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

InsightsThe 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: crigby@austinseminary.edu 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: atla@atla.com; 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
W 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 noth-
ing 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 chal-
lenges. This issue works to articulate exactly how we benefit from and how we are con-
fronted 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 point-
edly 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 Chris-
tians 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 suprema-
cy. Finally, Lameck Banda, Zambian pastor and emerging theologian, invites us to con-
sider what globalization looks like from the perspective of African contexts.
This issue also features an interview in which Dr. Jensen discusses (1) what Chris-
tian 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 regu-
larly featured pastors’ panel, Christine Eaton Blair and Laura Taylor de Palomino dis-
cuss 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 sup-
port 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.
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 I NTERPRETATION
OF 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 bor-
ders, to shape the revolution that is tearing down barriers and building new net-
works 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 global-
ization 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 bom-

W barded 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. Per-
haps 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

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 Work-
group 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 intercon-
nected 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 cul-
tural 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 histor-
ical examples.) What is new in this century, however, is the increased speed and intri-
cacy 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 dis-
ruption 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 glob-
al 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 con-
clusion to Matthew’s gospel offers but one example of Christian globalism: “Go there-
fore 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 com-
manded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Mt. 28:19-
20). 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, more-
over, 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 glob-
alization 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
M 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 oth-
ers. We assume, for example, that there is always room for one more baptized person at

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, hunger-
ing, 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 cul-
ture. 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 essen-
tial 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 Vati-
can. 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 indi-
vidual containers that resist sharing, of a maddening rush to the counter, of empty calo-
ries 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 homo-
geneous 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 intercon-
nectedness. 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, there-
fore, 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 assump-
T tions. 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 compara-
tive 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 hun-
gry 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 suppli-
ers are gained at the lowest cost, and often farmers have little recourse. Lose McDon-
ald’s as a customer and one can lose one’s livelihood. The intricacy of this global sup-
ply 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 won-
der 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 glob-
al 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. Twen-
ty-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 well-
off have continued to grow richer, while those left in the slow lanes of the global eco-
nomic 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 lev-
els of personal debt. If we assume scarcity and hoard our meals—even in abundant
times—we can never have enough.

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, every-
day 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 bless-
ings; 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 abun-
dance 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
I 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 region-
al 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 hap-
piness, for at this meal no others are welcomed. If the Eucharist presents a banquet

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 stip-
ulates 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 con-
sumer 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 “cheeseburg-
er” 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 expe-
rience, 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 con-
victions? Something of the richness of our response to God’s gifts at table is lost when-
ever 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 muf-
fling of praise poured out at Pentecost.
Cultural homogeneity is shunned in Christian practices of table fellowship. Con-
sider 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 participa-
tion 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 bap-
tized 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 stan-
dard 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 iden-
tity. 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 con-
vinced 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) rela-
tivizes 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 lan-
guage 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 incar-
C nation 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-glob-
al 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 dis-
appear, 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
meal that we celebrate and share with the world. i

10
 Jensen

NOTES
1. In constructing this definition, I have relied on selected definitions of globalization gath-
ered 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 “devel-
oping 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 glob-
alization is that environmental pollution and catastrophe now are perceived on a world-
wide 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 inter-
connectedness; 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 mat-
ter 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 rela-
tionship 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 sus-
tain 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 describ-
ing. 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 global-
ization?
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 giv-
ing 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 jus-
tice 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 provid-
ed 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, giv-
ing sanctuary to people who are illegal aliens. It seems to me that they are insist-
ing, 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 Chris-
tian 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 overabun-
dance 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
world. i

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
D seemed? Do you remember looking at the horizon and feeling it stretch away infi-
nitely 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

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 post-
doctoral 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 con-
nected 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 pro-
found 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 jus-
tice—in other words, justice within the human realm—had to be linked to my long-
standing 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 reve-
lation 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 ser-
vice 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 globaliza-
tion.
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 dif-
ference 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 eco-
logical 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
I 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 corpo-
rate-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 unique-
ly 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 orga-
nizations, 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 cap-
ital 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 mes-
sage 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

18
 Parker

Alliance of Reformed Churches launched a similar challenge to the project of econom-

ic globalization. Drawing upon a Reformed tradition invoked only during times of seri-
ous crisis, the General Council called member churches to enter into a processus confes-
sionis, 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 eco-
logical sanity) also required saying “no” to a prevailing economic system that is becom-
ing 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 ten-
dencies of the dominant form of globalization. According to the 24th General Council:
As we look at the negative consequences of globalization for the most vulner-
able 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 mili-
tary 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 sover-
eign 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 glob-
al 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 sover-
eignty over life and acts contrary to God’s just rule.6
To Christians in industrialized nations, the language of empire may seem inflam-
matory 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 catastro-
I phes of ecological destruction, increasing poverty and disease, and spiraling inequal-
ity, 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 dis-
tribution 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 “oth-
erkind” 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
all creation, demands no less. i

NOTES
1. Larry Rasmussen, Earth Community, Earth Ethics (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1996): 98-
103.
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 Gener-
al 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

O 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 gen-
erated 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

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 Conversa-
tion with Jürgen Habermas (University Press of America, 2006), We Will Get to
the Promised Land: Martin Luther King Jr.’s Communal-Political Spirituality (Pil-
grim 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 particu-
lar 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 internation-
al 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 interdepen-
dence, 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 culpabil-
ity 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 gov-
ernment’s close political alignment with the Christian Coalition and Christian funda-
mentalists 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 nation-
state becomes just one of many locals; it can no longer behave as a self-sufficient, all-
encompassing 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 rela-
tional. 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 signifi-
cance 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 com-
munity 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 mutu-
ally 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 mis-
sion 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.
For me, it is a wonderful time to be trinitarian. i

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 Univer-
sity 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
I 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 short-
est 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”? Inas-
much 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 press-
ing 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.

DUAL-FACETED AMBIGUITY
ow then is globalization ambiguous? The ambiguity lies in the fact that the cur-
H rent 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

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 Presbyter-
ian 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 expe-
riencing 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, Zam-
bia, 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 elect-
ed 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 global-
ization” 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 prof-
its 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 indi-
viduals are aiming at individual prosperity. The relations of the community are neglect-
ed 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 unem-
ployment 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 illus-
trate this point, I offer this example. Our son, Naphtali, knows more about the opera-
tions 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 respi-
ration, 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 hap-
pening 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 globaliza-
tion? 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 con-
A textualization. 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 con-
sider 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 ambi-
guity 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 contex-
tual theology has to make the theological heritage a reality in the ambiguity of global-
ization. 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 her-
itages 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 con-
text 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 syn-
cretism. 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 dis-
parity 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

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 ambigui-
H ty 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 consider-
ation 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 the-
ology must reflect the trueness of the gospel of God’s own self-disclosure in
Jesus Christ as attested in scripture.
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 experi-
ences 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 the-
ology 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 influ-
ence the African continent. An African contextual theologian should be con-
versant with what is going on in the world and how these events are impact-
ing 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 inter-
act with other theologies to enrich, evaluate, cross-examine, dialogue, venti-
late, 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 theol-
ogy should involve other non-theological disciplines such as sociology, eco-

28
 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,
G 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 frame-
work if they are to successfully, effectively, and efficiently face and address the chal-
lenges posed by the global scenario. i

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 Cre-
ation 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 com-
ing 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 wel-
come 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 lis-
tened 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 anti-
immigrant attitudes in people around them. We are able to benefit from a wider vari-
ety 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 grap-
ple 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 differ-
ences 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 funda-
mental 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 Offer-
ings, 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 will-
ingness to try new things and patience in learning new ways. We realize that not every-
one 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 bar-
rage of news and information at our fingertips, I believe we still lack a lot of apprecia-
tion of how people live and think around the world in other cultural settings. As Chris-
tians, 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 Chris-
tian 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 eco-
nomic 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 dis-
astrous 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 possi-
bly do to make a difference?” To remember that acting on a local level has an impor-
tant 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, does-
n’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 broad-
er 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, fam-
ily 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 for-
mer 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
the rich multi-cultural resources we share. i

33
REQUIRED READING
Books recommended by Austin Seminary faculty
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.
Ifindncalled
the theological discipline
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
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, text-
to-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 mini-
course 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.
 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 ten-
unit 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.
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
B in The Struggle to
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
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 5-
Origen, 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
 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 8-
John Chrysostom, chapter 9-Cyril of
Alexanderia, chapter 10-Théodoret of Cyprus,
chapter 11-Thomas Aquinas, chapter 12-
Nicholas of Lyra, chapter 13-Martin Luther,
chapter 14-John Calvin, chapter 15-
Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-century
Interpreters, chapter 16-The Nineteenth and
Twentieth Centuries, and chapter 17-
Postmodern 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
36
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
Christ. i
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

O 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 Thurs-
day morning we visited Casa del Migrante, adjacent to the Roman Catholic church, a

Arun W. Jones is associate professor of mission and evangelism at Austin Sem-

inary. 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: Episco-
palians 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 shel-
ter, 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 con-
fidence 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 Chris-
tians 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 Christian-
ity 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, Christ-
ian 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 pro-
viding 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 dis-
ciples 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 princi-
ples and ecclesiological structures that propel them into intercultural and internation-
al 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 transna-
tional 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 indi-
genized. 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 Protes-
tants 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 impe-
rialism, 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 pro-
vided by strictly political and economic interests in the West. Let me give two exam-
ples.
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-propagat-
ing, 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-west-
ern 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 yel-
low 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 remark-
able 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 sal-
vation, 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 num-
ber 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 develop-
ment of their own Christian communities, we should not forget that this was done in
conversation and often cooperation with western Christians, most frequently repre-
sented 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 Chris-
tians in Reynosa, the four Doctor of Ministry students have returned to their congre-
gations to experiment with new ministry and mission in their own churches and con-
texts. Two of these experiments (we call them doctoral projects) have to do with reach-
ing 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 vital-
ity 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 engage-
ment once again in cross-cultural, transnational Christianity. i

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 Voca-
tion and the Ministry” in Andrew F. Walls, The Missionary Movement in Christian History (Mary-
knoll: 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 J Carter King III

Karen C. Anderson Michael L. Lindvall
Thomas L. Are Jr. Catherine O. Lowry
Susan Beaird Blair R. Monie
F. M. Bellingrath III Virginia L. Olszewski
Dianne E. Brown B. W. Payne
Cassandra C. Carr William C. Powers Jr.
Peggy L. Clark Cheryl Covey Ramsey
James G. Cooper Sydney F. Reding
Marvin L. Cooper Max R. Sherman
Elizabeth Blanton Flowers Jerry Jay Smith
Donald R. Frampton John L. Van Osdall
Richard D. Gillham Sallie Sampsell Watson
Walter Harris Jr. Hugh H. Williamson III
Bruce G. Herlin Judy A. Woodward
Lydia Hernandez

Trustees Emeriti
Clarence N. Frierson, Stephen A. Matthews, Edward D. Vickery
 Non-Profit
Organization
U.S. Postage
100 East 27th Street PAID
Austin, Texas
Austin, TX 78705-5797 Permit No. 2473

www.austinseminary.edu

Address Service Requested

Spring 2007