Why Don’t We Hear Much from the Global Church?

William A. Dyrness 

Everyone by now is aware the global shift that has taken place in Christianity. Whereas in 1900, 80% of all Christians were Caucasian and 70% lived in Europe, today the situation is almost exactly reversed. More Christians worship in China than all of Europe; there are more Anglicans in Kenya than in the US and Canada combined, and so on. More importantly, because of globalization, these various groups do not exist in isolation but in increasingly complex relationships. They all participate in the transnational flows of people, goods, and ideas.

Yet despite this reality, and in the face of these transnational connections, the teaching of theology and the formation for ministry dominant in North American institutions is adapting very slowly to this new situation. It is safe to say that we theological educators are mostly not hearing much from what is sometimes called the majority church—and this is happening at precisely the time when North-South connections are more critical than they have ever been, and, ironically, given the Internet and email, more easily promoted.

Why is this so? Let me list very briefly a few of the reasons I think important.

1. We hear little from the majority world because the screen of western media and popular culture rarely lets voices from abroad be heard. The lopsided flow of information is almost entirely from North to South. For example in 2006 (according Bowker.com statistics) there were 292,000 books published in the U.S., of which 18,000 were religious titles. Compare this to 300 published in Kenya, of which 76 were religious and some 1200 in Nigeria, of which 203 were religious  (figures from 1994, 1995 the most recently available UNESCO statistics). And try ordering any of these books from Kenya or Nigeria—they are not available through Amazon!

2.  While we owe much to scholars like Philip Jenkins or Andrew Walls, they also illustrate the fact that voices from abroad, even when they are called to our attention, are mostly interpreted for us by western scholars. Andrew Walls, for example, focuses on historical factors that led to the expansion and growth of Christianity, rather than the theological (or ideological) impulses this represented. Try as we might the different voices escape us.

3.  Behind these factors lies what I think is the most important reason: the

formation we have experienced of the western self screens out too much. While there are significant differences between liberal and evangelical versions of Christianity in the West, in this respect there is a tacit agreement: western Christianity is indelibly shaped by the “liberal self,” in which the individual exists prior to and apart from society, so that the primary locus of religion is the individual.

In contrast, most places in the world experience the world in various pre-modern, modern, or even in some cases post-modern ways, and their churches are mostly untouched by this western liberal self. For them and for most people outside the West, community and relationship are pre-existent, involuntary, and constitutive (as Roberto Goizueta puts it). This means that actual relationships take precedence over abstract dogmatic declarations, whether these involve the physical form of the Virgin of Guadalupe in Mexico or the overwhelming presence of the Spirits in Africa.

           

So here is our problem: that which has determined our fundamental attitude toward truth and knowledge—the Enlightenment, simply does not exist for many people. This led the late Ogbu Kalu in his installation address a few years ago to the Luce Chair in World Christianity at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago to wonder: can real exchange be possible when western intellectual assumptions deny fundamental African beliefs about God and the spirits? As he put it: “Church historians who are in bondage to the tyranny of modern world  view and secular social-science models…collude by diminishing the geist of the profession and ignoring the miraculous and experiential dimensions [of the Church].”* How, he wonders, can intellectual exchange negotiate this difference?

           

There is much more to be said, about economic disparity and inequality for example, but this is enough to show that hearing from the other is not as easy, or as pleasant as we sometimes wish it could be. It leads us to ask: How might we work to change this situation?

*Ogbu Kalu, Clio in a Sacred Garb: Essays on Christian Presence and African Response, 1900-2000 (Trenton NJ: Africa World Press, 2008), 16.

**William A. Dyrness is professor of Theology and Culture at Fuller Theological seminary, co-editor (with V. M. Kärkkäinen) of Global Dictionary of Theology: A Resource for the Worldwide Church (IVP Academic 2008). A longer version of this essay was given at the Ministry Conference at the University of Chicago Divinity School, May 1, 2009, and has been published in Fuller’s Theology, News and Notes, Fall, 2011.

Teaching Theology in a Global Context

William A. Dyrness

Dwight N. Hopkins

Kwok Pui-lan

Dwight N. Hopkins

Despite the evident globalization of Christianity and the increasingly diverse character of our congregations and students, the pedagogy of teaching theology has not changed to address the new global situation.

Theological education in the U.S. has become a transnational enterprise. As a result, theological schools have sought to make their curricula responsive to the growing ethnic diversity of their students. Courses have been added on culture and ethnicity; history and ministry courses have included more diverse material; and many students and faculty have lived and/or traveled abroad. But up to this point the pedagogy within theology courses has not changed much.

More importantly, it has yet to engage constructively with the diversity of theological traditions both inside and outside of the U.S. As a result, students have come away feeling the tension between their experience and traditional pedagogies. Meanwhile, growing conversations, like those centered on comparative theology (and philosophy) and postcolonial theology, offer significant resources that have yet to be explored.  



Kwok Pui-lan

In the past two decades, there has been a growing body of literature on global theology and the construction of theological doctrines, such as creation and trinity, from an intercultural or global perspective. One particular volume talks about the importance of shaping a “global theological mind” so that students can be better prepared to be leaders and ministers in this increasingly interconnected world.

But a review of the 18 syllabi posted in the Syllabus Project of the American Academy of Religion in the category Theology (Christian) shows that except for the course on “Jesus across Cultures,” the other syllabi indicate: (1) there is little emphasis on the global nature of theology and the growing body of literature on the subject, (2) the majority of required texts are written by white European and Euro-American male theologians, (3) none or only one required text is by a theologian outside North America, usually from Latin America, such as Gustavo Gutiérrez or Leonardo Boff, and (4) there is minimal acknowledgment of the contribution of the work of racial and ethnic minority scholars in the United states.

William A. Dyrness

Theology is a longstanding discipline and occupies a central place in the theological curriculum. The ways that teachers approach the subject will shape the cultural ethos of the school and educational experience of students. William A. Dryness, Dwight N. Hopkins, and Kwok Pui-lan gathered a group of theologians and ethicists from Catholic, Protestant Mainline, Pentecostal, and Evangelical traditions from November 21-22, 2011 to discuss strategies of teaching theology in a global world.

We discussed some of these questions:

·         What developments in western theology have raised questions that cannot be answered by western theologians alone? For example, perhaps the intense attention to worship renewal and liturgical history, or the growth of the field of comparative theology offers bridges by which theological questions can be approached in non-traditional ways.

·         Where today are connections being made by Christians and people of faith from multiple settings that might have potential for raising (new) theological questions? (e.g., refugees, immigrant congregations, faith-based development programs, etc.).

·         Where do we find sources to teach global theology? Where do we go (figuratively) to listen? Who do we listen to and who are conversation partners for developing global theology? Books and articles are part of it, but that is only the start. What are the sources locally: students in our classes and ethnic enclaves in our cities, etc? Online resources? Study centers? Global networks?

·         What are the strategies of changing the theological curriculum as a whole to respond to our global context? How can we solicit support from colleagues who teach in traditional ways? How can we change institutional structures and ethos when we are not tenured? How can we form allies?

Members of the group hope to work toward a book to offer some answers to these questions and will share our insights along the way in this blog. We welcome your ideas and suggestions.

* William A. Dyrness is Professor of Theology and Culture at Fuller Theological Seminary. Dwight N. Hopkins is Professor of Theology at the University of Chicago Divinity School. Kwok Pui-lan is William F. Cole Professor of Christian Theology and Spirituality at the Episcopal Divinity School.