Critiquing the Method of Traditional Western Theology and Calling for
Sino-Theology
by
Enoch Wan
When writing
these articles, the author has no personal agenda against the church of the
West and
the missionary from the West. I am forever grateful to the American
missionaries who led members of two generations both in my family and my
wife’s to the Lord. However, when dealing with issues
related to the danger of Westernization and the need of contextualization,
critical analysis is
necessary and valuable.
Part I
I. INTRODUCTION
Theology is foundational to Christian
faith and practice; just as worldview of a certain cultural tradition is
foundational to group members’ belief and practice. Therefore
“contextualized Chinese theology” (i.e. “Sino-theology” or “ST”) is
essential to further discussion on practical contextualization. A critique
of the method of “Traditional Western Theology” (TWT) is offered in this
article from a Chinese perspective and a call is issued for the formulation
of ST specifically for the contemporary Chinese Christian.
This article is written
as a warning that some Chinese Christians might have blindly swallowed some
Western cultural elements (both the good and the bad) in the process of
theologizing when receiving the sound Christian doctrine from Western
theological tradition. This subtle form of westernization is not easily
detected and the bad elements might be dangerous and poisonous.
Clarification of several concepts and
terms is in order at the outset. The term “contextualization”
is used in this series to denote “the efforts of formulating, presenting and
practicing the Christian faith in such a way that is relevant to the
cultural context of the target group in terms of conceptualization,
expression and application; yet maintaining theological coherence, biblical
integrity and theoretical consistency."
“Sino-theology”
is one such “contextual theology” that is specifically designed for the
Chinese people; not by transplanting Christianity in the “pot” of Western
culture but by planting it in the Chinese cultural soil so it can take root,
flourish and grow. ST should be done by using the Chinese cognitive
pattern (e.g. shame culture vs. the guilt culture of TWT), Chinese cognitive
process (e.g. synthetic vs. the dialectic of TWT), Chinese way of social
interaction (e.g. relational /complementary vs. dichotomistic/confrontational
of TWT), Chinese vocabulary, topics, etc. Only one of these
aspects of ST is the focus of this article in contra-distinction from TWT,
i.e. “both-and” of ST vs. “either-or” of TWT. (For
other details regarding the complexity of the issues and debates related to
ST and TWT, readers may consult two separate titles by the author listed at
the end. The extensive quotations from Arnold Yeung’s 1988 title are
included with the intention to show that the view presented here is neither
to be regarded as esoteric nor to be dismissed as the author’s
idiosyncrasy.)
II.
THEOLOGY, THEOLOGIES, AND THEOLOGIZING
“Theology” is man’s attempt and
accomplishment in studying God (including His attributes, action and
accomplishment) and His relationship with the created order (including man,
angel, nature, etc.) systematically and academically. Since men differ from
one another in terms of time, temperament, cultural background, circumstance
thus they do not have uniform cognitive pattern, process, method, etc. when
theologizing. As a result, there are numerous kinds of theology (e.g.
Puritan and contemporary, liberation and feminist, Catholic and Protestant,
etc.) and multiple ways of theologizing (e.g. biblical vs. historical,
conservative vs. liberal, dispensationalist vs. reformed, etc.).
One of the characteristics when
theologizing in TWT is the use of the either/or” thought pattern of Greek
philosophy. Since the time of Aristotle, scholars of the Western tradition
have been strongly influenced by Aristotle's dualistic epistemology.
Subsequently, the dualistic thought pattern was reinforced and refined by
the Gnostics (Yeung 1986, 27-29). Henceforth the dualistic pattern of
"either/or" has been well entrenched in the Western mind. This "either/or"
pattern has several variations: the dualistic cosmology of ancient Greece,
the dialectics of Hegel (dialectic idealism), Marx (dialectic materialism),
and Augustine (dialectic sociology of the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of
Man), etc. The quotation below is Arnold Yeung’s comments on Augustine’s
impact on TWT in this regard:
"Unfortunately, since Augustine the Church fell once again
into the trap of Hellenistic dualism. This impact was prolonged by
scholasticism of the Medieval period and naturalism in the West, spreading
worldwide…” (Yeung 1986, 17, translation from Chinese by the present
writer)
THE PATTERN OF EITHER/OR IN TWT
As
shown in Figure 1 below, according
to the Aristotelian logic (i.e., the law of non-contradiction: A is A, B is
B; A cannot be B and B cannot be A at the same time) -- the left half is A,
the right half is B. Thus, each half is either A or B.
FIGURE 1 - THE WESTERN PARADOX OF
EITHER/OR (Wan 1998:120)
Great thinkers of the Western tradition
have been forced to follow the path of either/or thought pattern for too
long. The compartmentalization of disciplines (extreme, reductionistic and
tunnel-vision type of specialization) and dichotomistic conceptualization
(e.g. scientific vs. spiritual, rationalistic vs. mystical, natural vs.
supernatural, cultural vs. supra-cultural, human vs. divine, this-worldly
vs. other-worldly, empirical vs. intuitive, etc.) are just manifestations of
the either/or dualistic thought pattern in TWT. In Figure 2,
examples of dualistic thought pattern are presented in diagram format.
FIGURE 2 - THE
EITHER/OR PATTERN OF TWT (Wan 1997: 4)
|
TOPIC |
EITHER
|
OR
|
|
Christology |
Either the deity of Christ
Either the Christ of kerygma |
or the humanity of Christ
or the historical Jesus
|
|
Soteriology |
Either God’s sovereignty
Either faith
Either grace
Either evangelism for conversion |
or human free will
or reason
or work
or social gospel as witness
|
|
Ecclesiology |
Either the universal church
Either organic unity
|
or local congregation
or organizational uniformity
|
|
Eschatology |
Either already realized
|
or yet to come |
|
Bibliology |
Either divine revelation |
or human authorship |
The first several hundred years of the
Christian church were known for the christological controversies due to the
either/or perspective on the nature of Christ. This debate has been revised
in the last few decades by biblical scholars in the New Testament studies of
the "historical Jesus" as a response to the neo-orthodox insistence on the "Kerygmatic
Christ".
After the series of "christological
heresies,” controversies and conflicts occurred repeatedly for many
centuries between the Augustinians and the Pelagians on the sacraments, and
later between the Reformer (salvation by grace through faith) and the
Catholic (salvation by self-effort through work). The theological debates
on the issue of salvation by God's sovereign will or human free-will has
consumed much time and effort of theologians and church leaders in TWT.
The "fundamentalist movement" of the
early part of the 20th century was mostly a struggle to proclaim and
practice evangelism as a matter of personal and spiritual conversion,
fighting first against the "social gospel" of the liberal, and later against
"institutional salvation" of World Council of Church and liberation/feminist
theology. The underlying assumption is that salvation is either a
spiritual/personal matter or an institutional/collective matter.
In the last few decades, the Christian
church has been preoccupied with the "inerrancy debate" (i.e. the Bible is
either of divine revelation without error or of human authorship and thus
not error-free). These historical precedents clearly demonstrate the
pattern of either/or thinking in TWT. The resultant events and the costly
undertaking are not to be slighted at all.
Part II
|