History
group in STM, Malaysia
by Excom, Jakarta
schools for feedback
Excom, Sabah
Senate in Manila
Golden Jubilee, Singapore
Preamble
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 the ATESEA and the 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 the 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 the 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.”
(Report on Rethinking the Critical Asian Principle, ATESEA Members Schools Myanmar, 2005/2006)
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 to:
- 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 the religion of the colonial masters (Philippine Area Committee’ Report. * Revisiting the Critical Asian Principle, Philippines).
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.
The four principles of CAP are too general and do not specifically address modern day challenges.
The 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.
The CAP merely offers a general framework, without saying anything specific about the principles or application methodology. Hence it is seen to be descriptive and lacking in a clear theological perspective.
Since the principles are general in nature, the CAP lacks clear direction for doing theology and teaching theology in Asia. The original CAP is inadequate to provide interaction with contemporary issues such as globalization, global empire building, ecological and gender justice issues.
A lack is also noted in the areas of pastoral, ministerial and spiritual formation.
FROM BANGKOK TO SINGAPORE – A LONG JOURNEY OF CHANGES
As noted in the keynote 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.” (Huang Po Ho: Covenant with the Churches in Asia – Retargeting Theological Education in Responding to the Life and Death Struggles of the People of Asia – ATESEA General Assembly Meeting, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2005). Since the ‘changing context’ is the key factor which induced the reassessment of the effectiveness, functionality and suitability of the 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:
Religious Fundamentalism
Gender Justice Issues
Ecological Problems, Disease and Disasters
Globalization and Global Empire Building
Colonization
Spirituality
Identity and Power Struggle
Peoples’ Movements and Ecumenism
In a Christian minority and multi- denominational context enhancing ecumenical unity and cooperation is vital. In seeking to fulfil 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’) (Wilfred J Samuel, Review of the Critical Asian Principle –Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore Region, 2006). 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 intra faith and interfaith dialog in order to promote peace, healing and reconciliation.
Information and Technological Change and Challenges
Social Challenges
Reclaiming Indigenous Identity and Minority Rights
GUIDELINES IN DOING THEOLOGIES IN ASIA
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.” (Report on Rethinking Critical Asian Principle, Eastern Indonesia Area). Theologies in Asia must be authentically Asian in its content, shape and processes. Thus we propose the following guidelines. Theological education should promote:
- Responsive engagement with the diverse Asian contexts;
- Critical engagement with indigenous cultures and wisdom for the preservation and sustenance of life;
Reflective engagement with the sufferings of the Asian people in order to provide hope for the marginalized, women, indigenous people, children, differently-abled people and migrant workers; - Restoring the inter-connectedness of the whole creation;
- Interfaith dialogue as well as intra faith communion and communication for the fullness of life and the well-being of the society;
- Enhancing capacity building in order to serve people experiencing disaster, conflict, and disease as well as those people who suffer physical, emotional, and mental disabilities;
- 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:
- ATESEA accreditation criteria (notation) should be revised to incorporate the above requirements.
- The ATESEA member schools and the SEAGST should reflect the spirit of the above guidelines in their curriculum, ways of teaching and training programs.
- The ATESEA member schools should adopt an inter-disciplinary approach and avoid the departmental approach in teaching of theology.
- Ongoing faculty development should be given due consideration in developing expertise in the concerned areas mentioned in the guidelines.
- The ATESEA member schools should ensure that proper re-sourcing is done in libraries to enable meaningful academic research, reflection and articulation on current and relevant issues.
- The AJT/ATESEA publications should be encouraged to take the above guidelines into consideration and reflect the spirit of the same guidelines in their publications.
- Efficient efforts must be undertaken so that the ATESEA member schools and Asian theologians take the ideals of the guidelines seriously in theological education, reflection and construction.