Biblical and Theological Reflections in This Volume
The authors of this volume share a commitment to Scripture as God’s Word and recognize that their reading is always from and to a particular place, time, and cultural matrix. Contextualization is inherent in the affirmation that Scripture is truly God’s Word that is spoken in human words. The biblical scholars who speak in these pages—Zakali Shohe, Hua Wei, Samuel Ngewa, and René Padilla—all reflect on the biblical text in concert with their particular Sitz im Leben (situation in life), which gives rise to fresh questions and insights regarding the Spirit’s work as witnessed in the Word. The theologians from the Majority World—Ivan Satyavrata, David Ngong, and Oscar García-Johnson—as well the Asian American scholar Amos Yong who is the author of the opening chapter, all attend to the theological heritage from the West but recognize that the emphases and formulations developed there are not fully adequate to address the theological necessities of their communities. In other words, both the biblical scholars and theologians in this volume are connected deeply with Scripture and the tradition, but they also dialogue extensively with their context and their cultures. All theology, and all biblical studies, is contextual. We may embrace this fact without severing ourselves from Scripture or tradition. Indeed, the insights the authors present benefit the whole church since they are vital contributions to a genuinely catholic theology. Theology through the centuries has always been contextual. While we may read the ABCs of theology—Augustine, Barth, and Calvin—we always need to recognize that the theological alphabet ends with WYZ—Wei, Yong, and Zakali. And so it must be this side of the eschaton since now we know in part, awaiting that day when we will know even as we are fully known. Dimly reflected revelation will give way to face-to-face clarity (1 Cor. 13:9–12). Until that time we need one another, the voices of brothers and sisters through the centuries, and those that come to all of us from around the globe. We always get by with a little help from our friends. A few notes about each of the authors and chapters may help as you read along the grain of their concerns and questions that are related to the context of their reading and reflection.
Amos Yong is a familiar voice to anyone reading in the area of contemporary pneumatology. In his chapter he briefly surveys both the Western and Eastern Orthodox traditions regarding the Spirit before providing an overview of some Majority World pneumatology. The brilliance of Yong’s chapter is that he ties the traditions together with global developments while, at the same time, reflecting on their connection with the Nicene Creed. Of particular interest is his emphasis on life through the Spirit and its implications for our understanding of God’s agency in creation. He stands, along with Majority World theologians, in opposition to Enlightenment-inspired dualism that would want to preserve a sharp divide between spirit and matter. His concern is to show “the immanence of the divine breath within the fabric of created materiality.” In this he speaks as an Asian American theologian.
Ivan Satyavrata brings us into the heart of pneumatological reflection from India. In a world where the influence of advaitic Hinduism is pervasive, he takes pains to underscore that the Holy Spirit should not be “confused with the human spirit,” or be viewed as “an impersonal, immanent force.” He closely links the Holy Spirit with Christ—he is the Spirit of Christ. The themes here are familiar to anyone reading the fathers, but the turn comes in his dialogue between the biblical witness and the “personalist bhakti strand within Hinduism,” which he sees as offering “much more promise for Christian contextual engagement in India.” In other words, he finds resonances between the early Christian emphasis on the personality of the Spirit and a devotional strain within Hinduism. As he says, “the Holy Spirit is a means by which God makes his personal presence felt among his people, the church, the community of the Spirit.” He ties his argument up with Christology in stating, “the ultimate purpose of the Spirit’s ‘floodlight’ ministry is to mediate the presence of the risen Christ, and to create and deepen an awareness of the reality of Jesus in human experience.” His emphasis on personal relation and Christology melds historic theological orthodoxy with contextual insights. The seriousness with which he takes cultural influences derived from Hinduism in his theological reflection is characteristic of much Majority World theology. Cultural perspectives can be both critiqued and affirmed in this dance with Scripture and tradition.
Zakali Shohe writes from the Indian context as well, with special attention to Nagaland in Northeast India. She examines the role of the Spirit in Romans 8:14–17 from a relational perspective and draws out the significance of this passage for both Christians and society in India. The Spirit allows the believer to use the filial address “Abba Father,” thus identifying all believers as co-heirs with Christ. For her, life in the Spirit is not about power but relationship. This Spirit-inspired relationship is a manifestation of the eschatological unity of God’s people. Relationship and unity inspired by the Spirit lead to acceptance of the other. But Shohe is not content to stop at the doors of the church. While understanding that the church has not lived up to its full reality in the Spirit, she boldly states that, as unified community, “the church as an institution needs to be a model of openness by taking initiative in bridge building and creating platforms for meeting points.” In other words, the church is an eschatological sign to the wider community and this relationality is part of Christian witness and social renewal. Shohe sees a much broader role for the Spirit than personal piety and powerful evangelistic campaigns. Social hopes are tied to the Spirit’s work.
Wei Hua writes from a Chinese perspective on one of the enduring problems of Christianity in his country. How should Christians respond to the rites of ancestors and Confucius? After detailing the history of the controversy, Hua explains the meaning of these rites, understanding that they “have many dimensions, and these dimensions are clearly intertwined.” He vigorously denies that due reverence is the same as idolatry, which both Confucius and he reject. The surprise in his chapter comes as he examines 1 Corinthians 8–10, where Paul reflects on the practice of eating meat offered to idols. May one participate in these rites? Hua proposes that the answer Paul gives is not a simple “Yes” or “No,” as even a casual reading of 1 Corinthians reveals. This biblical reflection undergirds his discussion of the rites issue. Hua does not simply present a facile comparison between China and Corinth. He understands within Christian practice, both then and now, a fulfillment and renewal of culture. Thus, he concludes, “Just as the Jewish law had been fulfilled in the power of the Spirit by Gentile Christians, and the Roman customs had been renewed in Paul’s time, so also the Chinese commemorating rights can be renewed and obeyed by Chinese Christians as ‘humanizing’ etiquette (li) in the power of the Holy Spirit, who moves and works through all believers.” Hua, as other Majority World biblical scholars and theologians, is struggling and thinking deeply about how Christianity and culture can critically coexist so that the gospel becomes truly contextualized and is not seen as a foreign entity but as the fulfillment of hopes. His desire in the end is expressed in the final prayer: “May the Spirit of God help the global church in China not to be ‘Christianity in China,’ but to be Chinese Christianity.” He is able to get to this point because he understands that Christian identity is wrapped around the reception of the Holy Spirit. Christian koinonia is possible within a diverse community, one that includes Jews, Gentiles, and Chinese, without the dissolution of their cultures.
Samuel M. Ngewa brings his biblical expertise to bear on the work of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2, 8, 10, and 19. Like Shohe, he focuses on inclusion as he discusses the Spirit’s work among