The
Critical Asian Principle (CAP) has a history,
purpose and direction. Since its formulation
and implementation about thirty years, we
believe it has achieved its purpose reasonably
well in assisting the process of doing theology
and teaching theology in Asia. However
in today’s context, given its peculiarities
and changing needs, we realize there is
a need to review the CAP in order to intensify
Asian theological reflection and theological
training. Hence the need to revisit and
rethink the CAP was suggested at the Taipei
2004 meeting by the ATESEA Executive Committee.
Member schools, colleges and seminaries
were requested to facilitate and participate
in the re-assessment
process. The
process was to focus on relevancy, sufficiency
and adequacy of CAP for today’s Asia.
The
Critical Asian Principle has been the framework
applied by ATESEA and SEAGST in theological
education. In 1972 at the Senate meeting
in Bangkok, the CAP formulation was introduced
by Emerito P. Nacpil and officially adopted
to provide basis for theological construction
and education in Asia.’. The primary concerns
behind the implementation of the CAP were
twofold:
-
To promote an
Asian orientation in theological education
in Southeast Asian region
-
To seek and identify
what is “distinctly Asian and use such distinctiveness
as a critical principle of judgment on matters
dealing with the life and mission of the
Christian community, theology, and theological
education in Asia.”
Hence the CAP took into account the common spiritual and socio-economic
context of Southeast Asian countries as
the point of reference for biblical reflection
and theologizing. Four broadly described
principles were thus proposed:
-
the situational
principle
-
the hermeneutical
principle
-
the missiological
principle
-
the educational
principle.
Each of these principles had general objectives to meet; namely:
-
Help Asian Churches
develop a theology of their own and be fully
liberated from the Western framework.
-
Help Churches
evolve an attitude which would seek to think
Asian and act Asian in order to create a
scope for living theology.
-
Help redress the
situation whereby Asian Christianity continues
to remain Western and religion of the colonial
masters.
WHY REVISIT AND
RETHINK CAP
As
mentioned in the preamble, the need to revisit
and rethink CAP has been made necessary
by the constantly evolving Asian context.
Many things have since changed and would
require different approaches and modus operandi
in theologizing and teaching of theology
in Asia. The revisiting and rethinking should rightly raise critical
questions in relation to the adequacy, relevancy
and sufficiency of CAP in current Asian
situations. The following comments are findings
compiled through the various regional discussions.
i)
The four principles
of CAP are too general and do not specifically
address modern day challenges.
ii)
Usage of the term
‘Critical’ in the context of CAP does not
seem critical enough as the four expressed
principles are common basic hermeneutic
principles.
iii)
CAP merely offers
a general framework, without saying anything
specific on the principles or application
methodology. Hence it is seen to be descriptive
and lacking in clear theological perspective.
iv)
Since the principles
are general in nature, it lacks
clear direction for doing theology and
teaching theology in Asia.
v)
The original CAP is inadequate to provide
interaction with the contemporary
issues such as globalization, global empire
building, ecological and gender justice issues.
vi)
Lack is also noted
in the area of Pastoral, Ministerial and
Spiritual formation.
FROM BANGKOK TO SINGAPORE – A LONG JOURNEY
OF CHANGES
As
noted in the paper ‘Covenant with the Churches
in Asia’ presented at the ATESEA General Assembly 2005, the Asian
world has changed rapidly in all aspects
of economic, political and social development.
Christian Churches in Asia continue to struggle to witness the message of the gospel
and the promise of the reign of God to be
actualized among the people of Asia.” Since the ‘changing context’
is the key factor which induced the reassessment
of the effectiveness, functionality and
suitability of CAP, we need to identify
what features color the changed context
of today’s Asia and what paradigm shift
has taken place between Bangkok (then) and
Singapore (now). The following are some
propositions:
i)
Religious Fundamentalisms – The escalation of
tensions between the Muslim world and the
West, as well as terrorist activities sponsored
by religious sectarian groups in Asia continue
to challenge us in the way we think and
act as Christians in Asia. The revival
of many sects, with a fundamentalist tendency
within the living religions of Asia, stand witness to rising religious fundamentalism. Living
in a pluralistic community leaves limited
alternatives for Asians: either we build
bridges or walls.
ii)
Gender Justice Issues
– The rising cases of violence against women
and children, as well as issues aimed directly
at marginalizing women from main stream
activities and promoting erosion of women’s
rights has become a growing concern for
Asia. This women
issue must be seen as a humanitarian issue
as well as within the context of the image
of God in humanity. Women are created in
the image of God.
iii)
Ecological Problems, Disease and Disasters – These ecological and health problems have become common
in Asia today. The recent Tsunami, flash floods and earthquakes have
taken away thousands of lives and left the
living devastated. The outbreak of Avian
Flu and the resurgence of diseases (like
Tuberculosis. Dengue and Malaria) once thought
to have been eradicated in Southeast Asia,
have once again resurfaced in epidemic proportions.
HIV and AIDS are affecting families, communities
and nations and challenge us to reexamine
our ministerial formation programme. Furthermore,
uncontrolled and one-sided exploitative economic development projects
have brought with them various ecological
crises.
“Ecological concerns have often been neglected
or conveniently sidelined.” The rape of Mother Earth
manifest in uncontrolled logging, indiscriminate
use of chemicals in agriculture, inconsiderate
disposal of non-biodegradable waste, and
human beings’ many other ecocidal acts due
to negligence, ignorance or greed destroy the ecosystem.
iv)
Globalization and Global Empire Building – Much of Asia has moved from colonial contexts to a variety of post-colonial
and neocolonial situations
where the global empire and
the neoliberal economic scheme of globalization
play symbiotic relationships. The greed of the Empire and the neoliberal globalization threatens and
destroys
all life, especially the poor and marginalized
people
and Mother Earth.
Thus, economic globalization and the
rise of a global empire is a serious concern
for Asia today.
Such “new realities within the Asian
contexts are posing new challenges to our
theologizing today. . .”
v)
Colonization – Most Asian
countries have a colonial experience. Asia’s post
colonial realities and emerging
neocolonial attitudes are matters that should
be given a renewed emphasis in combating
abuse, imperialism and exploitation. “Neo-colonialism
is now disguised in the form of economic
domination.” Neocolonialism also employs
cultural hegemony in both subtle and glaring
ways. The principle of ‘decolonization’
must be implemented in making people “aware
of the colonizing command and dominance
that is around us and in us. We need to
engage consciously and continuously in decolonizing
all alienating and imposing influences.”
vi)
Spirituality – With the
increasing influence and impact of materialism,
secularism, and liberalism in the postmodern
era, Asian countries continue to experience
challenges and stagnation in spirituality. These include
loss
of focus in discipleship and spiritual formation,
loss
of indigenous wisdom,
character and values, and infiltration of
western culture and ideology through the
neo-Pentecostal and new
religious movements influences.
vii)
Identity and Power Struggle - Most communities in Asian countries have experienced identity
crisis
through history. In the process, some
develop the ‘meeting-place’ identity. Similar to this is the
question of “what kind of world order is
theology going to project that is consistent
with its hope for the kindom of God, as the people of Asia rise to claim their
basic rights and rightful place in the world?”
viii)
People Movements and Ecumenism – In a Christian minority and multi- denominational context
enhancing ecumenical unity and cooperation
is vital. In seeking to fulfill the Great
Commission
and the Great Commandment, the Asian Churches
need to transcend denominational boundaries
and constantly seek to promote wider cooperation. Some Asians see denominationalism as a legacy of Western
mission agencies that promotes a particular
brand of Christianity. Learning from the
past history ecumenism must not be just
seen in functional terms but as a dynamic
unity (‘that they may be one’) Ecumenism is about a
vision of God’s household where the members
seek to listen to the variety of Asian theological
voices, and to practice intrafaith and interfaith
dialog in order to promote peace, healing
and reconciliation.
ix)
Information and Technological Change and Challenges – “Globalized capitalized economic activities act not only
to widen the gap between the rich and the
poor, but also weaken the sovereignty of
individual nation states by interruption
of capital power. Its operation is backed
by the information technology and military
power, and has led to the decline of the
weaker cultures, discrimination against
minorities such as aborigines, and exploitation
of women and children.”
x)
Social Challenges – The
expression of sin in terms of greed for
power and wealth experienced by the peoples
of Asia has had a tremendous effect on the community, especially
the poor and marginalized. Ethical problems
such as corruption, abuse of power, and prostitution; poverty
realities such as indentured child labor
and population explosion; communal problems
such as ethnic
conflicts, racial tensions and breakdown
of family structures and continued marginalization
of women, children, and persons with disabilities
continue to rise.
xi)
Reclaiming Indigenous Identity and Minority Rights
– Loss of identity, dignity,
and loss of good cultural values have resulted
from lack of dialogue with the indigenous
peoples. Dialogue with them has been hindered
by our prejudices and stereotyped views
about them that were influenced by western
theology and culture. The indigenous has
often been equated with being ‘backward’,
‘primitive’ and ‘irrational.’ For these
reasons, local cultures and their wisdom
has been systematically suppressed and marginalized.
However, indigenous wisdom has a valuable
character that needs to be rediscovered.
GUIDELINES FOR THEOLOGIZING
AND THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION IN ASIA – TIME
FOR ANOTHER PARADIGM SHIFT
The
purpose of these guidelines is to allow
a redefinition and a retargeting of the
role of theological education and its methodology
in Asia by addressing the actual situation
of a local community and at the same time
ensuring it is “biblically based, missiologically
oriented, educationally shaped, pastorally
advocated and spiritually empowered.” Theologies in Asia must
be authentically Asian in its content, shape
and processes. So we propose the following
guidelines:
i)
Responsive engagement
with the diverse Asian contexts.
ii)
Critical engagement
with indigenous cultures and wisdom for
the preservation and sustenance of life.
iii)
Reflective engagements
with the sufferings of the Asian people
in order to provide hope for the marginalized,
women, indigenous people, children, the
differently able people and migrant workers.
iv)
Encourage to restore
the reality of the inter-connectedness of
the whole creation.
v)
Helpful to promote
interfaith dialogue
and intra faith communion and communication
for the fullness of life
and the well-being of the society.
vi)
Enhance capacity
building in order to serve the people experiencing
disaster, conflict, disease and those people
who suffer physical, emotional, and mental
disabilities.
vii)
Prophetic resistance
against the powers of economic imperialism.
IMPLICATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION
The
following suggestions are made in order
to allow for effective implementation of
the guidelines.
i)
ATESEA accreditation
criteria (notation) be revised to incorporate
the above requirements.
ii)
AESEA member schools
and SEAGST should reflect the spirit of
the above guidelines in their curriculum,
ways of teaching and training programs.
iii)
Adopt an inter-disciplinary
approach and avoid the departmental approach
in teaching of theology in ATESEA theological
schools.
iv)
Ongoing faculty
development should be given due consideration
in developing expertise in the concerned
areas mentioned in the guidelines,
v)
Ensure proper
resourcing is done in libraries to enable
meaningful academic research, reflection
and articulation on current and relevant
issues.
vi)
AJT/ATESEA Publications
should be encouraged to take the above guidelines
into consideration and reflect the spirit
of the same guidelines in their publications.
vii)
Efficient efforts
must be undertaken so that ATESEA member
schools and Asian theologians take the ideals
of the guidelines seriously in theological
education, reflection and construction.