deconstruction.” In this one-page entry McClure defines this “cultural, philosophical, social, and textual critique” and delineates five ways that this work relates to homiletics. Preachers are thereby introduced to postmodern philosophies important to their work.

PREACHING WORDS: 144 KEY TERMS IN HOMILETICS, John S. McClure. Westminster John Knox Press, 2007. vii + 170, $19.95. Reviewed by Jennifer L. Lord, associate professor of homiletics, Austin Seminary. the theological discipline Ifindncalled homiletics, readers will a variety of publications. The variety is evidence of the complexity of the art and task of preaching and the multitude of thoughts on the subject. There are histories of preaching, theologies of preaching, rhetorical strategies for preaching, denominational and cultural theories of preaching, and the list goes on. In the mix there are preaching books that function as secondary theologies—works that attend to the primary theological act itself, the sermon. These books are the introductory preaching texts and accompanying texts that expand the beginner books to say more, for instance, about the use of story, or the context of the listener, or the definition of kerygma. But it is often difficult to understand how to negotiate all of this material. How does the new preacher know what to pick up and read? How does the seasoned preacher select a work that is challenging yet relevant? John McClure’s most recent book, Preaching Words, is a fitting provision for both needs. This new book offers orientation for the beginning preacher and sets out the paths of extended homiletical engagement for those who want a longer walk. This work is not done as a narrative but in the style of expanded glossary. True to the title, there are 144 words defined in this book. The length of the definitions varies, with some being closer to what one might expect in a dictionary entry while others fill pages in order to show current debates and schools of thought. The entry for “Poetics” is this: “Included in the poetics of preaching are the elements of allegory, analogy, narrative,

34

REQUIRED READING It would be difficult simply to read this book from start to finish, though some might approach it this way. The author provides suggestions: read this as a glossary or encyclopedia—looking up words as needed; read this as a supplement to a basic preaching text; read this in a homiletics course in place of an introductory text. McClure provides a tenunit outline for a syllabus and he chooses which words would be studied for each unit. This is a unique book. It does not develop a thesis or offer a precise historical account. It does not contain sample sermons. But it does give readers a very fine survey of the landscape of contemporary homiletical thought. The bibliography is current, the breadth of entries covers all that is presently on the homiletical table with references to what might be coming, and the writing is clear and precise. This will be an excellent resource for personal use, seminary classrooms, and perhaps even for ministerium groups who coordinate their own ongoing homiletical education.

constitute the most original thoughts with chapters 2-17 forming the nucleus. Each chapter begins by examining a select theologian’s background, life, and primary work or works. Past and modern scholarship about the exegete (or school of thought) is then offered. The ensuing sections discuss hermeneutical appropriation followed by an analysis of its strengths and weaknesses. In chapter 1, “The Early Reception of the Hebrew Bible: The Septuagint [LXX] and the New Testament,” Childs brings the general reader up to speed on the history of LXX scholarship. He accessibly points out that the formal study of the LXX has benefited much from the work of Joseph Ziegler’s 1934 monograph Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias. In short, without the LXX, we would not have the NT. Chapter 2 discusses the exegetical approach of Justin Martyr, chapter 3-Irenaeus, chapter 4-Clement of Alexandria, chapter 5Origen, and chapter 6-Eusebius of Caesarea. We see a historical progression from the 2nd century to mid 4th century within the cadre of the Alexandrian “allegorical” approach. Justin Martyr, the Greek second century apologist, sets the stage through Dialogue with Trypho (a religious debate between Jews and Christians). O. Skarsaune’s (1987) scholarship is introduced. The underlying exegetical approach of Justin is “apostolic exposition,” tradition passed down from Christ (Dial. 76.6). The strength of Justin’s appropriation is that he bridges his faith and theology directly to the risen Christ in interpreting the Jewish Scripture. A weakness, however, is an extreme form of supersessionism—that God has rejected Israel and replaced it with the Christian church. The distinctions between allegoria (allegory) and typologia (typology) are introduced through the seminal work of Jean Daniélou (1948) in chapter 5. Origen’s First Principles and Philocalia are introduced prior to the review of this secondary scholarship. And although Origen’s commentary on Isaiah is lost, Childs’ attempts to recover the work by examining subsequent generations of Church Fathers (Eusebius, Jerome, and Cyril) who

THE STRUGGLE TO UNDERSTAND ISAIAH AS CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURE, Brevard S. Childs. Eerdmans, 2004, xii + 332, $35. Reviewed by John Ahn, assistant professor of Old Testament, Austin Seminary. revard Childs’ central thesis in The Struggle to B Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture is “to investigate the church’s reception of the Old Testament scriptures when seen especially through the lenses of the interpretation of the book of Isaiah” (34). With additional sub-themes, the classic question posed by every major biblical theologian is, What is the Mitte (center) of scripture? The monograph is an amalgamation of four disciplines—Church History, Dogmatic Theology, Homiletics, and Biblical Studies. Descriptively, it is an anthology of prominent theological exegetes or schools of thought commenting on the book of Isaiah. The book has eighteen chapters. Chapters 1 and 18

35

REQUIRED READING were dependent on Origen for their own exegesis. The strength in this approach is that scripture is the unique channel by which the Holy Spirit continues to unveil the divine will of God for the church. In addition to the obvious point of Origen being condemned as a heretic, however, the allegorical approach of Origen is deemed arbitrary, subjective, and incapable of dealing with the original Sitz im Leben (Setting in Life). Chapter 7 narrates Jerome, chapter 8John Chrysostom, chapter 9-Cyril of Alexanderia, chapter 10-Théodoret of Cyprus, chapter 11-Thomas Aquinas, chapter 12Nicholas of Lyra, chapter 13-Martin Luther, chapter 14-John Calvin, chapter 15Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-century Interpreters, chapter 16-The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, and chapter 17Postmodern Interpretation. We observe the continuous historical progression from the mid-fourth century to the Reformation, and subsequently, to the 21st century. Chapter 10 highlights Théodoret of Cyprus as the last great theologian of Antioch. Childs points out that the two schools of thought, the Alexandrian and Antiochene, at the outset shared common assumptions about scripture—the inspiration of scripture, the unity of the two testaments, and the need for careful philological interpretation. J. Guinot’s, L’exégèse de Théodoret (1995) provides the forum for undertaking Théodoret’s hermeneutic. In the Commentary on Isaiah, Théodoret is known to have employed traditional patristic terms such as, facts (ta pragmata), harmony (symphonia), coherence (akolouthia), intent (skopus), end (telos) in addition to subject matter (hypothesis), linear commentary (kata merps), and typology (tropikos). In chapter 14, Childs argues that John Calvin’s training as a French humanist paved the way to combine philology, history, and literary analysis. Just as “law and grace” were the approaches for Luther (from Galatians), the two central hermeneutical keys for Calvin were “accommodation” and “typology” (from Hebrews). Childs devotes much time to the homilies of Calvin in addition to reviewing the work of Hans Frei. But for Calvin, “the Spirit-inspired Word of God in scripture has

its own voice” (221). Childs adds, “Scripture is not an inert artifact awaiting human creative imagination to give it life, but its voice goes forth from God’s mouth with power (53.11), exerting coercion upon its hearers for salvation and judgment” (221). In the concluding chapter, “Hermeneutical Implications,” Childs pulls the seven sub-points that were running throughout the monograph: 1) The Authority of Scripture; 2) The Literal and Spiritual Senses of Scripture; 3) Scripture’s Two Testaments; 4) The Divine and Human Authorship of Scripture; 5) The Christological Content of the Christian Bible; 6) The Dialectical Nature of History; and 7) History and the Final Form of the Text. Childs’ closing reflection is that, because the church “[assumes] the divine authority of both testaments, the church reflects theologically in a struggle for understanding, often amid tension. The church confesses that the criterion of truth for both the Old Testament and the New Testament is Jesus Christ, the divine reality that undergirds the joint witness of its scriptures” (313). So, for Childs, “What is the Mitte of scripture?” Jesus Christ— indeed a struggle for many. The term “struggle” is Childs’ rendering of Karl Barth’s theology-laden term “wrestle.” It should be noted that Childs studied with Barth in Switzerland. Furthermore, both men hold deep concerns for pastors who may struggle with Old Testament texts, whether with respect to their content and message or to how one might preach the Old Testament particularly in light of the New. To consider what one might preach, while bearing in mind one’s context (rural or urban, traditional or contemporary, young or old), is the genesis of the theological and exegetical task; and struggling with that task is an appropriate theological enterprise. This book will help pastors see that they are deeply a part of the history of biblical interpretation, and that there is a family resemblance in interpreting or preaching the sacred book, namely, the Spirit’s quickening and faithful witness to Jesus i Christ.

36

CHRISTIANITY A N D C U LT U R E

T HE W ESTERN M ISSIONARY M OVEMENT IN AN E RA OF G LOBALIZATION A R U N W. J O N E S

n Wednesday, January 17, 2007, four Doctor of Ministry students and I drove slowly southward at the tail end of an ice storm, heading towards McAllen and Reynosa, sister cities on the U.S.A.-Mexican border. We were going to spend two full days in Reynosa, visiting and observing various missions and ministries carried out by Christians in Mexico on their national border. So, on Thursday morning we visited Casa del Migrante, adjacent to the Roman Catholic church, a

O

Arun W. Jones is associate professor of mission and evangelism at Austin Seminary. He earned the BA from Yale University, the MDiv from Yale University Divinity School, and the PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary. The son of Methodist missionaries, Jones is an ordained minister in the United Methodist Church. He is the author of Christian Missions in the American Empire: Episcopalians in Northern Luzon, the Philippines, 1902-1946 (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2003) and is working on a history of the church in north-central India from 1800 to 1980 that will be published by the Church History Association of India. 37

CHRISTIANITY

AND

C U LT U R E

shelter for deported people or for those whoπ come to cross the border and cannot get across. The shelter is run by nuns of the Sisters of Charity, who provide short-term shelter, food, medical assistance, counseling, and referrals to many who are uprooted and lost. In the afternoon we visited Victory House, a rehabilitation home for drug addicts run by a Pentecostal group. Through a ministry of prayer, worship, spiritual healing, and legitimate economic activities, the leaders at Victory House invite drug addicts into a residential community where they can give their life to Jesus, and thereby gain life itself. Of course, in some ways these two ministries and the others that we visited were quite different from each other: they had different emphases, foci, methods of outreach, and Christian traditions. But in some fundamental ways, all the mission work we saw in Mexico was imbued by the same spirit. In the midst of tremendous problems caused by forces way beyond their control, the Mexican Christians simply sought to live out the gospel of Jesus Christ by reaching out in ways that they saw God leading them. Their ministries were marked by a remarkable joy, peace, and love, and a complete confidence that God would provide what was necessary for them to do their work. If God did not provide what they asked for, then they would adjust their work and reach out with Christ’s love in new and different ways. There were two important ingredients to the ministries that we briefly witnessed in Reynosa. One ingredient our group from Austin Seminary talked about: these Christians were rooted and grounded in the society and land where they lived, that place of mixed and conflicting cultures called the borderlands. In other words, their Christianity was indigenous, and their ministry was indigenous. The other ingredient our group did not talk about: while being indigenous, these Christians were not isolated from the church universal. They all were part of, and drew strength and resources from, Christian networks which were intercultural and international. Thus the nuns talked to us of their hopes for solutions to border problems coming from a meeting of bishops from southern United States and northern Mexico. And the leader at Victory House related to us its connections with a large Pentecostal church in San Antonio, Texas, that is providing it with financial support. Without being dependent upon the church beyond their region, these mission workers are fed and refreshed by spiritual, moral, financial, and other support coming from the worldwide church. As I look at the church in the United States and assess where it is growing in disciples and discipleship, and also where it is struggling to survive, I become convinced that one important component of Christian vitality is the ability to engage sisters and brothers in Christ across cultural and national boundaries. Both Roman Catholicism and Pentecostalism, for very different reasons, have built into them theological principles and ecclesiological structures that propel them into intercultural and international Christianity. In contrast, we mainline Protestants have in the past four or five decades become so concerned with indigenous Christianity at home and abroad that we have neglected to explore with any seriousness or in any depth the universal and transnational dimensions of the Christian faith. In other words, one of the reasons for the decline of mainline Protestantism in the United States is that it has become overly indigenized. Typically, the solutions offered for the plight of mainline Protestantism are for us to become more like ourselves. While certain individual congregations are bucking 38

Jones the trend, mainline Protestant denominations as a whole have become less and less invested in cross-cultural and international mission, which is where American Protestants usually encounter people of other cultures and nations.1 The heyday of Western Protestant mission was a brief century, from about 1850 to 1950. This was also the heyday of European and North American imperialism and colonialism. While the western missionary movement was certainly affected by imperialism, often in quite negative ways, it is important to remember that the two were not identical. Thus the western missionary movement provided a bridge between East and West, or between North and South, that was somewhat different from the bridges provided by strictly political and economic interests in the West. Let me give two examples. Western missionaries went to Asia or Africa in order to convert the “heathen.” While missionary polemics against these “heathen” could be vituperative, once Asians and Africans converted to Christianity, they had to be presented to churches in the West in sympathetic terms, as fellow Christians. After all, it was in the missionaries’ self-interest to present western Christians with pleasant stories and photographs of alien converts: the latter were the evidence of the missionaries’ success. Add to that the fact that many western missionaries accepted the ideology of self-governing, self-propagating, and self-supporting churches, and then a “successful” missionary would try and present alien Christians not only as fellow believers but as those who could live out the Christian life with some degree of independence.2 Such missionary views of non-western people, while far from being perfect and wholesome, did introduce Asians and Africans to western Christians as more than foreign peoples to be subjugated and ruled, or as labor to be employed cheaply. Reading and hearing about black, brown, and yellow Christians energized and motivated ordinary western church folks from the back pews of big city churches to the wooden benches of small country churches to extend themselves in compassion and service for the work of Christ around the world.3 The missionary movement, in other words, infused vital energy and life into the western church. The missionary bridge between North and South, between East and West, worked both ways, however. Given the glaring imperfections of the western missionaries, imperfections which were quickly and easily spotted by non-westerners, it is remarkable how such missionaries sparked in Africans, Asians, and other peoples a vision of a new life, which included a vision of an alternative way of being, of goodness and of salvation, possible through Christ and Christ’s church. What missionaries did when they went to lands away from their own homes was to present to the people in those lands different possibilities for life. Until relatively recently, most people in those lands ignored the rather preposterous missionary claims. But there were those who heard the claims and were desperate enough, or idiosyncratic enough, or simply struck by the strange message, who became followers of Christ. Soon a community of Christians gathered. They were fed and inspired in part—and only in part—by Christians from other places in the world, places like England, France, and America. Then, in any number of cases, such communities would become vital, active forces of change and new life

39

CHRISTIANITY

AND

C U LT U R E

in their own world. While it is a salutary corrective in recent mission historiography to emphasize the initiative taken by indigenous Christians in the formation and development of their own Christian communities, we should not forget that this was done in conversation and often cooperation with western Christians, most frequently represented by the missionary. The missionary was a two-way bridge of life and vitality. This brings me back to the Puente Internacional, or International Bridge, between Reynosa, Mexico, and McAllen, U.S.A. Inspired by the life and work of Mexican Christians in Reynosa, the four Doctor of Ministry students have returned to their congregations to experiment with new ministry and mission in their own churches and contexts. Two of these experiments (we call them doctoral projects) have to do with reaching out to Spanish-speaking populations. One explores the question of how the act of attentive listening to the “other” can be part and parcel of evangelism. One student is immersing himself in readings about the biblical jubilee tradition, with a special eye to issues of land that are so prominent on the border. All four students have received vitality and energy from listening to stories told by their Mexican sisters and brothers in Christ about their work among the poor and the oppressed in Reynosa. In some places in our country, at least, mainline Protestantism is being revitalized by serious engagei ment once again in cross-cultural, transnational Christianity. NOTES 1. Increasingly popular short-term mission trips are an interesting phenomenon. On the one hand, they are often a counter-sign to the disinterest in transcultural Christianity. On the other hand, they can inoculate us from the radicality of the encounter with the other. Without speaking their language, drinking their water, picking up their diseases, or immersing ourselves in their lifestyle, we can feel good about having shared experiences for a tolerable length of time with Christians who are alien to us. 2. Some of the most influential proponents of independent indigenous churches were Rufus Anderson (1796-1880), who from 1832 to 1866 was the foreign secretary of the Massachusetts based American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; Henry Venn (1796-1873), who served as honorary clerical secretary of the Church Missionary Society in London, England, from 1841 to 1872; John Nevius (1829-1893), an American Presbyterian missionary in China from 1853 to 1893; and Roland Allen (1868-1947) who was an English missionary to China and Africa from 1895 until his death. For further information see entries for these mission theorists as well as for “Indigenous Churches” in Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000). 3. Until the 20th century, the missionary movement was a thriving enterprise only among those on the fringes of ecclesiastical power. For example, see Andrew Walls, “Missionary Vocation and the Ministry” in Andrew F. Walls, The Missionary Movement in Christian History (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1996), 160-172.

Coming in the Fall 2007 issue:

PROFESSOR JOHN ALSUP ON RESURRECTION 40

Theodore J. Wardlaw, President BOARD OF TRUSTEES John M. McCoy Jr., Chair Michael D. Allen Karen C. Anderson Thomas L. Are Jr. Susan Beaird F. M. Bellingrath III Dianne E. Brown Cassandra C. Carr Peggy L. Clark James G. Cooper Marvin L. Cooper Elizabeth Blanton Flowers Donald R. Frampton Richard D. Gillham Walter Harris Jr. Bruce G. Herlin Lydia Hernandez

J Carter King III Michael L. Lindvall Catherine O. Lowry Blair R. Monie Virginia L. Olszewski B. W. Payne William C. Powers Jr. Cheryl Covey Ramsey Sydney F. Reding Max R. Sherman Jerry Jay Smith John L. Van Osdall Sallie Sampsell Watson Hugh H. Williamson III Judy A. Woodward

Trustees Emeriti Clarence N. Frierson, Stephen A. Matthews, Edward D. Vickery

Spring 2007

Address Service Requested

www.austinseminary.edu

100 East 27th Street Austin, TX 78705-5797

Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Austin, Texas Permit No. 2473