Theology and Ministry Trendsetters of the 21st Century

The 21^st century needs ministers and theologians who are fully consumed with the passion of God for the lost and for His kingdom. They are trendsetters in vision, commitment, and compassion whose goals and characters match their call to set ablaze the way for excellence and glory of God. The world does not need more jargons that do not speak to the church and theories in theology that cannot contribute to the propagation of God’s kingdom in this world. Theological preoccupation that does not envision the fulfillment of Christ’s Great Commission is empty, vanity—a toiling under the sun without meaning. Evangelism and missions are fully in need of continuing in its theologically sound foundation whereby it is tasked to be faithful to Christ’s commission. Any concerns not promoting the worship of God and compassion for the lost are misplaced priorities and mislaid efforts to do God’s ministry. Hence, a person fully committed to God—and is focused and persevering in the God-given vision in lined with the missions of the church to the world—is what the this century needs. The kinds of person who will set the blaze ahead of others are those who are not content with mediocrity and the status quo, but catch the vision, the empowerment of God’s Spirit, and the attitude to meet the demands of the post-modern urbanization whereby God’s kingdom advances among receptive people.

So, the world needs ministry trendsetters whose visions are not confined to their own selfish desires and agendas, but is big enough to contain the uttermost parts of the world where God commands the church to go and make disciples. The world needs trendsetters who visualize the inevitable from beyond. They foresee the potentiality of global urbanization and strategic positioning of prospective local churches which are able to reach out the unreached people groups and maximize their effectivity on establishing culturally relevant ministries and mission points. They are trendsetters in a truest sense for they cannot just fold their hands from afar and watch the ministry in plateau and decline. Instead, they strive to go and learn, expose and expand, grow and change towards the new paradigm.

Therefore, the world need not people who have no moral authority and intellectual authenticity of their own for it is fed up with superficial spirituality, ineffective structures, and systems that demean the church’s mission unto the world’s ends. God is molding trendsetters who—like Paul strategically fulfilled the Great Commission—despite that most leaders were content in sitting in their own Jerusalem, not minding the known world. And now is the time for a borderless expansion of doing theology in various contexts and ministry settings.

Heibert's Thoughts On Cultural Anthropology

Worldviews are integral in doing contextual theology. Some of Paul Hiebert's ideas below maybe of help in the shape of theological method.

Political Organization. All people groups and societies include organization regarding political decision-making. Stabling political goals, authority, distribution of resources, duties, rewards, and social control constitutes responsibilities of the government (336-38). There are at least four types of governments: 1) Stateless societies among tribes, bands, and kinship groups; 2) States covering chiefs, monarchies, nations states; 3)Colonial governments linked with British politics; and 4)International governments (339-49). Any anthropological witness deals with the complex elements of societal leadership, power, control, manipulation, and the relationship between politics and government. It is governments that provide “the norms and structures for political activities,” but people’s behavior does not essentially mean compliance to the norms (352).

Worldviews. Natures of reality and ethics are basic assumptions of every worldviews. Such “existential postulations” can be implied (and taken for granted) or explicit. It is the peoples’ worldviews that order and give meaning to human existence and experiences (335-57). Worldviews vary; American worldview is poles apart to Indian worldview. American worldview is characterized with absolutes, naturalism, linear view of time, order and immutability, knowledge, particularistic and categorized world, equality, individualism, and competition. Indian worldviews is opposite; they believe in relativism, supernaturalism, cyclical view of time, mutability and unpredictability, wisdom, unit of all things, hierarchy, specialization and interdependence, patron-client relationship, and karma or cosmic law (358-60). Worldviews deals with methodology, philosophy, and ethics in all its complexities since there is no unified worldview in the world. Every culture has distinct worldviews. With the increasing international current of culture, idiosyncrasies are still present and cannot be ignored (369).

Religious Beliefs and Practices. It includes rituals and symbols as an expression of specific belief that explains the world. Meaning of rituals and symbols is tied in the context of the culture. Supernatural processes differ in their meaning and sometimes their relationship to humans is ambiguous. Even the attitudes of practitioners to rituals vary; sometimes, the same practitioner performing different rituals has different behavior towards to the diverse object of ritual expression. Hence religious beliefs and practices cannot be stereotyped; it must be dealt specifically. More often, the disintegration of culture is caused by the religious systems’ failure to satisfy and maintain the needs of the people. Any religious figure bearing higher explanatory systems can be a factor of change or transformation when the people are converted from their failing explanatory system (372-94).

Expressive Culture. Aesthetic senses are part of human nature. Inclined towards the appreciation and enjoyment of pleasure, excitement, and beauty, expressive culture contributes to “the meaning and satisfaction of life” (408). Through art and entertainment, values and ideas of culture finds expression and symbolism of itself. The combination of form and meaning is usually inseparable. Hence, arts and entertainment conveys the human feelings and ideas of a certain culture towards another society (400-07).

---

[1] Paul Heibert, Cultural Anthropology (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincot Company, 1976), 335-410.

Old Testament Bases for the Contemporary Concept of the Ministry

Revelation is the well-spring of theology. Let's take a journey in reflecting the role of prophets in the process of God's disclosure of himself through the gift of prophetic ministry.

There are three foci in this report concerning the Old Testament bases of contemporary Christian ministry. It includes the ministry of the prophets, the priests, and the wise of Israel. From these three distinct traditions, present ministries can learn something for the advancement of important aspects of current ministry.

The Prophets and the Prophetic Imagination. The focus of Abraham J. Heschel’s first chapter, book The Prophets: An Introduction, is to answer the question: What manner of man is the prophet? According to him, primarily God’s prophet has a deep sensitivity concerning the various forms of evil. For example, Israel has been unfaithful to God and the prophets dealt it with strong opposition. His words are marked with violent feeling towards the callousness of God’s people. This fierce feeling is believed to be coming from God. In Heschel’s words:

The prophet is a man who feels fiercely. God has thrust a burden upon his soul, and he is bowed and stunned at man’s fierce greed. Frightful is the agony of man; no human voice can convey its full terror. Prophecy is the voice that God has lent to the silent agony, a voice to the plundered poor, to the profaned riches of the world. It is a form of living, a crossing point of God and man. God is raging in the prophet’s words.(AH,5)

Hence, the prophet is very concerned with the “plight of man” as a reflection of God’s preoccupation with man more than any eternal ideas. In spite of man’s rebellious tendencies and actions, nothing—whether bad of good—is trivial before God. With the prophet’s words, God expresses his concern with man. And in the language of the prophet, his words are not just violent expressions, but it reveals an artistic capacity of a poet. The emotional tone, imaginative concepts, vocal dictions, verbal cadence, and oral or literary style portray an explosive passion cultivated from tranquil recollection and reflection. Nevertheless, his poetic tendencies do not outshine his historical concerns.(AH,3-6) Poetry and lyric, therefore, are essential characteristics of a prophet (WB2,40).

The prophet of God is identified with his words and involvement in the community. Hence, his whole life is at stake upon his prophetic utterances and the fulfillment of his pronouncements. Although his language is explosively paradoxical—a mixture of firmness and contingency, harshness and compassion—it is barely enigmatic; it’s beckoning, warning, and urging; it comes from God’s heart wanting to break through man’s center of inner being. As the prophet casts events, he preaches with burning passion, communicating the sharp-edges of God’s terror (Isa. 32:11; 49:2). Generally, the prophet’s words are intense, disturbing, and full of strained feelings. However, in spite that his words usually contradicted with the status quo of popular opinions, his seemingly pessimism is bound to be concerned with the highest good of the people; that is to know God (Jer. 9:23-24; Zech. 4:6) and not the valuation of worldly wisdom, wealth, and power. Because of the prophet’s uncanny to perceive the worst in any moral circumstances of the state, his language amplify man’s weaknesses and guilt; and he makes no excuses or apologies for his prophetic utterances. What ordinary people were attuned to see, the prophet visualizes beyond; what is commonly known at present, the prophet perceives the end (Jer. 4:23-26). Where man’s conscience ceases, the prophet’s words burned without melody and pretension (AH,6-10).

To some, the prophet’s words seemed blasphemous, irreverent, and sacrilegious, especially when he challenges “the apparently holy, revered, and awesome. Beliefs cherished as certainties, institutions endowed with supreme sanctity, he exposes as scandalous pretensions.”(AH,10) Because of the his awareness towards the negative tendencies of religion—which is to distort God’s demand on man—the prophet is concerned with the people’s way of worship and religious practices (Jer.6:20;7:9-15,21-23). The prophet does not only oversee the people’s lifestyle in worship of one God, he is also deeply associated with God. Among the pagans, the status, survival, and strength of the god or gods are dependent upon the worshiping people. Once the shrine is destroyed by the enemies, the cult practitioners do not hesitate to commit suicide. In the case of defeat in battles, the defeated tribal images of the gods are also smashed. However, most Israelite prophets consider God’s enemies as instruments of his anger and judgment towards his people (Isa.10:15;13:5;5:26;7:18;8:7;Jer.25:4;27:6;43:10). (AH,10-12)

The prophets of God usually begin with the message of doom, but it also end with a message of hope. Foundational to this message of hope is God’s love and compassion for mankind. Unlike the common notion that the prophet’s primary role is to predict, prediction is only a fraction of his authority (Deut.18:22;Isa.41:22;43:9). His main function as a prophet is to exhort God’s people concerning the here and now. Whatever he utters about the future, it is not spoken in isolation of the present. Interestingly, the prophet’s allegations to the people do not condemn the individual alone; there are sweeping generalizations that cover no particular group, instead the whole community, society, or nation is accused (Jer.5:1,5;6:13; 8:10;6:6;Hos.4:1-2;Isa.1:4;30:1;6:5). Unlike the great Roman orators, they exercise to single out individuals and their abuses, the prophet’s cavalier pronouncements knows no personal boundaries, whether the accused are kings, priests, false prophets, and the whole nation. While the prophets would despise the logic of statistics, their concern is not mere identification of facts, but the factuality’s meaning. For the prophet, there is no such thing as statistical formula in measuring the mysterious human nature and true existence. Most of the prophets perceive man in God’s perspective (AH,12-14).

The prophets employ rhetorical exaggeration (a mode of writing common to biblical literature). Consequently, while there are only a handful of guilty individuals, all people are eventually responsible. When the people of God worshiped Baalim, God felt discarded and alone (Hos.11:1-2). Despite that only some of the people worshiped, the whole nation suffered. Hence, the prophets proclaimed a truth about the moral state of God’s people which is: and individual’s crime is the society’s responsibility, since the society plays a vital role in shaping an individual. The person cannot be separated from his society. And not only that, the prophet of God does consider gray areas and middle ground. It is possible, therefore, that prophets are extremists, one-sided, and strange. His strong inclination to mend man’s ways pushes him into the presence of God. Being alone is not in his vocabulary because he always recognizes God’s presence with him. To disregard that divine-human companionship is an act of insolent rejection of the relationship; hence, a way of life compatible to the realness of God’s presence is a primary task to accomplish. It is because man’s coexistence with his God determines not only the inter-relationship and companionship but the direction his is life and mankind’s history as a whole. God’s presence for the prophet is a perpetual demand, not a comfort zone. His message is loaded with God’s compassion in spite the fact that his predictions can be proven incorrect; it is because man can change his mind and action. While the prophet’s prediction may fail because of man’s (or people’s) repentance, there is one thing that will never fail: God’s compassion reveals an impeccable reality from heaven (AH,14-16).

The prophet challenges religious and political authorities with his prophetic words. This is not merely to overcome moral and spiritual callousness or to change and inner person, his intention also includes the revolutionary redirection of history. As such, to be a true prophet is embarrassing because when the proclamation necessitates the threat of disaster and death upon the people of the nation, the community would hate to hear anything other than cheerful words of peace and prosperity, self-reliance and confidence, optimism and victory. It is possible that the true prophet’s words may remain unimposing that soon the calloused people and hierarchy would forget (at least for a moment). It is also true that the prophet’s predictions of things to come do not validate his words; just like the miracles, they are not at their disposal. In fact, only a few of the miracles attributed to the prophets (1 Sam.12:18;Judg.6:36-40;1 Kings 18:36-38). It is because miracles are not probative for prophetic verification. Prophets are more identified and measured by their words and symbolic acts. While the call of being a prophet is noble, most prophets disdained it (Jer.20:14,17,18;15:15,17;20:29;Amos 5:10). Because of scorn, persecution, and reproach, prophets are usually alienated from priests and people, kings and commoner. His constant challenge to authorities and moral state of the nation is not, however, futile. Their lives and existence are significant for better or for worse (Ezek.2:6;3:8-9;2:4-5;3:27). Whether the people listen to their words or not, the responsibility is upon his shoulder, to declare the uttering faithfully (Ezec.33:6-7;3:16-22;Micah 3:8;Jer.2:19;25-3-7). To some extent, the life of the prophet is also a delight of the heart (Jer.15:16). (AH,16-19)

Biblically, the prophet is mainly concerned with the contemporary scenario of his time. By his words, he serves as an “assayer and tester” of the society’s ways (Jer.6:27), as well as a messenger of God (Hag. 1:13), a servant (Amos 3:7;Jer.25:4;26”5), and a watchman (Hos.9:8). According to Heschel, the prophet’s “ear is inclined to God. He is a person struck by the glory and presence of God, overpowered by the hand of God. Yet his true greatness is his true ability to hold God and man in a single thought.”(AH,21) Hence, a prophet usually feels that his relationship with others transcends with—not just above—his own community or other nations. His sense of his call is measured by the universal scope of his ministry, to shape history (Jer.1:5,10). As a messenger of God, he is more than just a tribal messenger because he stands in God’s presence (Jer.15:19) and in the council of the Lord (23:18). As a prophet of the Lord, God reveals his secrets to him (Amos 3:7), but he can dispute with God’s objective (7:2,3). (AH,20-22)

Prophetic consciousness is impossible to measure and comprehend. When God’s spirit radically metamorphosize a person, the degree of power cannot be measured as the person is turned into another man (1 Sam.10:6), defying normal human consciousness. The prophet’s ability to do pronouncements or predictions is beyond his capacity; it is not a product of learned skills, but of divine gifts and consecration (Ezec.3:25-27). Thus, he bears witness to the divine source of the word. Heschel says,

The words the prophet utters are not offered as souvenirs. His speech to the people is not a reminiscence, a report, hearsay. The prophet not only conveys; he reveals. He almost does unto others what God does unto him. In speaking, the prophet reveals God. This is the marvel of a prophet’s work: in his words, the invisible God becomes audible. He does not prove or argue. The thought he has to convey is more than language can contain. Divine power bursts in the words. The authority of the prophet is in the Presence his words reveal.”(AH,22)

So, the prophet’s greatness lies not only in his testimony but also on his experience with God’s judgment, compassion, and mercy.

It has been said that the true prophet’s predictions can be unproven. Partly, it is because of the presence of apparent contradictions (or paradox) on his asserted words. If laws of principles are applied to prophetic utterances, it seems that the validity of the prophet’s words can be destroyed or discredited. But otherwise is true. It must be remembered—as it has been mentioned from the beginning of this chapter—that the prophets are dealing with the relationship between God and man. And as such, the inevitability of contradictions is always possible. This kind of relationship is intricate and complex. Human nature and behavior cannot be stereotyped because of its complexities and contradictions, therefore, predictions related to that divine-human relationship cannot do away with contradictions also. The theory of truth as coherence is not found in the principle (the “what”) of the prophet’s words but on the Person (the “Whom”) he speaks for. As God is the ultimate object of the prophet’s consciousness, so is his final theme. His prophetic utterances have no comprehensive conclusiveness because it is “expressed ad hoc, often ad hominem, and must not be generalized.”(AH,23)

In the prophet’s perspective, “God is the focal point of his thought.”(AH,24). He sees the world through that focus, no less, no more. When a prophet thinks of man, he also thinks of God at the same time. He perceives man “through” God and wants to bring man into divine focus. The prophet judge, proclaims, and predicts from God’s point of view, not on some eternal moral standard. It is a clear indication that the God of Israel is not an impersonal spectator above, but he is deeply involved with meeting human need. The prophet’s words—as words of God—are not mere factual pronouncements but an expression of God’s motives, a disclosure of “divine pathos.” The pronouncements are reflections of God’s love and compassion, as well as pain and disappointment, indignation and mercy. According to Heschel, that divine pathos is “the key to inspired prophecy,” marked by God’s involvement with the life of man. God’s commands are not mere recommendations but an embodiment of his personal concern, intensified with all the contradictions involved in a personal relationship (AH,24).

Therefore, because the prophet responds to divine revelations, he is more than just a mouthpiece of God. The prophet is actively involved in the divine uttering, not an unconscious receptor. In transmitting what he perceives as of divine origin, he personally reproduces the words, acting as a partner of God, an associate. The prophet’s emotions are not suppressed by God but to be pursued with all of the prophet’s heart and mind (Jer.3:10;4:4,14;29:13) as God’s covenant will be etched in the people’s heart also (31:31-34).(AH,25) The prophet’s active response to God goes beyond just a religious experience, sensibility to God’s voice, or communion with God because—as in the case of Jeremiah—the divine pathos gripped his whole personality in that his words are not merely of his own but an express glow of the divine pathos. In Heschel’s words, the prophet is “in fellowship with the feelings of God.”(AH,26) The prophetic sympathy is cultivated through the prophet’s reflection, participation, and communion with divine consciousness. It is where the mind of the prophet is permeated with God’s heart. “Prophetic sympathy,” according to Heschel, “is a response to transcendent sensibility. It is not, like love, an attraction to the divine Being, but the assimilation of the prophet’s emotional life to the divine, an assimilation of function, not of being. The emotional experience of the prophet becomes the focal point for the prophet’s understanding of God. He lives not only his personal life, but also the life of God. The prophet hears God’s voice and feels his heart. He tries to impart the pathos of the message together with the logos. As an impartner [sic] his soul overflows, speaking as he does out of the fullness of his sympathy.”(AH,26)

The Priests and Levites. While prophets are more of an autonomous fiery preachers and poets, priesthood in OT is an institutional ministry. It is an established order. God’s union with his people is represented by the ministry of priesthood. As Israel is called to be a “kingdom of priests”, it also carries a call to be holy—a holiness based upon God’s holiness (Exod.19:6;Lev.11:44; Num.15:40). Etymologically, the word priest is derived from the Hebrew word kohen. Priesthood, however, is not an exclusive term for Israel. It is also used for non-Israelite order. The Bible applies it to the priests of the Egyptians (Gen.41:45,50;46:20; 47:26), Philistines (1 Sam.6:2), as well as the priests of Dagon (1 Sam.5:5), Baal (2 Kings 10:19), Baalim and Asherim ((2 Chro.34:5), and Chemose (Jer.48:7). The verb form of kohen is kahan which means “to stand”. This is where the idea of priesthood as standing before God as ministers or servants was taken. On the other hand, the term “Levites” denotes offspring of Levi, third son of Jacob. Levites could also mean someone who “attached” or “joined” himself (Num.18:2,4) of which other scholars believe that Levites are foreigners who attached themselves with the Israelites. Despite the fact that some scholars take the Levites as an “artificial tribe” serving with menial jobs, the biblical account support the idea that they are part of the twelve tribes of Israel coming from the Levi (Gen.34:25-30). (RA,877)

While it is true that the order of priesthood in Israel is an established institution, it does not neglect the nation as a whole in their special relationship as covenant people of God. Nevertheless, it is the priesthood that has the capacity to represent the people before God. Their theological and ministerial significance is based upon the duty they embody and the honor and privileges they carry upon their shoulder in behalf of the people. As priests of God and of the people, there is a high moral standard and spiritual principle they have to fulfill. They are to be conformed to the likeness of God since they are called to serve the Lord. They are representative of the people in their national and community worship. They are, therefore, expected to be pure and sanctified. They are required to serve God continually and maintained their ministry as representative of the people and the whole nation before the presence of God. Hence, the priests’ function is “to assure, maintain, and constantly re-establish the holiness of the elect people of God.” (RA,877-78) (See also Exod.28:38;Lev.10:17;Num.18:1) It is because the priests are the mediator between the Covenant maker and the covenant people (Mal.2:4;Num.18:19). Through the ministry of priesthood, the people have access to serve God and receive God’s blessings (Zech.3:1-5). There are at least three hierarchy of priesthood. First is the high priest in whom the whole of the priests and people is represented annually in the holy of holies for the atonement of sins (Exod.28:29). Second are the sons of Aaron in whom the people are represented in their sacrificial requirements. And thirdly, the Levites; they are responsible in the temple services. They serve as replacements of the firstborn child (who belong to God by his right) in every Hebrew family (Num.3:12-13,41,45;8:14-17).

After the period of exile, priesthood in the second temple was established strongly. The high priest serves as the head in the hierarchy of priesthood. In the province of Judah, their type of government came from monarchy to hieroracy. By the year 520 BC, the status of the high priest became equal to the king (Hag.1:1,12,14). Double rulership—by the king and the high priest as the “two anointed”—became common in the community of Israel, but in the temple, the high priest remained the sole ruler (Zech4:14;6:9-15). When the house of David was weakened and gone, the high priest became the undisputed ruler of Jewish state and ecclesiastical domain. In the second century BC, as the Sanhedrin is begun to emerge and soon would be popular and powerful, the high priest is the presiding person over the senate composed of all ecclesiastical, family, and academic leaders (1 Macc.12:6;2 Macc.4:44;11:27). Such powerful position is desired by scrupulous person during the Greek period through bribery and murder (2 Macc.4:7-35).

Nevertheless, the main honor of the high priest is the representation of God’s people in annual Day of Atonement where he enters the holy of holies and sprinkle blood (from the sin offering of the people) upon the mercy seat for his sins and the nation as a whole (Lev.16:1-25). And because he is the head of the covenant people of God, his ceremonial purity must exceed than that of the ordinary priests. In fact, if he sins, there is a special prescription for his expiation. When the high priests sins, the people are also guilty (Lev.21:10-15); such is the special magnitude of his significance as representative of the people before God. Among the order of priesthood, he alone is anointed. Moreover, the priests’ main function in the temple is to care for the sacred vessels in the temple and fulfill their sacrificial duties; it is their privilege to be the only ones who can make sacrifice in behalf of the people (Num,18:5,7). According to R. Abba, the priest, “no less than the prophet, was a medium of revelation. But whereas the revelatory experience of the prophet was personal and direct, that of the priest was collective and mediated, either through divination or through his training in the accumulated knowledge of the past.”(RA,879) Not only that, the priests are also the custodians of the health of the whole community (Lev.13-15), administrators of justice (Deut.17:8-9;21:5), re-consecrating the called-out ones like the Nazirite (Num.6:1-21), and others. They have duties in war (Num.10:1-10) and in blessing people in God’s name (Num.6:22-27). Most of the priests are supported by the offerings of the people, from the first fruits (Exod.13:12-13;Num.18:12-19), from specified sacrificial dues (Lev.2:3-10;5:13;7:30-34;24:5-9), and the people’s tithe (Num.18:26-28).

While priests are considered religious specialists, the Levites are more responsible on the lower duties of temple worship (Num.1:50;3:28,32; 8:15;31:30,47;1 Chro.23:25-32). The Levites assists the priests in their religious functions (Num.3:6,8;18:2) and administration of justice (1 Chro.23:4;26:29). Aside from service of praise, the scope of their responsibilities includes the care caring temple courts and chambers, cleansing vessels, and preparing the offerings (1 Chro.23:28-32). Some of the Levites are gatekeepers (1 Chr.9:19) and treasurers (1 Chor.26:20). While in some occasions, there were non-Levites who are mentioned in the music ministry of temple worship, Levites are also involved as choristers and musicians (Ezra 3:10;Neh.12:27). Before the Scribes took over their function in relation to the Laws, they also serve as teachers and interpreters of the law (Neh.8:7,9). Their length of service vary between twenty up to old age (Num.4;8:23-26;1 Chro.23:24). They are also entitled to the tithes and gifts of the people for their sustenance (Lev.27:23-33) but they give to the priests the tenth of all their earnings (Num.18:26-28). Working with time schedules (1 Chro.24:31;28:13,21;Neh.13:30), they perform their religious duty of purification orderly (Num.8:5-13).

The Wise and Wisdom Tradition. There is a sort of sagacious tradition established in Israel. Although not institutionalized like the priesthood ministry, this tradition is, however, very influential in the life and faith of the Hebrew people.

Israel’s life, thought, and faith were deeply associated with wisdom tradition. Although in most modern scholarship, wisdom materials—which are commonly limited to the books of Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes, Canon Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, and several passages in Psalms—have been questioned as authentically Israelite, its influence is felt and recognized in the life and faith of Israel. There is a considerable attention given to wisdom in the Hebrew tradition. Distinct to this belief is the valuation of life—a contradiction to the faith of the church, especially in Protestant tradition. The proponents of wisdom tradition in Israel love life and enjoy it. Their appreciation of life gives importance to “the best learning, newest knowledge, and most ingenious cultural achievements.”(WB1:14) In other words, the wisdom tradition of Israel is directly in contrast to Reformation tradition that religiously despises culture and human knowledge. Israelite sages are not “culture-fearing” and “culture-negating” people, far from being “humanists” in the modern tradition of meaning. They do not consider culture as a threat to their faith and neither do they use faith to despise culture. Israel’s intellectual tradition is basically relevance oriented to their culture. That is wisdom in its truest sense (WB1:13-14).

There are several characteristics of Israel’s wisdom tradition. First of all, “wisdom believes that the goal and meaning of human existence is life.”(WB1,14) Like itself is the purpose and meaning of human existence. The kernel message of Proverbs supports life at its all fullness (Prov 10:7,27). Proverbial provisions of wisdom seek to uphold life in its fullness via keen observation and practical instructions. In wisdom tradition, however, life is more than just earthly survival and age longevity; rather, it is deeply concerned with life as a whole in all its positive potentialities. This kind of life lived in wisdom is not for personal well-being only; in fact, it is heartily practiced within the context of the whole community (Prov.11:10-11). Any personal actions are concerned with the society’s welfare and not personal consumption. Here, the concept of communal peace (shalom) is practice meaningfully. Wisdom tradition is present-oriented. Wise actions are made in and for the present, not in the after life. Valuation of the community seeks present rewards in the here-and-now life, not something to be awaited up in heaven or the after life (Prov.13:12,21,25). Hence, making peace and acting wisely towards one another is a here and now priority. It contributes to the experiential abundance for the individual and the community. A person’s well-being is a matter of wise decision at present and does not wait for the community to wait; wisdom is impatient and life is not used “intrinsically” or imposed upon the historical process. It does not exploit life by using laws and stipulations to negate life in its fullness. Its appreciation of human existence paved away any hostility to human life or “life for the community.” In fact, they consider pious talk about God’s will that does not contribute to the life for the community is non-sense, to some extent, blatant idolatry. Regardless of the origin of life-giving for the community, they believe that anything which stimulates life for the society is God’s will (WB1:15-17).

Secondly, “wisdom affirms that the authority for life is to be disconcerted in our common experience.”(WB1,17) The rightness and goodness of thing is derived from careful observation of what a person ought to perform to be community-oriented or part of the society. Pragmatic patience is an important ingredient in wise actions (Prov.11:16,25;12:24;13:24;14:30). Proverbial affirmations are bold statements about life, a form of confession of faith open for invitation to those who would believe. These axioms are not institutionalized nor does it seek to be approved by any teaching because it is authentic by itself. Life actually happens just in that manner; hence, one can try and see for himself and learn. Wisdom tradition takes truth from life experiences, not institutional or centralized confessions. It trusts human opinion and does not devalue human capacity to know the truth and right about life. Far from being a godless trust in humans, wisdom tradition appeals to the God-given aptitude that does not monopolize the disclosure of truth. It is a distinct characteristic of the sages that they do not claim any monopoly on wisdom because they believe that God discloses his will not only on few elite but also for those who are concerned to see wisdom (Deut.30:11-14). Social experience are shared and learned, not an isolate claim. Because of the communal orientation of wisdom, it is also international in its view. Perspective in life for the community is held open for those who choose life and not just the covenant people (WB1,17-19).

Thirdly, “wisdom affirms that man has primary responsibility for his destiny.”(WB1,20) Man’s course in life is a personal and decisive choice (Prov.18:21;21:21;24:16). He is responsible in fixing his destiny and the life of the community. There is so much in life and he has to seize the moment to really live life in fullness. In the belief of wisdom tradition, man is capable of choosing wisely and making responsible decisions; human options are not programmed but they are real. In fact he can there is no need to choose foolishness of wickedness for it is unnecessary. But there is always two ways to choose in every decision: every act take leads to death or life. Hence, in the wisdom tradition, it is expected for man to function and take actions sensibly towards the community as a responsible person and part of the society. Wisdom upholds that man must be humane to other humans. As a man is the overseer of the created world, he is to take charge in supporting the orderliness of the environment. In not taking heed to wise counsel, acting foolishly can be a potential downfall (Prov.17:2). It is because man, in wisdom tradition, is considered not morally crippled and has the capacity to be humane in one way or another. In relation to his prayers to God, man’s responsibility to take part in the working out of his prayers is present. Wisdom does not believe in blind prayers—prayers that are not accompanied with the courage to do and act according to what has been expressed and requested. Hence, prayers are to be taken with insightful actions on human part, not just giving all the responsibility to God to take charge of everything. It is believed that God will not do what humans can do; he will not perform human work for humans. Prayers for peace, justice, and well-being ought not to be passively handed-over to God as if God alone will handle all the responsibilities with out the effort of the petitioners. In other words, God and man are actively involved in making prayers effective. Unlike what most of the church believe being human is not taken passively; meaning, because humans are just humans is not an excuse of weakness, unworthiness, irresponsibility, and abdication of accountability. Man is to be treated with mystery and glory and not to be violated by manipulation, suppression, intimidation, or oppression; his choices are not to be controlled in stiffness and rigidity, making him less human. If God trusted humans enough, man ought to trust in man also (WB1,20-22). In wisdom tradition, man is regarded highly, not devalued.

Fourthly, it is the characteristic of wisdom tradition in considering that “man is meant for an orderly role in the orderly cosmos.”(WB1,22-23) That means man lived with a shared-responsibility towards the orderliness of the world. It is a distinct motif of wisdom tradition to deal with international themes like integrity, guidance, fear of God, righteousness, etc.(Prov.10:9;10:17,27;11:6). It is because it upholds the concept that shared-values goes beyond geographical border; human values know no territories. It is God’s will that man shares with his benevolent rulership over the world and in the orderliness of human life. Hence, continuity in human history is a valuable aspect considered. Since it is God’s will that man should to take charge of the world—along with the anti-provincialistic themes—wisdom does not adhere to the so-called “partial community” where life and order are placed in ghettos. Such isolation and parochialism of the community to the whole of society is a way to death, not fullness of life. Partial communities are not viable for the full appreciation of human life (WB1,23-24).

Fifthly, “wisdom is the celebration of man as the king of creation.” (WB1,24) Man is not only responsible and highly esteemed among his fellow humans, but also to nature and social environment, to his world as a whole. Since he is a created being and part of the created world, he ought to relate to his Creator. In the first place, he is a trusted creation because he was made in a special manner. He is ordained by God, endowed with intellect, and a priced-crown among God’s creation. He is not supposed to be overshadowed in the created world. In wisdom tradition, the world is created good and is a healthy place to live; man ought to enjoy its orderliness and environment. “Wisdom affirms that the essential mark of a man is his coming to terms with the opportunities and responsibilities of his social and natural world.”(WB1,14) Aesthetically, wisdom reflects on the goodness, grandeur, and beauty of the cosmos; it also values the man-woman relationship in their essential life-giving roles to be fulfilled in this world (WB1,25).

Contemporary Church and Cultural Engagement

Brueggemann observes: “We have been robbed of the courage and power to think an alternative thought” in relation to the common norms set before us as a church (WB2,39). It seems that prophetic imagination was not welcomed in most of the church belief because of the “royal” mentality—that is the static religion afraid to embrace to divine pathos—which self-satisfies the church in comfort. We love to sit in comfortable ministry. In fact, we often grind ourselves with the common, the ritual, the mundane, and the standard; all newness is held in suspicion. We want to implement almost anything, ironically, without vision and creative imagination. And yet, prophetic imagination echoes for the contemporary church to be concerned first with the “vision”, then the “implementation” (WB2,40) The problem: there is so much implemented according to the standard norm without vision. As a result, lack of prophetic imagination and the implementation of anything become futile.

It is no wonder that most totalitarian stance—even government—are afraid of artists. It is because of their ability to stir and procreate alternative to the common norm. The same is true in the popular church mainstream. Prophetic imagination, with their appreciation of arts, poetry, lyrics, and verbal power, can be a threat to the placid, docile, and easy-going atmosphere of their “kingly” status. Nevertheless, according to Brueggemann, “It is the vocation of the prophet to keep alive the ministry of imagination, to keep on conjuring and proposing futures” by providing alternative to the commonality of church ministry and dominant reality (WB2,40). As much as possible, the church must be willing to embrace the “divine pathos’ towards the community where it belongs. Prophetic ministry embraces pain—the pain of God and the pain of man. “It is the task of the prophetic ministry and imagination to bring people to engage their experiences of suffering to death” namely, the opposite of the fullness of human life. While most of the church ministries are designed for something out of this life, heavenly, and out of this world, prophetic imagination—despite of the seemingly phantasm ideal and its “visionary”-ness—it is deeply concerned with historical process and continuity of humaneness. It is not afraid to know the reality but creates awareness about it. It does not deny the pain of death but it responds properly to human existence (WB2,43). As a matter of fact, prophetic imagination unveils self-deception and numbness that denies the divine pathos (WB2,45).

How can the modern church learn from the ministry of prophetic imagination? At least in three ways: First is to offer symbols that are integral to the transparency and integrity of human life. by reactivating symbols from the past, self-deception, stonewalling, and artificiality has to end. The church must not dwell in ghettos. Second is to open up hidden fears and terrors of the marginalized. Underneath the superficial expressions of individual persons lies the suppressed longing to voice out their suffering and pain to the community in public. The prophet gives explosive voice to those very fears and terrors before the society. And third is to overstate in concrete terms and metaphors the “deathliness” with passion and anguish. Apathy and numbness to death through self-deception that “all is well” leads to alienation of life and loss of humane consideration for others (WB2,45).

While the prophet is well acquainted with the language of grief that brings out the reality others won’t even dare to see and behold, the church must be stirred up from her personal satiation by taking into consideration how she values mankind. While the ministry of priesthood is already conformed to the institutional norm, at least, that ministry does not contradict to the wisdom tradition of orderliness and valuation of the relationship between God and man. As the divine-human union deserved a proper place in priesthood ministry, so is the valuation of man before God in the wisdom tradition. We are to seek, as contemporary prophets, priests, and sages to alleviate the appreciation of man and his culture. Instead of despising human culture—a norm that has a long tradition already in the church—we pursue the appreciation of contemporary youth culture, the message of freedom and justice instead of apathy and un-involvement to the needs of the society. We might as well value also the here and now and the continuity of historical process, not just the ethereal ideas. Man might never be the measure of all things, but certainly, he has the capacity to live up his significance as a created being towards humane becoming.

Bibliography

Brueggemann, Walter. In Man We Trust: The Neglected Side of Biblical Faith. Atlanta, GA: John Know Press, 1972. *WB1

____________. The Prophetic Imagination, 2d ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001. *WB2

Heschel, Abraham. The Prophets. Vol 1. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. *AH

The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Vol 3. s.v. “Priests and Levites.” By R. Abba. *RA

Implications of Biblical Anthropology

The human factor in the discipline of doing theology is non-negotiable--it is very essential. As such, anthropology is a basic element in any Christian theology. Some thoughts on it can be encouraging from our Filipino point of view.

Cultural “anthropo”-logy is about humans and Jesus Christ came for human beings; he must have cared for the culture of the people. Jesus was born in a place where cultural values were strong. It is part of the wisdom of the Jews to care for the cultural achievements of the people; Jesus must have known the value of understanding humanity by becoming human himself. At least he understands what human culture is through his experience as a Jew. I am inclined to believe that Jesus did not come to save the “soul” of the people only, but to make the whole lives of the people a lot better and meaningful. Since culture is part of the human construct, God must have cared about the culture of the people. And one trademark of his concern for human culture is the Christian contribution to the study of anthropology so that Christian witness may become more meaningful and culturally relevant to the recipients. If God cared so much to become human, we ought to care the welfare of humanity also as it was exemplified in the incarnation of Jesus. His incarnation itself explicitly expressed that he cared for humanity as a whole, not in part, lest he could have just made himself much better than angels, not human. Hence, cultural anthropology, in my opinion, is incarnational.

Consequently, cultural anthropology creates a “humane” Christian ministry. From the moment religion became a part of human history it has become one of the major sources of de-humanization also. The abuse of religious figures under the cloak of spiritual authority has been as old as time can tell. Even today, religion is one justifier of making humans less than they are. Instead of advancing the welfare of the people, religion is one of the instruments that threatens the freedom and wholeness of the people. Through false spiritual claims, people have been deceived and deprived of the truth of God. Even Christian witnesses, if they fail to identify and value the culture of the people, the tendency to look down on the idiosyncrasies of human cultures will certainly occur. It is easy for the missioner to feel superior and special over the local people. But through cultural anthropology, the witness will able to avoid the mistakes of lack of cultural consciousness.

Moreover, cultural anthropology cares of the welfare of the people and as Christian witnesses we ought to express higher degree of care to the well-being of the people we minister. Since the recipients of the gospel cannot do away with human culture—and the same with us—we ought to be concerned with the wholeness of the people and the wholeness of their culture as well. The culture which is not godly ought to be transformed—through the power of the Gospel—to create new “nature” and new meaning to their cultural identity as a unique people group. One expression that we really care for the welfare of the people is to respect and enhance their culture through the gospel of Christ.

Therefore, cultural anthropology is a necessity for every witness who deals with people for it caters to the needs of the people. As it has been emphasized from the beginning, cultural anthropology is not an end in itself; it is a means to effective Christian witness. To learn from the blunders of those who have been there, it is wisdom to learn the uniqueness and value of anthropological studies for that’s where we are. We are dealing with people, not animals or angels. The complexity of human nature requires understanding, not just an abstract notion or proposition of who the people are by generalizing them with where we have been, making them like us.

The Significance of Colloquium in Christian Ministry

The composition of the subject Colloquium serves as a vital point concerning its significance for modern Christian ministry. Now, the acronym will be the guide to emphasize its importance for today’s preachers, teachers, leaders, and ministers.

C–ontextualized Christian Theology and Practice Are Enhanced!
Contextualization is a hallmark of Third-World theology and ministry. For long, the Christian faith has been synonymous to western colonization and worldviews. Colloquium provides contemporary Christian ministers a culturally relevant and theologically enhanced type of ministry. Sensitivity to culture and differences of people makes colloquium a necessity. The Philippines is composed of fragmented islands with many worldviews, traditions, and tribal cultures. Differences in concepts of God, world, and man can be categorized when dealt with specifically as theologians start with specific people groups. Christian faith practically in dialogue with Filipino worldviews can be more helpful than isolated independent formulation without consultation of where the people are coming from or any practical implications. Insensitivity to people’s worldviews damaged the understanding of the essence of Christianity since the introduced Christianity is either Hellenized or Westernized Christianity. Through the context, the task of doing the Christian ministry is a potential discipline with practical applications both to the minister and the recipients.

Contextualization is not just a matter of outward concerns of buildings, properties, and schools, but the very material that evangelicals apply today are more often foreign to the people. These materials are not even teaching people to strengthen their culture through, in, and for Christ, but phasing out their culture by a foreign form of Christianity. If only evangelical missionaries and theologians in the past gave them opportunity to talk and be heard in dialogue, their culture could have been redeemed and their heart totally changed towards Christ. With tiny religious groups in the Philippines, the challenge of Christianity is enormous. These traditional religions are often dehumanizing. Their requirements and religious obligations are not helping people to succeed as a community or as an individual family unit.

Though there is so far to prove yet on the relationship of religion to poverty, this seems to be the main motif of the poverty of many cultic and primitive ethnic groups in the Philippines. Of course, politics has been the main player of this economic decline, but the religious understanding of these people is basically the foundational manifestation of dehumanized people through religion. Their idea of the sacred is the great challenge to Christian theology and practice, if ever it will be able to make the bridge and take roots in the tribal lands without distorting the essence of the Gospel of Christ. Colloquium is a potential door to open up the contextualizing process of Christian faith and practice.

O–bjective/Subjective Interaction of Practical Ministry Is Developed!

The practicality of the Christian ministry does not mean cognitive-less ministry. As a matter of fact, practical ministry becomes practical when it is supported by theological foundations that are Christian. Through colloquium, the compartmentalization of theology and practical significance to the recipients are avoided. The following interplays are identifiable.

First is the “global and local interaction.” Colloquium valued practicality without avoiding complexity in the Christian ministry. Hence, the introduction of colloquium to contemporary Filipino ministers is valuable. The Philippines has been the melting pot of many racial nationalities. With the original Indio-Malayo tribal people and with the sequential coming of the Chinese, Muslims, Spanish, Americans, Japanese, Indians, Koreans, etc., Filipinos are struggling to maintain their identity as a people. Perhaps, that kaleidoscope of ethnicities is what the Filipino is all about, a unique blend of oriental people. Mixed marriages, media, and migration to urban cities contributed a lot to this phenomenon. Industrialization and modernization, however, were not impediments to Filipino traditionality and religiosity. A Christian faith and ministry that help bring solidarity and unity—not uniformity—to the identity of the Filipino people is an important enterprise. And the interplay of tensions between the general view of the Filipino context and the particular distinctions of every tribe and local church community will appreciate the effort of colloquium in making Christian faith the framework of such interaction. Moreover, Filipino OCW phenomenon is also sensitive element in doing Filipino theology and practice.

Second is “the community and individual interplay.” How is Christian faith relevant to the “diaspora” Filipinos? Filipinos are found globally, but they usually have their roots intact especially that most of their loved ones are here. Their affections and interests are usually for the welfare of their families who are not well to do, but their efforts contributed to nation building. With the upsurge of corruption and economic depression, patriotic struggle in the name of Christ is also a challenge. Third world theology, especially liberation theology, is taking grounds among many grass-roots Filipino. Catholics were ahead in terms of theological inculturation and doing Filipino theology, but a better theological alternative that gives foundation to the moral and spiritual changes of community and nation building is a challenge to achieve. Filipinos are not necessarily illiterate but their traditional religious heritage and community struggle are still influential in shaping their theological concepts.

Third is the “biblical and oriental interaction.” An “unbiblical” Christian faith can never be an authentic Christian Asian ministry. The Bible is still the very foundation of teaching, theology, and faith. Methodologies are being modified and explored to make the gospel understandable to the people. When the oriental emphasis is taking ground, westernized or Hellenized Christianity will be minimized, if not eliminated. What is very important is the eternal and unchanging essence of the gospel and not the coverings that surrounds it. With correlational approach to theology, teaching, counseling, preaching, ministry, and biblical understanding of thee Bible and culture can be a good combination to approach Asian Christian ministry. The Bible is written in a Near East setting—almost oriental—and our culture and situation are not far from them. Approaching Asian setting directly from the Bible is feasible and workable for culture of the primitive Hebrew has similarities to Asian’s.

L-ife-related Ministry through Anthropology, Social Ministry and Counseling Are Accommodated!

Filipinos are known as “People of Reference.” Filipino people like identifying themselves with someone or a group of people that are significant, powerful, influential, popular, or not ordinary citizen. They often associate themselves with significant others. This is relational phenomenon and could be a strong consideration in colloquium as an effective tool that emphasizes community building and identity formation. Dogmatic Christians even Bible Schools can not even take anthropology in their curriculum. But this is a bold step of some Seminaries who saw the benefits and advantage of having redemptive cultural anthropology in their curriculum. One advantage that can be seen here is that when theologians and missionaries are acquainted with cultural anthropology, they are safeguarded from “dehumanizing” people in the process of indoctrination and practice. This is the case of religion in oppressing people through its inhuman demands and concepts. Man may not be the measure of all things, but things that matter to humanity can never be discounted. To some extent, reevaluation of major and minor traditional concepts--i.e., God, sin, salvation, etc.--of Christian faith can be modified in anthropological perspective. But this requires an extensive and comprehensive dialogue between theology (revelation) and anthropology.

Cultural “anthropo”-logy is about humans and Jesus Christ came for human beings; he must have cared for the culture of the people. Jesus was born in a place where cultural values were strong. It is part of the wisdom of the Jews to care for the cultural achievements of the people; Jesus must have known the value of understanding humanity by becoming human himself. Jesus did not come to save the “soul” of the people only, but to make the whole lives of the people a lot better and meaningful. Since culture is part of the human construct, God must have cared about the culture of the people. Hence, cultural anthropology, in my opinion, is incarnational. Consequently, cultural anthropology creates a “humane” Christian ministry. From the moment religion became a part of human history it has become one of the major sources of de-humanization also. The abuse of religious figures under the cloak of spiritual authority has been as old as time can tell. Even today, religion is one justifier of making humans less than they are. Instead of advancing the welfare of the people, religion is one of the instruments that threatens the freedom and wholeness of the people. Through false spiritual claims, people have been deceived and deprived of the truth of God. Even Christian witnesses, if they fail to identify and value the culture of the people, the tendency to look down on the idiosyncrasies of human cultures will certainly occur. It is easy for the missioner to feel superior and special over the local people. But through cultural anthropology, the witness will able to avoid the mistakes of lack of cultural consciousness.

Moreover, cultural anthropology cares of the welfare of the people and as Christian witnesses we ought to express higher degree of care to the well-being of the people we minister. Since the recipients of the gospel cannot do away with human culture—and the same with us—we ought to be concerned with the wholeness of the people and the wholeness of their culture as well. The culture which is not godly ought to be transformed—through the power of the Gospel—to create new “nature” and new meaning to their cultural identity as a unique people group. One expression that we really care for the welfare of the people is to respect and enhance their culture through the gospel of Christ. Therefore, cultural anthropology is a necessity for every witness who deals with people for it caters to the needs of the people. As it has been emphasized from the beginning, cultural anthropology is not an end in itself; it is a means to effective Christian witness. Take for example some Filipino concepts.

First: the Filipino concept of self-valuation. The Filipino concept of self is very interesting and deep. The breadth and scope of it is not only limited to self alone, but of others. Filipinos value themselves in the light of others, yet they value their own. This self-valuation is healthy and weak at the same time. A theological framework that will face the challenge of this concept of self is a potential enterprise since abstraction is of little value to Filipinos. They want something experiential, cause-worthy, and personal, rather than abstract propositions, highly philosophical and irrelevant. Second: the concept of Filipino sense of well-being. With the Filipino-image downtrodden in the global view, Filipino’s sense of well-being is strongly desired. Almost all aspects of Filipino lifestyle bear the stigma and scar of humiliation, shame, corruption, and economic depression, as well as spiritual insufficiency.

Life-relatedness has something to do with pastoral care and counseling also. Pastoral care and counseling provides a wholistic framework of making Christian faith not just a religious worldview related to the mind, but also of the heart—in fact, the whole of life. Pragmatism of human life is a curse of the time. The pastor-counselor can be an effective mender of human life as a whole, not just part of it. Pastoral care and counseling helps the Christian preacher develop a creative approach to meet the genuine need of the people, not just relaying facts and information—or even detached theology. Such imagination is not presumption but real and yet innovative. It is not satisfied with mediocre method. Pastoral care and counseling also helps the listener of the message view themselves as valuable and as persons, not just some passive recipients of eternal ideas, not knowing how such ideas are relevant to their personal experiences. Nothing is more valuable to a listener of preaching than to be addressed as humans with needs and concerns, not objects of empty words. Moreover, pastoral care and counseling creates depth of effectivity and transformation. Within the church, dealing on inner needs and not just some superficial ideas and theories for a better life is a must. Not only that. Pastoral care and counseling effectuates an authentic theology.

L–eadership Enhancing Through Preaching and Teaching!

Complexities are part of human nature. Preaching can do away with superficial simplicity synonymous with mediocrity. Oral communication of divine words is hard to imagine to be handled in contemptuous familiarity. The poetic structures—now on their literary forms—conveys a profound treatment of obvious, but taken for granted, concerns for the community of God. In a creative and innovative—sometimes radical—ways, the prophet of God conveys the message with clear purpose and meaning. The motivation is always the centrality of God, but the methods vary. Modern prophetic preaching can employ complex poetic structure, narrative exposition, modern parables, and shocking funeral dirge, but his biblical material suggests more than that. Prophetic preaching has to deal with the vacuum created by postmodern skepticism on absolutes. While God is absolute and thus “relativizing” everything other than himself, nonnegotiable essentials of faith must be communicated with conviction and passion in accordance to the context of the listener and recipient. It is the modern preacher’s challenge to convey that “godliness in Christ” is an absolute demand that cannot be compromised.

With worldwide information on the tips of human fingers, global facts, awareness, and information—at their worst and best—is just a click away. A challenge (and temptation) to contemporary preachers are always present. It is easy to use electronic scissors and pastes to create messages for the hungering congregants. But I always believe that preaching is more than presenting facts and updates. Preaching is a means to assist the listener experience Jesus Christ and find meaning in their existence and community value. To this, I find the prophetic materials fascinating in dealing with current issues similar to our times, i.e. superficial religiosity, injustice, societal evils and the like. While any preacher today is dealing with the contemporary issues, it is also valuable to utilize not only the prophetic materials in the Bible but to keep one’s self updated with the global picture of the trend of times. In that way, prophetic preaching can address—and even confront—not only the need of the church community but to keep them conscious about the picture as a whole. After all, the prophets of old addressed domestic and international issues that threaten the relationship of God’s people with their God.

Almost in every culture, the messenger of divine words has authority in his own right. Through personal conviction, the messenger stands, whether his authority is challenged or acknowledged, in the community. But the Christian witness on a certain community cannot do away with his divine calling in addressing human needs and not just presentation of eternal ideas. God is disclosed before the people through imaginative ways. It’s more than “tell me what you know” but also of “tell me what you do.” In that may, the people may see that we really understand what we know; and it is not just in the mind, but also in the heart. A prophet may not be perfect but his call demands a higher standard of life, integrity, and purity. They may be ordinary people in the community, but it is certain that they are not unconscious about their purpose and message. Thus, prophetic preaching is not just about words and articulation of the message; it is accompanied with lifestyle. It addresses current issues and concerns, but its ancient text is always on hand ready to answer those who are asking for the hope that is in us.

Prophetic preaching, therefore, is a potential ministry in Philippines. It is not threatened with pessimistic disillusionment and relativism of everything. After all, deconstruction is not absolute in itself.

I believe that the church—both as an organism and organization—is a biblical pattern the present leadership ought to consider. We function not merely as a structure of hierarchy but as a body also, ministering to one another. Both systems have their own risks to face. First, the institutional type of leadership is subject to abuse. Because of the desire to take full control—a human urge without bridle can be abusive and manipulative. Anything that is in accordance to the structure and outside of it is considered threat to the norm and dominant system. Rigidity in church leadership in conformity to the system can be oppressive and suppressive. Nevertheless, structure is good in that it provides framework to serve and hold the unity of the whole system; it also give foundation to the many facets of its parts so that the system can stand. Apart from structure, orderliness and authority is called into question. Hence, the church as an institution remains a crucial element to the effectiveness of her purpose, goal, and meaning. Not only that the church is an organization, it is also an organism. The symbol that Paul used in particular is the “body of Christ.” Hence, the leaders ought not to be preoccupied with the institutional aspect of the church ministry, but most of all, the bodily aspect of it. Jesus is the head and the body must find direction, meaning, and purpose from what the head designed. However, the head won’t do what the hand is not willing to do. We as a church must reconsider what Christ intended the church to be. The basics of Christian church are always a necessity. When we do ministry, we ought to see it through the eyes of Christ who founded the church, to see if all of our ministries are in line with what the founder intend.

The early NT churches took problems as challenges—not hindrances to growth. Today, church leadership is on the verge to clarify herself to be “run”, managed, marketed, and secularized. These main concerns of modern church leadership ought to be addressed clearly from the biblical standpoint knowing that our “drivenness” does not always mean spirituality, ministry, and purpose. The church should offer clear stand to major questions. Is apostolic leadership irrelevant today? Where is the church leadership going? Is biblical position more important that the person?

O–rganized and Yet Flexible Emphasis on Worship and Prayer Is Improved!

Filipino Christian worship can be dynamic. As it is clear historically, the church has never been an original proponent of any act of worship for before these acts were practiced, it slowly evolved with an influence to some degree from anything “outside” the church. The only thing that makes an act of worship “Christian” is the element of Christ, nothing else, nothing more. All—including preaching, reading of sacred scriptures, singing, sacrifices, and other cultic practices—have their interconnections with other ancient religions and practices. It is only in their Christian content and meaning that the act worship becomes “Christian.” In a sense, questions on syncretism and secularism may be a technical concept that might be defined here. The mixing of religions as well as the secular influence in politics made the state church really an imperial church. Yet these influences, to some extent, are not hindrances to the development of the body of Christ. The challenge may be is more on the clarification of what is bad and what is good. Outside the Catholic Church, we can also see forms of secularism prevalent among many Protestant churches. Marketing the church is often synonymous with running the church just like any business. The music caters to the popular culture; church meetings—at their best and worst—were identical with what other institutions made. It is a fact; the church cannot do away with what is going on in the world as long as the church is in this world. She has to address to the need of the people who have various cultures, dispositions, and capacities to act with motives that only time will tell. It is true that there was a great change that happened in the body of Christ, but such change was gradual, perhaps because the acceptance of the practice was made with careful consideration. But in all these things, Christian worship remains developing, innovating, and changing; it is because Christian worship is dynamic.

Q-uality-Oriented Values Through Christian Stewardship Is Lived!

The person’s definition of success is highly shaped by external factors—i.e. society, parents, schools, etc. Against this background, Dayton wants to point out the importance of the urgency to write a new story concerning the Christian’s whole life. But before this kind of life is lived out, one must recognize the rules of God to be established in the mind of the believer. These rules are found both in the Old and New Testaments. The Ten Commandments, as a foundation of God’s rules, is laid in the Old Testament. The Ten Commandments emphasized the “going hard after God” and looking out on idols that people may not replace their focus on God with money and wealth.

Whereas, in the New Testament, Jesus summarized the entire Law in stating that Christians ought to love God with all their heart and mind and soul and to love their neighbor as they love their very selves. Jesus did not condemn money and wealth. He spent time with rich people also and some of his disciples are middle-class businessmen. Yet Jesus is also aware of the danger of wealth in distracting the focus of a person towards wealth, instead of God. Work can be an idol. Often, those who want to get rich quickly suffer from burn-out by sapping their energies through their prestige, power, and identity gained from their successful work. But Dayton emphasizes that honoring God and relationships, even taking Sabbath rest, are basic ingredients to obedience to God’s rules. Preservation of life, staying pure, respect for property and welfare of others is great gain. Satisfaction is also beneficial. These core values are prerequisites to successful business. In today’s world, the application of the Ten Commandments carries with it an implied question: Is it good? Is it loving? Does it put God first? Does it lead to an integrated life? When these realities are dealt with, then the Christian is ready to complete the journey by describing for himself the meaning of a successful life. Faithful stewardship of God-given possessions is still a must. Colloquium supports such values.

U–p-to-date But Biblically Founded Principles Are Maintained!

First things are first priorities. Without the awareness born out of sensibility and Godly experience, the church might remain recluse towards the tradition set before her. Not only that, if ever the church is on the right tracks, and yet lost her prophetic voice to the world, it makes prophetic voice an inevitable necessity. It is not just being on the right way, but also of doing it right with creativity and innovation. Any artistic innovators would set the pace alone; but imagination set upon the creative ability of God makes a modern prophet a timeless call for Christian ministry—someone who will creatively remind the people not to forget God. On the other hand, bureaucratese found their way inside the church instead of the ancient Spirit-filled or charismatic leadership (like that of judges) as well as the institutional type of leadership (that of the priests). Politics and personal agenda become more powerful voices in the church institution. Evangelicalism values the orderly system and, consequently, local churches are more of a bureaucracy; the voice of God is easily identified with the voice of the people. Hence democratic politicking is more viable than spirituality, holiness, integrity, and gift for the ministry. More likely, any leader is on position for their influence, status, money, and alliances. Despite of the autonomous prophetic ministry and autocratic system of OT priesthood, modern minister can glean still the demand of godly living, intercessory ministry, and financial integrity remains a valuable philosophy in the ministry.

The Sage, who claims no monopoly to wisdom tradition, is such an example for Christian educational institutions of today. How will seminary teachers know that what they impart is really what the church needs? How will a full-time pastor feel to be taught with ministerially inexperienced teachers or uninvolved with local churches? Are students enrolled to gain more “theory” in exchange to their “first hand” knowledge of the field? Who teaches whom—the one sent according to their mission agency’s agenda or the one who are deeply concerned with the cultivation of Filipino church life? It seems that “specialists” do not mind what others think. The wisdom of “other-mindedness”, I believe, is a key to the propagation every local churches’ fullness in ministry. Hence, I observed that the relevance of the courageous prophetic imagination, spiritual and moral standard of priesthood in Christ, and the wisdom of inter-personal reflection is as significant as ever. Since Bible schools and seminaries served as center of Christian education in ministry, (instead of the local church) isn’t it that the local churches and seminaries must have mutual agreement as to discern what really is the purpose, vision, goal, and mission of the local church? An open communication between educational centers and ministerial people ought to be a norm rather than one-way tradition. From hence the seminary can supply what the church really need. Christian ministers learn dialectically both from OT and modern cultural situations. Seminaries must be open to the local churches, to listen and learn from them and see what they can supply.

I-nnovative and Introspective: No matter How Informative!

Filipinos are innovative and interested for new things, but they are also concerned of their past, especially their traditions and beliefs. Many might say that since they were born in that belief, they are to die in that belief. This is not mere superstitions, but sensitivity to traditional heritage as part of their identity formation and security. Such traditions are not at all threat to the gospel for it can be the completion of that tradition and the redemptive tool for their past heritage. Filipinos may speak western language fluently, but their heart language is still Filipino. They still think, act, sleep, dream, and believe like Filipinos. Colloquium is aware of that.

In this way, introspection on the person of the minister and its implications are needed. There is a question that says: What is a minister? To be a minister is being; hence, a minister is a person in a process of becoming; he is someone who is willing to be ministered upon by others, not just someone ministering to others in action. And yet, I also believe that being and doing—which is to “minister” in its state of action—are suppose to be one in the minister as an individual. The “being” is not a stranger to the “doing.” It is unlikely for a minister to be so preoccupied with his sense of being, pouring out his all energy on his self, but neglecting the external manifestation of his ministry as a minister. In other words: a minister is not just a person per se, but an embodiment of a minister who functions as one. A claim to be a minister without functioning as minister is empty claim, a byword without sense. The true minister is not only self-conscious about who he is a minister, but as a self-giving minister to others, as well as a recipient of the ministry of others unto himself. By implication, being a minister is more than just a personal identity and self-consciousness; it is a state of a person emanating what is from within unto others the essence of clarity, compassion, and contemplation. In short: authentic Christian living. Hence, a minister is not mere principle, but person; not a cliché, but character; not mere internal preoccupation, but incarnational. It is Christ within the minister, working out for others to be like Christ.

To be in the ministry is a spiritual adventure; we do not come or involve ourselves in the ministry because of who we are as “we are” already. We are in the ministry because we are called into it and to be a minister is becoming and fulfilling of who we are called to be. Thus, by implication: spiritual growth in the ministry is dynamic, if not given. There are times when the minister may not feel the growth. Perhaps it is because the growth is not like constant or sudden change; it is possible that the growth is gradual, not to mention that measuring spirituality is not like measuring grades and IQ. It is through the drudgery of life that growth is strengthened, not on the assumption of expertise or accumulated knowledge. Spirituality is like the essence of being a minister; it is a process. The height or depth of it is covered in the whole process. The fact that we cannot measure or draw the clear line in between spiritual and carnality makes spirituality a lifetime challenge; most of the time, we are only able to identify the extremes of it—that is the external manifestation of deep spirituality and grave carnality. Most of the time, spirituality is a personal matter, but not self-centeredness; it is not just the external manifestation of deeds, but also of the internal consciousness of living and being controlled by the Spirit. Thus, the minister’s spirituality is beyond implications; it is explicated.

U-navoidable and yet Vital In Seminary Curriculum!

There can never be another way. Colloquium in Christian ministry program is a must. While many Christians are afraid of having dialogue with other disciplines especially those “marked” as hostile to Christian faith, interdisciplinary dialogue is a healthy practice. Though there is never a guarantee of safety here, reaching out for the lost is not just a matter of being safe and secure but to take the risk and challenge. Christian faith and theology is never afraid of self-evaluation and self-criticism. In fact, Christianity was there all alone when it was tossed to and fro in the wildest waves of persecution, attack, and slander. That has been the very breath of Christian faith. It inhales defensive stance for faith and exhales apologetic arguments with those who despise her. As of the present, especially in doing Asian theology, dialogue with other discipline, like sociology, is a potential way to hear the other side of the camp. To defeat an enemy is to know his strength especially his weakness. It importantly includes using their own power for Christianity’s advantage. This is a healthy “spoiling Egyptians” and this has been an asset of theology when it is in dialogue with other disciplines. Utilizing their strength and rejecting, if there’s no hope of accommodating or modifying, its weakest link that is contrary to the faith and theological task. In sociology for example, many ministry now are growing and benefiting the contribution of this discipline. This is not just a matter of marketing the church or the Gospel, but using what is in hand for God.

While many dread exploring knowledge due to ignorance, a learner of interdisciplinary can take courage that truth can never be monopolized by any institutions, not even the church, the pillar and keeper of truth. If God can never be domesticated, truth can be found wherever God may put it and no one has the right to question him about that. In sum, if Christian theology wants to make an in-depth effect to transform and strengthen the people it ministers with, dialogue with worldviews, culture, politics, ethnic religions, and other related disciplines like sociology and anthropology is inevitable. Asian Christian theologians and ministers must live to their purpose and goal to reach out to the lost by making the Gospel of Christ understandable and meaningful to the local community. The message may be unchanging and inherently powerful in itself but let it be remembered that doing Asian Christian theology is like farming vegetables. The farmer cultivates the soil and waters, fertilizes, and cares the plants. God provides water, soil, rain, and makes the plant to grow. God could do all these things for the farmer, but it is certain that He will not. Both must do their part that the harvest may be plenty.

Theologians and ministers must seek the Ultimate Subject of their quest and task. Asian Christian ministers must communicate and this communication is not monologue, but dialogue. Then and only then the Logos is made clear in the heart of the local people. The same is true with theology and ministry; tradition and organizations itself are withholding theologians to explore the unknown and the road less traveled in theological enterprise. Of course, today’s ministers, for economic reasons and others, may be afraid to take the baton and travel. Silence may be a conspiracy but it is never without a cost. This is not a task just for difference sake but for potential advancement of the discipline. And going back to politics, especially with the moral decline of many government officials and political, as well as economic, sectors, it is perhaps high time for the church and its theologians to take the flag for a dialogue in that each camp may be heard and do the right step for building the nation. A right theology and distorted practice may be incompatible but the church with all that is entrusted to her, must take the stand to listen and be heard also as it dialogue with politics—not for politicking but for powerful transformation.

M-otivational but Practically Mission-minded and Evangelistic!

There is nothing like this before in the history of theological enterprise where the priority of missions and evangelism is globalized. This is meant to last. Colloquium develops trendsetters—ministry Trendsetters of the 21^st Century. The 21^st century needs ministers who are fully consumed with the passion of God for the lost and for His kingdom. They are trendsetters in vision, commitment, and compassion whose goals and characters match their call to set ablaze the way for excellence and glory of God. The world does not need more jargons and theory in theology without contribution to the propagation of God’s kingdom in this world. Theological preoccupation that does not envision the fulfillment of Christ’s Great Commission is nothing, but vanity—a toiling under the sun without meaning. Evangelism and missions is fully in need of continuing in its theologically sound foundation whereby it is tasked to be faithful to Christ’s commission. Any concerns not promoting the worship of God and compassion for the lost are misplaced priorities and mislaid efforts to do God’s ministry. Hence, a person fully committed to God—and is focused and persevering in the God-given vision in lined with the missions of the church to the world—is what the this century needs. The kinds of person who will set the blaze ahead of others are those who are not content with mediocrity and the status quo, but catch the vision, the empowerment of God’s Spirit, and the attitude to meet the demands of the post-modern urbanization whereby God’s kingdom advances among receptive people.

So, the world needs ministry trendsetters whose visions are not confined to their own selfish desires and agendas, but is big enough to contain the uttermost parts of the world where God commands the church to go and make disciples. The world needs trendsetters who visualize the inevitable from beyond. They foresee the potentiality of global urbanization and strategic positioning of prospective local churches which are able to reach out the unreached people groups and maximize their effectivity on establishing culturally relevant ministries and mission points. They are trendsetters in a truest sense for they cannot just fold their hands from afar and watch the ministry in plateau and decline. Instead, they strive to go and learn, expose and expand, grow and change towards the new paradigm.

Therefore, the world need not people who have no authority and authenticity of their own for it is fed up with superficial spirituality, structures, and systems that demean the church’s mission unto the world’s ends. God is molding trendsetters who—like Paul strategically fulfilled the Great Commission—despite that most leaders were content in sitting in their own Jerusalem, not minding the known world. And now is the time.

I, therefore, conclude that Colloquium is a must in every seminary curriculum for this is where theory and practicality meet. This is where potentialities are beginning to be realized. The student is able to think deeply to recognize the important from the superficial; the integral from the shallow; the significant from devoid. Through curriculum, the students will be able to see themselves in the light of the growing present and potential future ministry without detaching themselves from the foundational past.