TWO CLAME FORUMS

Forum on the r-1ission of the Church -- Aug. 2 f 1979

1. Principal

Christian Mission in the Americas ., Dr. Orlando

E. Costasv Director of the Latin American Evangelical Centerfor
Pastoral Studies (CELEP)

2. Responseg Prof. Saul Trinidadi Latin American Biblical Seminary

3.

Rev. William Brown, Executive Secretary, Association

of Costa Rican Bible Churches

4. Summary of the discussion

Forum on Contextualization -- Aug. 3, 1979

1. Principal paper: Contextualization from a Biblical Point of View,

William Cookv Associate director of the Latin American Evangelical
Center for
Studies (CELEP)
2. Response:

Prof. Laverne Rutschman, Latin

Biblical Seminary

3. Responseg
Rev. Alvaro Munozv manager of radio station TIFC and
president of the Costa Rican Evangelical Alliance
4. Summary of the discussion
These forums were organized by a committee of the board of the Latin
American Community of Evangelical Ministries (CLAME). The op1n1ons
expressed do not necessarily represent the position of the entities
represented nor of CLAME. This material is presented with the sole
purpose of sharing various viewpoints of the people within the CLAME
family, to thus develop a broader understanding of some of the subjects
of current interest in the Latin American Church.

.-'

CONTEXTUALIZATION FROH A BIBLICAL POINT OF \'IEW

by Hillian Cook

Given the short amount of time that lvaS given to me to prepare this pap'er, and
the length of time at my disposal here, it goes lvithout saying that it Hill be impossible for me to cover our topic the uay it deserves to be covered.
Although in the last fu1 years it is the 11 in thfnP, ': in some evangelical circles
to talk about contextualization, ue have not been able to find a formal or exacf definition of the
in the sense in Hhich l.ie are using it here. Since the term con. textualization
different things to different people and different theological
f;treams, ue will .leave formal definitions to one side r-rith the hope that these Hill
come out of the material l'le tTill be presenting as He .go
I think I should clarify, to begin l;vith, that the sense in lrhich I am
1'indigenization, "
using the uord i'contextualization" is not entirely synonymous
11
as appears to be the case in Hortimer Arias' excellent article on prophetic contextualizationn (1979 :1). Indigenization, as set forth by Nevius (1889), is hased
on the concept of the "three selfs'r: an indigenized church is self-governing, selfsustaining (economically) and self-propagating. Until recently, this concept Has
much the rage (although seldom put into practice) in certain missionary circles.
P.ecently voices from the School of Uissions at Fuller Theological Seminar)' have
questioned this approach, pointing out that a church can be apparently autonomous in
every 'tvay and still be a decontextualized church. Contextualization is defined,
say these missiologists, as it relates to the structures and socio-cultural symbols
within Hhich the church exists.
INTRODUCTION
For the Christian there is a better word than contextualization. This trord is
incarnation. lf ue . reflect deeply on the implication of John 9 s declaration .
And the Hord uas made flesh,
and dwelt among us ,
and
beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,
full of grace and truth (John 1:14) .
trill understand what contextualization means from the Biblical point of vielv. The
incarnation of the Son of God into our sinful and rotten lmrld has profound il"lplications for our understanding of hoH the t.J ritten Hord becane flesh and continues to be
made flesh in all cultures and societies of this earth. I t also has implications for
the incarnation of the church of Jesus Christ in this l-70rld. This is Hhat contextualization deals 'tvith.

t-Te

I have observed a continuity bett-1een our cristology, our way of doing theology
and our concept of the Church. The neodocetic cristology of Evangelical fundamentalism leads almost inevitably to a decontextualized Scripture and to a disembodied

- 2 -

church. The neo-adoptionist' cristology of European a.Tld Anierican liberalism and its
heirs in Latin America is almost aiuays reflected in a
Hord that is the revelation of God in a restricted sense only. As a result, the church ends up beinp. so human that it loses its divine distinctiveness and is almost indistinguishable from o'ther
humanistic groups . Both cristological heresies have lost sight of the Biblical meaning of the incarnation. Therefore, contextualization, as ue are defining it here,
makes li,ttle sense to either fund&-uentalism- or liberalism.
The relationship between the tt-1o natures of Jesus
and of the divine : imd
human dimensions of the Bible and of the church--escape our logic. They are facts
_.tb_a t; _;l-Te IDU$.t -C!-CCept on faith Hhile at the same time acting on them as though -lTe Wl. :. derstpod them fully. There is no other r.-1ay, because the incarnatiort of Jesus Christ
demands of us submission to Him and commitment to the "t-7orld. The mystery of the indoes not allot:r for an escapist or decontextualized Gosp el. The God l-mo "ecal!le _flesh ttro thousand years ago in a specific historical {eeographic, linguistic-,
socio-cultural and political-economic) context, is the same God Hho has comniunicated
with His creatures through the Scriptures, in many settings, and
continues to
become flesh in ._each period of history and in each. socio-cultural context;. through
His _church and His \<lord.
The symbols thatc God chose for communicating through the Bible
not created
in ..he11ven. -. The H<:>ly Spirit used, and continues to use, . ordinary' everyday,
sometimes pagan symb.o ls to . shm-1 His glory among men. The verbal and liturgical syinhols
of the church Here not sent in .a
from heaven. ' The Holy Spirit, through 't he
church, took advantage of the ritualistic symbols--JeHish and pagan-.,.of the day, and
of purely secular terminology_, to . communicate the faith,. This is still the way God
chooses to communicate with our suffering human race .

1.

Context :

\-Jorld Reality t..rith a Capital R

In the Base Ecclesial Communities in the Catholic Church, 11context'' is synony.;.

mous with "reality 11 --Reality "rith a capital R n 1arins 1977). P..eality is the context
of the marginali;?ation, oppression and alienation in l-lhic.."l'the majority of Latin
Americans . find themsetves . It is also the theological, ecclesiastical and missiological context in uhich these base communities develop. I Hill return to the !teality
of the base communities a little later. For the moment, let !'le drau a little diagram
to illustrate the dimensions of this Reality. Hhat "t-7e see here is the "contextualization;; of a diagram that \'Tas suggested by one of my professors to illustrate another
type of Reality.

- 3 -

PEP..SONAL DU1ENSION

IUPERSONAL Dll1ENSION
.

..

1. COsmic forces

(
\

2.

3.

. G)

...... .
4-).

5.

TRANS1 PIRICA

beings
. ( or1.xas
... )
Spl.r::tts

4.1
4.2 nsain ts " _ " :
4. 3 Principalities and
powers .(stoichea)

.;.:.. . -.-

..

:..

Natural forces

6 . So:cial beings

'

(.

6.1

5.1 Natural sciences

5. 2
5.3

Angels
SaFan, etc.

4.

Intermediate

< .:- --i\

2.3

3.1 Astrology
3.2 Hagic, macumba
3.3 Para-psychology

Cf.)

. p.

EARTHLY

2.2

- -

1'1

2.1 !he'Trinity

:Fatalism
11
I:.:::r;::;.a'' or fc.te

1. 2

Supernatural beings

Social sciences
Sin
.6 .3 Harginaliiation, aliena.. tion and oppression ..

6.2

Automation
Dehumanization

;EHPIRICA

(tension)
(Hiebert 1978:16)
. This diagram illustrates the total Reality or context in t-Thich t-Te live and move
in Latin
The contextualization of the Gospel must take into account every
dimension of this Reality.
tend, hotiever, to focus our attention only on the aspect of Reality Hhich is most familiar to us.. In this overall Reality . there are four
poles of tension. The forces of ;rmodernization" or
tend to pull ,us
toward the pole t-Te have called "earthly 1' 'or .''empirical" (squares 5 and 6) . . The same
forces push the human race inexorably touard the t-rorld of the 11 impersonal" or dehumanizing (square 5) . On the other hand, there are forces of reaction that push an
ever larger number of people tm-rards tt.,-o completely opposite extremes. TI1ey sometimes
move tmiard the pole of extra-terrestrial escapism (square 2) and.<sometimes
the pole of a socio-empiric r educcionism {square 6). Between these two extremes there
is a tvorld. unknm-m to the pure empiricists .because it cannot be proved: scientifically
(squares 3 and 4) . But, in spite of its being 11trans-empirical, 1' this is a tvorld that
for millions
people is as r eal as the tangible objects that surround.
It is
a Reality in
our nei.ghbors seek
to their most
problems.
I
referring to the \Torld o f spiritism; and of popular relieiosity. While the elite
s eek ans'tvers in the impersonal forces of magic,. astrr logy and para-psychology, the
masses hide
hurts in ti.1e. comforting rituals of veneration of the "saints." This
is als o the deoonic world of'
and poHersn l1hich manipulate the str uctures - o.f this aeon.

of

am

. ..

l .

Any attempt at contextualization should take into accotmt all these dimeooions
of our total Reality. Unforttmately, this doesn't happen very frequently. Many of

-- 4 -

the churches that vTe represent are on the edges of the Latin American Reality . Hhile
the Lati,n Ameri.can people find themselves trapped in the vrorld of impersonalism and
the' purely empirical (squares 5 and 6)' the ch'tirch seems' to have 'difficulty in getting
ouq of the supernatural -box (square 2). The great st-r uggle we have ahead is to look
for Hays in 't-7hich the Gospel can become prophetically incarnate in each Of these six
con texts . 1:_/
Principles of Contextualized Communication
Throughout the Bible v7e find a God l-Tho is concerned about
wit.h His
creatures and knocking 'dol-m all the barriers that hiliaer social connnuni c8,tion. One of
the dimensions of God's image in men and vlomen--which still remains, in spite of the
barriers erected by sin--is their capacity for communication. Communication involves
the transfer of messages between one or more communicators (sources or transmitters)
and one or more receivers. Both the communicator and the receiver come from different
contextsp which makes communication difficult. The message consists of content or
meaning
i s couched in particular forms (language, t-TOrds P signs, telecraphic signals, etc.) . Keeping these
facts in mind, let us briefly go over some fundamental principles . of communication .

2 . 1 The purpose of all communication is to bring as close together ' as possible
the understandirig of
transmitter v7ith that of the receiver.
2.2
message.

The receiver has the last lvord in the formulation of the content of the

2 . 3 t-Jhat the colllillunicator transmits is not the mean:ing of the message but the
symbols or forms in uhich that meaning is contained. The meaning as such does not
reside in the forms (symbols) of the message, but in the heads of the communicator
and the receiver, respectively. The cornmu.Tlicator transmits a message l7ith his meaning and the receiver, 1;11hen he receive's the aessage, adds his
2.4 Since the receiver has "ve to
over a message, effective communication
requires the transmitter to take the receiver and his context or Reality as his point
of departure. Briefly, this is contextualization.
1. The great Pentecostal grouth in Brazil has developed precisely among the
masses v1ho are involved in Afro-Brazilian spiritism, becauc;e it has known hovr to
confront ag gressively the uorld of the ;'intermediate spirits . n (Johnson 1969 :66ss) .
Tilis has caught the attention of the Catholic Church, t-Jhich has made several sociological studies on pentecostalisrn--and the Ca tholic charismatic movement v7hich appeals to many middle-class people Hho are attracted to the impersonal spiritism of
astrology and para-psychology (Revista Eclesiastica nrasileira 1971 : 78-94; Ribeiro,
Boff, et al , 1978) . On the other hand , " considering the extraordinary
of the
tnnbandista (spiritist) cult. . o\>Te have the i mpress ion of
a phe nomenon of a
vio.!.ent eruption o f religiosity dissatisfied . vTith t h e_official religious forms
/of/ official Catholiciso, /of/ Protestantism and /of/ Kardecism /"scientific" /
spiritism/. Umbanda gives
impression of being-a-grass-roots protest against
all religions that are imported and insufficiently adapte d to the environment. r
(Kloppenburg 197'5 : 34) .

- 5 -

2.5 Coiiiiilunication llill be more effective 1:men the transmitter, the m essage, and
the receiver are part o f the same cotitext..:.-t-Tith a resulting increase iri correlation
bet't-Teen their respective meanings-and t<7hen the context that is shared is the Reality
of the teceivE!r and .not of the communicator.
2. 6 The more the me-ssage 11scratehes uhete the receiver itches " the more significant (comprehensible) will be the message, and the more impact it will have. Therefore, contextualization requires that the COM11lunicator identify ;.rith the Reality t-1here
the receiver Hitches'.' so that his message can "scratcn" it.

2.7 Lack of credibility on thepart of the communicator and his message interferes with communication. The cor:municator and his message lose credibility 1:-1hen the
receiver perceives the message to have little relevance to the Reality (experience)
of the commnnicator. ' The message also loses credibility "to.-rben the communication is
stereotyped and depersonalized to facilitate its manipulation. "In jesus, the stereotyped God broke out of the stereotype . His enemies accused him of many things, but
never of being a foreigner. n (Kraft 1978: 270-280, 309. 313) .
These seven principles of contextualized cOI!ll'lUnication -.;..rill ser\Te as poirtts of
reference in our consideration of the various levels of contextualization.
3.

Levels of Contextualization

Contextualization is necessary at all levels of human communication. Contextualization is required at the linguistic level (semantics), at the psyco-social level
(inter--personal), at the socio-cultural level (ethnic) and at" the socio-politicaleconomic level (ideological).

3.1

Contextualization on the linguistic level

Several years ago linguistics became a front-line science. It has prompted

nelT sciences such as the philosophy of language, psyco-linguistics, socio-linguistics,
etnolinguistics, metcilinguistics (the language behind the language), hermeneutics,
logic. semiology (root meani..Ttgs), the theory of communication.
anthropologists such as Levi-Strauss and Uary nouglas, and linguists such"'as Noam Chomsky
have dedicated themselves to studying the common myths and syr:tbols / or the universal
principles,- behind all human languages (Halefeijt 1977: 315-3!7). Host of these
studies belong to the functionalist school of the social sciences," and therefore are
not very critical of the Reality they seek to analyze. Nevertheless, they offer some
tools that can help us understand the relation beb:reen
culture and ideolop,y.
In 0 Enigma da Religiiio, Rubem Alves of Brazil points out the ideoloeical nature
of language. Citing a variety .of sociologists and philosophers of langUage
Herton, Dewey, Lefebvre and vJittgenstein), he says:
Everyday logic is the logic of language. GramMar reveals the Hay in t-rhich
the '"orld is organized for man . . For the social man, the physical . tiniverse
only exists by means of society and, consequently. by mea ris of language
Our conceptual language tends to determine our perceptions, and in a related way, our thoughts and behavior. Ideas define the situation.

6 -

And Alves continues:

The other side of the coin is that in defining our Horld,
really
establishes. its goals .and limits. This prevents us from ,perceiving those
dimensions of the real which are not foreseen (or are undesirable) by our
conceptual system Language, therefore, functions in an environmental way.
It gives
and blinds at the same time. It illuminates and obscures .
It makes us prisoners of its world, excluding other possible worlds.
(Alves 19-75 : 63, 64; ef Newbigin 1978: 161-165).
In his first book, Alves had already pointed out -the =paralyzing effect: of
language and insisted on the necessity of the death and resurrection of the 0 language
of faith ," already overloaded
ideological preconceptions.
the language of
faith, for its
preservation, rejects death and remains as ,a repetition of the
langt1age of the past,. it ceases to be historical. . '' It is "the: presence of that
was alive once, but "tlhich no1:r1, heine dead, remains in the world of the livinp,"
(Alves 1968: 103-110) . Although 1:r1e may not all entirely agree Hith the conclusions
;reached by Alves .in his tlvO books, the concepts I just quoted are based on the incarnation principle in the Gospel. As is well said by the Brazilian priest, Urbano
Zilles, ':Language aluays has a firm existential reference. 11 (197:126). m1en a lan.guage stops communi.cating intellieibly to the majority of the receiving public, it is
a dying language.- The language of the Bible shatved a high degree of contextl.lalization
throughout the time when it
put into "Triting. This same degree of contextualization should be seen in theology, in ecclesiology, and in the:_ communicat i on of the
Gospel. Zilles goes on to say:
Evange.li.z ation needs. a permanent translation tdthirt the overall process of_;
:the historical evolution of .languages and life situations. Unfortunately, .
the exaggerated preoccupation t'lith verbal orthodoxi in the business of theology noH and then leaves more gaps, because ne'(IT ._rays of life, neN languages,
emptied traditional theological dis:c ourse, inherited largely from the ontic
metaphysics of Scholasticism. (Zilles : l28)
Alves' preoccupation Hith the death and resurrection of the "language of faith, "
however,. leaves sor.1e questions unansHered .
do you cOl'lffiunicate the Gospel, and
do you :share theological concerns with those who speak another
or
Christian language? In other Hords 9 hov1 do you contextualize language in relation
to a new . Reality (or a recently, discovered Reality)
decontextualizing it in
relation to othe.rs Hho have not yet :perceived that Reality? tf He insist that
others" must leam the neu language, Hill -:re not be falling into the trap of ideological and cultural paternalism and sinning against the principles of coinmunfcation?
I dare to suggest that contextualization requires a double task. It demands of us
a constant search for new languages and symbols Hhich more adequately define our
.Reality., and at the. same time requires of us the communication of . the riches of the
.Gospel in the old symbols,
the people understand, trying at the same time to
r,ive tl1em nev7 content .

'
I would like to emphasize the need to discover and not simply to create: new symbols. \-le run the risk of ivory toHer theology
corresponds more to the problens
and needs of the theologian than to those of the peop-le '1-Te supposedly represent. Contextualized language sp-r ings from the.. Reality in 'Hhich the people live and ttot necessarily from the. Reality seen through our eyes.

- 7 -

3.2

Contextualization on the inter-personal level

The Bible is full of ex.a mples of contextualization . .on this leveL The
theophanies; ' the'
by God of the pol':lgamous and cruel con_te;Kt of the environtnent in 'tvhich Israel developed, are only U'To . examples from the Old, .Testament. In his
letfgthy dialoriue with the patriarchs, for example, God accepts thein j :w;;t. as they are,
as -part of their context; and'
utmost patience leads them'
by: step into the
paths of faith: 0 And the . times of this ignorance ('_,od '-linked at; . but no"1 coinma.Tldeth
all men every where to repent. :1 (Acts 17:30)
An analysis of the method of communication used by Jesus demonstrates that
always toolr; the Reality of the receiver
point of departure. Hhen
crosses His path -v1ith problems that are physical (blind), socio-economic (beggar),,
psychological ,.
and spiritual (sinnet), Christ doesn't put !lis hands on him
to heal him:i :He
t 'offer h;i..m alms and much less a uay of solving his employment
problem. lie doesnt recommend
.. i:>r him, nor does Ue press him to confess his sins and recognize Him a9 ' "his personal. Lord and Saviour. n . :Jesus simply
asks him one question: "Uhat do you warit _.me _to do for Y<?u? 11 Incarnation put into
practice! nr :want to see! says the blind
. and inimediately he recedve5 his
sight arid follows Jesu5 in the uay (Hark 10:46-52).

Let's go a little deeper int'o the mat'f'er. The NeTri Testament .emphasis on eternal
life and salvation does riot move uniformiy in the spiritual dimension, :as
Evangelicals like
emphasize. Salvation and eternal life
errib.race all the
mensions of our existence) are experienced in different contexts and different 'toJays .
The only two times that Jesus
asked, "Uhat shall I do
.inhe,r.i.t . eternal
life?", He did not 11evangelizea . hfs . questioners in "spiritual" : t:eriris ." .. lnstead, He
responded in well coritextualized sd2io-ethical tenns: "GO seJ,.i give folloo:-r .''
(Hark 10:17-22); "l.Jhat is \oJritten 'in 'the
. this do, and thou shalt live:"

(Luke 10:25-29). . The . salvation of. Zaqueus Has '"contextual;zed" by

:in .the light
of his restitution of 'stolen 'godds: .
day is saivation cone
th:i,a ho.use"
(Luke 19:1-10). Even the
o: the Philippian jailer,
.
by Luke in terms o f his personal faith :in Jesus Christ.
about; in
of the political-religioUs threat that the
of PaUl and Silas
to the Roman systein.

to

to

Finally, the fire of the

of the Holy Spirit, far from being a very
pleasant individualistic eXpeti'ence, is described by John the Baptist as' an event
of terrible judgment aeainst all those who sin against their neighbor-- ''Exact no
more than that 't'J'h ich is appointed you, " etc. As a result of his contextualize-d
messa:ge,
h.e. was throvm
jail
and. .htter beheaded by Herod!
3: 1-20)
.
.
..

in

It's time to come do'tm' from the theoretical to the practical. It's much eas.ier
to talk about contextualizatiort than it is' to put it into practice in our relations
in community . Theological or ideoiogical fundamentali.sm-:...be it rightist, centrist
or leftist (I don't be lieve: in any of . them)--that close our minds "to the
tions and corrections of
'a nd
sin against the very prin.ciple of '
incarnation that is rooted in th_e ,heart df divine revelation. C.ontextualization on
the inte r-personal 'level requires us to become deeply
in theological, sociocultural, and socio.:.economic _.Realid.e s that are foreigx} to our Olm _particular Realil=Y
He cannot reject other Realities'--be.cause loTe .do not understand
or do not like
them; because they use a different theoloBical langu'age or their ide_ological commitr.Jent is different from ours--until
have penetrated those Realities, as did the
Son of God .

- 8 -

3.3

Contextualization on the socio-cultural level

This is the contextualization level "t-Tith Hhich I am a little more failiar

because the greater portion
of my more recent
studies have been in , the field of cul.
:- .
.
t:ural anthropology. This tvas the main emphasis of the
held at .Hillowbank ,

in January 1918
sponsorship of the Continuing Lausanne: Conm:i.ttee.
During this consultation,
of .the pres.u ppositions of the Anglo-Saxon
' anthropologists loJere strongiy questioned by representatives of . the

Theological
and a group in the United States and Engl?lld called
1
'" Radical
with 't"Thich I, personally, identify myself.

some .

Anglo-Saxon missionaries were the pioneers in

and.
continue to make their contributions.
have .t o recognize, ho,.,ever, that. the u.s.
missionary mOvement lias not . p'a id enough
to
sociology,
nor have liberation theologians .

Evangelicals in Latin .America give11 :

ficient time .to cultural anthropology. We need the contributions of
Some 'of the insights from Ethnolinsuistics (the study _of
and

!)primitive" peoples) whose pioneers have . been people of the . caliber, of .Eugene Nid,a !.
and Kenneth Pike, are ' being applied to inter-cultural studies . For .. exatllp;Le, Prof..:.
Charles Kraft (formerly of the Bible
nm..r at Fuller Seminary),
ta!-..en
the principle of adyriami.c eqUival(mce" "t-lhich is used in translating .t he Bible, and
is attempting to apply it to the totality of Christian communication. Orbis Books
(the publishing arm of the )1aryknoll Fathers, . which publishe_s the books on l,iberation
theology) has juat
.a
book entitle_d Theoio,U.zing in ..Culture . .
.I ; ,r
dontt have this book in my. poss_ession, I
from a copy . of the original ..
... . _. . .
. ,,
"Dytiamic equivalence" is a :tooll<Thich can. prove useful .in our attempt
411derstand contextualizatiori on a s o cio-cultural .level. Nevertheless, . it . is
.t o
that this concept err-s in not being ..sufficiently .critical ideologically .due
its
excessive dcpcnc;lencc on functionalist sociology. 2/
tmrd, ''dynamic equivalence 11
is 'a 11 futicti6nal equivalenceri )../
is n(dther-static .nor formal.
Riblica.l
11
passage is .
t-lhat .t s sought is ne.i ther a forma1" or literal (word :for trord)
would probably
.unintelligible--nor. a translation
"mile
less tied to each word l.n the
continues using the same literary, and cl.,ll.tural
symbols as the original. If the object: is to cotlllllunicate the meaning or
o1;_
the
and not just the
forms of it, Hhat the translator seeks are the
symbols in the receiving culture that .most faithfully communicate the
contained
in the: s)rmbols' .t hat were use'd .by .t 4e
all lmow ,- for
j;.
in

. .. .
:

2. T he 'anthropology and functionalist sociology of Halinm.rski,

l!erton, Parsons and
concern themselves with learning how the socio- cultural
structures
and
\iThy ; in other.
they are .more . interested in their
performance 'o r
than in a critical analysis of the structures
.. ,
They seek to effect structural ehanges in such a way that soc;i.ety may continue .functioning efficiently. ui.th a mininiuro .of .c;Iisturbance. Functionalist sociology
the strategy and
the ' missionary establishment, as l'Tell as the foreign
policy of the United States (e.g. Nicaragua!) .

.
.
.
3. The most efficient social changes, according t .o functionalism, , are brought 1
about when the agent for change in a given social grou-P T!lanages to subst;itute .for; :a
cultural component (a stone axe, poligamy,_ rel.i gion, or
po.l itical regime),
"functional equivalent 11 which doesn't destroy
the cultural ethos or the social
structure of the group.

of

- 9 -

some cultures the seat of the emotions is not the heart but the liver, or the kidneys
or the stomaCh," into
therefore, Christ is invited to enter!) Hhat .the
lator tries to obtain is not
correspondence, 11 word for lrord or idiom for
1
idiom, but a "dynamic equivalence ' which l-7ill best communicate the meaning of the
orj;ginal: message. (Kraft 1977: ./.62-491) .
.,.The application of God 1 s message in and to a new situation results in a
event in the course of history Evecy Bible translation, every new church,
evety conversion, every attempt at theologizing is a new event in human
pe rience. The
character': (of the Biblical propositions) does not,
as many assume, prove the trUth of the proposition but, rather, their inappropriateness to real life--at least till such a time as they are perceived
/by the recipients of the Gospel/ to be appropriate at the level lJhere life
is lived. But, "t,Jhenever eternal truths are thus perceived, it is not . their
eternalness but their dynamic relevance to the life of the receptor that is
perceived.
'1\10 examples of application of the principle of t'dynamic
cific case are Don Richardson's books (1976 and 1978).

in a spe-

The Scriptures offer many examples of contextualizati.on on a

level. The acceptance by the church in Jerusalem of the conversion of
without their having to
throug.."'l the reli.g ious-cultural process of circumcision
(Acts 10 and '11) and the subsequent ratifying of this fact by the Council of
Jerusalem (Acts 15) are tliTO of the best known examples. If we ap.alyze
preaching
St. Paul, \ole will. see that he communicates diffe.rently "Tith people from.:a
background and environment than l-Tith Greek philosophers or pagans from the-Lycaoriian
culture df Derbe and Lystra (cf Acts 13:13-4i, 14:18:-20 and 17:16-34). " There.fore
disputed he in the synagogue with the Je,Js, and tvith
devout persons, and {n the
market daily with them that met
him. Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans,
and of the Stoics, encountered him. 11 (Acts 17 : 17 ,18). !Jhatever the level of his
audience, the apostle
hm.r to communicate -.:.rith them contextually.

go

of

However, the coin of socio-cultural contextualization has bJO sides. As Lesl1ie

Newbigin observes, culture is not neutral (1978: 161, 163-165) . In
first place,
it hasheen affected by sin. In the second place, all cultures have been molded,
more than b y a
according to Kraft' (1978: 119-l3Lf), by a certain definite
ideology. !.I Throughout all his epistles, except Philemon, St. PaUl makes reference
to celestial powers (principalities and p0v7ers) which struggle
God for dominion
of the universe. In Romans 8:37-39 he ennumerates a long list of personal and impersonal forces and of realities wh.ich cannot gain dominion over the people of God
because of the victory of Christ on the ' cross. These pot-Ters are behind the sociocultural and political systems of this uorld.
The apostle
a Greek term, in more or less current usage, the lvord stoichea,
and nre-contextualizes" it, giving it a little different: meaninc. In
Greek
a nd in the koine, this term meant' " tiers, ranks or series.' 1 The term stoichea uas
used. in philosophy to refer prima.r ily 't o those elements from tJhich all things issue
(see this usag e in i i Peter 3:10). The astrologers used i .t to refer to the celestial
4. In its non- pejorative sense, ideology is the system of goals and means that
serves as the necessary backdrop for any human option or line of action (Segundo 1976 : 102).

- 10 -

. bodies that ruled : the destinies ..of mankind. Finally, it 1-1as also used to describe
of wisdom, the rudiments or fundamental principles of some philosophical
system (cf this use in Hebret-rs 5 : 12).. But Paul seems to give the ,w ord stoichea a ne,.,
meaning, though still based on the
meanings of his time. For -. the apostle, the
stoichea (rudinents or principles) are those _elements in the pre-Christian
(Jewish as 't-Tell as pagan) in the world vielm (or ideologies) and also in the political
system, which enslave man instead of liberating him so that he ca.11 be truly huma., before God (Kittel 19.78: 684, 685 ; Ne"t>Jbigin: _.159,
cf Fackre 197.!!_: 28, 123). "Even
so we, when vle
children, ''1ere in . bondage, under .t he elements lstoichea/ of the
tTorld but nm.T, after that ye have . known God, or rather are known of God, how turn
yc again to the "t-Teak and beggarly elements lstoichea/ tThereunto ye desire again to
be Jn bondage? 11 (Galatians 4:3,. 9 ; cf Col. 2:20,21)
. . ;

In Ephesians 6:12, Paul reminds us that vTe are in mortal combat . against
principalities pov1ers rulers of the darkness of this '.rorld, against spiritual
11 ickedness in high places. 11 What appears very clear in light of all this is that
the exorcism of demons is necessary on the structural level as tTell as on a personal
.level. In
even the exorcisms on a personal level have clear social, political and economic as well as cultural il!iplications . He have only to look at tqe
case of Jesus and the Gadarene
t-ras possessed by demons, and the case of Paul and
the demon-possessed Philippian. Pastor
Arias has put is so well
in
recent essay entitled, "Contextual Evangelization in Latin America: Between
Accommodation and Confrontation" : . "Contextualization from a Biblical po:int of viet7
is ah1ays a 'prophetic' and confronting contextualization.n (Arias 1979 .: 10-12).

This paper lvould not be complete if ue did not po;i.nt out that the Latin American
theologies that are in the forefront can also err through lack of socio-cultural contextualization. In his essay, "On the Ibe rian Concept of Time, the t-Torld-famous .
Brazilian
Gilbereo Freyre points out . thal: capitalism and marxism--both
of them prodqcts of -northern European . culture and the so-called indust r ial revolution
of the XIX
based on a linear concept of time -and history which is
to the Iberian concept of time and history. For the Iberian, time is neither
linear nor cyclical but vie't>Ted as a wh ole, \-There past, present and future interact
'lvith each other.
Such an attachment includes an identification with an Iberian sociologic a lly significant noti on of social time that, although ina dequa te to a n .
industrial civilization based mainly on we ll-organized human labor,
to correspond b e tte r than a stric;tly Anglo-Saxon notion of time to a
lization based on
and whose destiny ,.1ill probably be v e ry
f e rent from the one that, deterministi c Uarxist and
i deas
ascribe to human nature.
(Freyre 1975: 137-139).
On the other hand, I lvould s ay that t he ';creative improvisa tion " of Latin A.rnerican
theolo gies is much more . Iberian than neo-Europe an, Hhich makes its analysis -and nnde rs tanding difficult for those of us
have been formed in a different theoloe ical
context.
a lso unde rlines this lberian penchant for improvisa tion, quotinR a
Don Quijote and an aspiring painter. :1l1hat
s hort but s ignificant exchange
are you p a int;mg'l" asks Don Quij ote . .."Thi s i s that Nhich tvill come into being , n
replies the painter (Freyre : 6, 140), a comment which, I s uspect, well des cribes the
methodology of the Latin American theologies.

- 11 -

3.4

Contextualization on a socio-political level

Here we have reached the heart of our problem. In a chapter entitled "The
Context of Latin American Reality 1 ' uhich can be found in a small book
for
. social : scif:mtists at the Latin American Episcopal Congress in Pue bla, we find the
following description of this Reality.

. :. .
.

The reality of the majority is a continuing phenomenon in the l).istory of

all the Latin American
\\That is surprising nmv is tl:lat the poverty
of the majority is seen alongside an economic groWth that has had rio effect
on the conditions and standards of living for these majorities
et
lfagistta:' 198). On''the con
we see a 13radual, but accelerating deterioratiori of those
aS pointed out 18 years ago by John XXIII
(Hater ei:
187).

Then there folloHS a list of evidences of socio-economic deterioration for the

masses of Latin Americans :
The lack of decent housing, the growing rate of unemployment and underemployment or. the decrease in buying power for the lower
the unmet demandS 'for services such as
health, social security, .etc. ,
the existence 'of chronic malnutrition, made acute ' by the
of prol6n$ed h'linge'r ; infant mortality, etc.

An<i : these st>ciologists finish by pointing out that "the roots of this reality
are in the prese n:t pattern of development in Latin America, t.J.i th peculiarities in
each country, and in the behavior of the economic system th.a t supports it. u
(Goros tiaga
-1979: 18;19)..
- .
.
'lt 's obvious. that fu vie'"] of this Reality' t-rhich
all knmT to some e:g:tent, lrle
cannot speak
inter-personal or even socio-cultural contextualization.
Here we need tools fot a deeper analysis of our Reality'. I believe that the criticalanalytical contributions of the theologians of liberation can help us understand contextualization (they uould say " commitment") on a political and economic level. Although the term :cori:textualization'' 5/ docs not appear, as far
I have been able to
ascertain, in the conttibut'ions of these theologies, there i!; an abundance of material in reference to this sub ject from their OloJn point of viet-7. Juan Luis Segundo,
for example, s hmJ s us the impossibility of applyine the lTord of God to human P.eality
from '"ithiri an antiseptic laboratory ''immune to all the present ideological tendencies and
I t is at this point t hat Ser,undo introduces us to the concept
11
Of the henneneutiC Circle , II Or 11 the COntinUOUS Change in OUr interpretation Of .the
Bible relative to the continuous cl-jange in our present reality, individual as Hell
as social. 11 (Seeundo: 12)

as

This 'circle " (or ;'movement, : r or better yet, "spiral'' because it i s n't a static
or closed hermeneutic) presuppos-e s otir inclination or ability to asi-: enriching questions or to interject doUbts ' ahout the actu_a l situation.
addition, it presupposes
a net-T way of interpreting t!.le Bl.ble which is also
_:rhe..se
are based on four very decisive factors:

In

5.

The context of the committed Christl.an is d<;!fined hy the t e rm

in other
the ongoing process of action based: on a
reflexion
previous action.

em

- 12 -

(1)

A net;T way of experiencing Reality, Hhich leads us to an

picion .,, 6./
..
. . ,,

sus..

i' . ;

(2)

TI1is, "suspicion11 relates to the whole ideological superstructure in general

and to theology in particular.

(3) .

suspicion, .: i.e. the susp1c1on that tve have not taken into acall the existing data in our Biblical analysis., comes as a result of
this net-7
of experiencing theological Reality.

(4)

Conseq:uently, \ le have a new

that is, a neu uay of interpreting
the source of . our faith (the Scriptures) loTith the neu elements \le have at
hand. These tools come to us from critical-analytical sociology and not
from philosophy as continues to be true in traditional theology (Segundo:

11-14, 116-122).
mtether or not ':T e are in agreement l-Tith all their conclusions, the theologies
of liberation represent a radically prophetic current of thought in the contextualization of the Gospel. We should listen to .them.
they speak to us of the
"political dimension of
t:.hey are reminding us that the Christian faith is
public , and not private--although Hitl;lout rejecting the private dimensions of faith.
they point out the element of conflict in social Reality throughout history,
they Shal US the SOCial nature of sin, VIhich at the same time includes individual
sin. Uhen the
of , liqeration underline the fact that God reveals Himself
in the
process, they are shm-ring us that divine revelation is ah1ays
historically placed (made flesh, contextualized), and that salvation-liberation
is always given in a specific historical context (praxis), which is political,
tecl1nological-human and personal (Gutierrez 1973: 36, 37, 45, 176- 1978, 235, 236).
Finally, by insisting on our commitment . to a specific historical project--though ToTe
may debate the content of
theologies of liberation make us see
that . the Christian faith, far
being decontextualized, requires concrete commitment and.action.
TI1e theological reflexion and evangelizing action of a person or a church committed to the Reality (the
of the Latin American people, h as as its point
of
the people ; i.e. their ':grass-roots bases " and particular Reality, and
riot . the dogmas or pre-sullpositions of the church. lie have a clear example of this
type of contextualization in the !tBasc Ecclesial Communities 11 in Latin America.
Instead of being simply an extension on a level of p raxis of the theologies of
liberatiqn, these
are .their
of departure as Hell as their laboratory for
action. The "base
are more or less spontaneous
expressions of the religiouc;--social dissatisfaction of the oppressed masses in Latin
America in vihich context sone of the liberation theoloRians began the ir critical
r:eflexion on praxis, and for Hhom they continue making their contributions. At least
in Brazil, '!-fl)ere there are said to be CO,OOO of these. communities, the Base Ecclesial
Commun:i,tie$
a demonstration .of the .contextual nature of Latin American theologies .
At the verf
this Reality represents a challenge to the theological and rnissiological reflexion and action of the Evanr,elical church in Latin America.
6.
suspicion': is the ability to see, behind theological and socio. political theses, the . ideologies op. lrhich these are based .

- 13 -

Hov7 shall l<7C respond to this challenge? Let me make a feH suggestions, in the
first place, for those \-Jho see in the theologies of liberation a threat to our
Christian faith.
(1)

(2)

Let us approach these theologies uith humility,

th open minds, ready to
learn. (The bibliography "'hich follous can be a good beginning.) Anthropologist Jacobo Loeuen of the Bible Societies has observed that the depth
of the riches of divine t-J isdom t-Till not be exhausted until every people,
culture (there are more than 6,000!) and nation has the Bible in its
Olvn language, and has
had a chance to theologize freely within the context of its 01m Reality.
-
Let us not allm-1 our respective theologies and the ideologies that feed
them to hinder Latin America 1 s prophetic voices from speaking to us from
the perspective of their otm Reality.

(3)

Let us never lose our critical sense toward the front-line theologies, in
the light of Scripture and our m-m Reality, but at the same time let us
recognize that our interpretation of Biblical Reality and of our ot-m
social Reality is conditioned by our culture and ideolop,y, and therefore,
is not absolute.

(4)

Let us be critics from -,;-J ithin and not from

Let us penetrate
into the overall Latin American Reality . Those viho are not acquainted
\vith, or have not experienced that Reality (Hhich is true of most of us),
have feH criteria 'l:ifith which to evaluate the theological reflexion of
those \vho do know i t first

..

.. .

For my brothers and colleagues who are militants in the

of the so-called
;Christian vanguard' 1 (who I believe should take seriously the above suggestions
from their o"m perspective, I shall add one final observation:

(5)

4.

Respect the Christian commitment of those of us who have been conditioned

by other cultural, socio-economic and political
Be patient
uith us, and please, don't shut off the dialor,ue.

T'ne Rislcs of Contextualization

. J,will merely point out four of the nore obvious risks in contextualizinr; the
divine message. Borroliling once again from cultural anthropology,' I w'ill ' give you
my attempt at 1;contextualizing 11 the chart worked out by Prof. Kraft
XXXI-4}
td illustr ate \-that happens when lve confuse the fonns uith the meanings (content)
of our message:

HEANINGS

FOPJ1S
Foreign
Autochthonous
Foreign
Autochthonous

+
+

+
+

RESULTS

Foreign

Dominated church

Autochthonous

Popular religiosity

Autochthonous

Syncretisa

Christian ]_/

Contextualizafion:

7. Applying
suspicion, ;; it
og:Lcal baggage of these Christian meanings is.

be

to a5k

the irleol-

- 14 -

This char.t. sums .u p . three of at least. four of the possible

zation.
(.;1.)

.,
I

11

rislu; ' ' of . contextuali-

H.et-1 forms of . dependence, i.e. changine one religious . o.r theological system,
be-.Jt .aut-ochthonous. Qr
for another system, .seemingly autochthonous,
.b ut \-lhich, .:.Qn- imposing its ovm standards, end.s U{) b.eing dqminant and, there.fore , :

..
.
.

(2) , The popularization .qf the Gospel. to such a point that . it ..loses its prophetic nature and its distinctive Christian c ha-racteristics
. (3) . . Syncretism, i.e .the . contextualization of
content. of , the message Hithout substantive changes in the foreign forms in l<Yhich the m.essar,e is con.municated. Good examples of this tmuld be Afro-Brazilian spiritism, or
the "simple Gospel ; that He Evangelicals
it is
in
imported forms (presuppositions, symbols and methodologies).
Ever;
Li.eolom that does not question--in the light of the Bible and the social
and cultural Reali.t:.y--the sub-Biblical (or anti-Biblical) theological and
ideological
on
it . is based, is also . syncretist.
(4)

The greatest risk to uhich contextualization can brine us is that of a

. total de-Christianization ..of theology, t-rhere Biblical truths lose their
normative value _and serve , only as secondary points of reference.

In spite of .t he
of ._these risks in contextualization, He are in no vmy
excuSed from the obligation of contextualizing the divine messar,e. Through its history, the church has been most faithful to her Lord Hhen she has ventured to take
allowing the Gospel to become . flesh in the very dust of the earth. It r<Tas
the same risk that God. took .in permitting His mm Son to t;ake on human nature and
humble Himself to the dust of the earth. The cros s '{-TaS not .the failure of the incarnation, but the proof of its resounding success.
!Is Newbigin has pointed out, the communication of the r.ospel always i'l'lplies
risks, not only for the communicator, but also for the C-ospel itself. He have the
treasure of divine grace in earthern vessels (II Cor. 4:7), but we have it as
stel-tards (I Cor. 4 : 1,2) and not as mmers. The stel.rard can yield to the temptation
of believing that the treasure is his. Or he can fall asleep and
it to be
stolen! But the loJ"orst thing the
can do is to forr,et the purpose for n hich
.treaSure
entr\lSted to him, and hide it in a hole in the ground fo:r fear- .of
displeasing his Lord. This is .,rhat the unfaithful seryant .did Hith the talent tbat
' '7as
rusted to him to be risked in the g ive and take of everyday
and -in the
marketplace of this
The ow faithful servants risked portions of the treasure
Hith
they llere entrusted and thereby received the approval of their Lord.
(Newbi gin : 212-214).

CONCLUSION
In the simple and moving story of the journey of the nm disciples from Emmaus,
it seems to me that He find four pointe of reference that
help us in the risky
undertaking of contextualizing .the Gospel.
(1)
1 '.

The ChristoloBical point of reference. It is Jesus Christ Hho, to begin

,;ith, communicates Hith . two dejecte d arid discouraged human heines, and it

- 15 -

is He v;ho identifies Himself (becomes flesh, contextualizes) with their

road, or vith their concrete Reality. It is also He r1ho opens the
Scriptures to us and breaks the bread of life and fellolr ship for and
l-lith us.
(2)

The point of reference of the dusty road, plagued "rith thieves (the
crete Reality) in tr hich Jesus becomes flesh or is contextualized.

(3)

The point of reference of the Hord t-Thich is opened to them by Jesus and
which serves as the focal point of reflexion on the praxis (or contextual
Reality) of the tHo disciples who are on the. road. These Scriptures are
reinterpreted by Christ and understood in a completely different l'!ay in
light of the experience shared on the road (the u!lermeneutical spiral'').

(4)

The brealdne of bread and the communion of the church open our eyes to
perceive unsuspected dimensions of God's action in the Horld. t.Ye
perience the adventure of contextualization tor,ether in the fellmTship
of the Body of Christ. It is only thus that our hearts l-Jill burn Hith
evangelistic fervor.

If we are to be faithful to the mssion of God, the church of Jesus Christ must
become flesh on the dusty roads of our bleeding Latin A.merica (tr hich implies commitment and action), open the Scriptures and break the bread of life and of Christian
fellotrship in the context of the Reality of the Horld and of the church. I believe
that these four points of reference will fix for us the parameters of contextualization from a Biblical point of vie\'T. (cf Fackre 1975 : 102-105).

--- CLAllE Colloquy

CONTEXTUALIZATION
A Response by

A. Rutschman

It- is good .to listen to the mediating voice of a person uho is the product of 'hoth
Americas. As I read Bill Cook 1 s paper, I realize that because of his cultural, religious and academic background, he is the right person to haqdle this subject.
Perhaps I should not try to represent the SBL in this discussion. Our stay here
is for a limited period, as representatives of the Hennonite churches in the task of
theological education in Latin America.
theological pilgrimaee has taken me '
from the extreme of dispensational fundamentalism to the acceptance of certain liberal
influences and values, until I find myself in the church of r:ty forebears, a radical'
Allabaptist l1ho seeks to update himself in a present .day environment. On arrivine in
Costa Rica after having
in other places (Colonbia, Uruguay, the U.S. and Bolivia),
Harriet. ,and I had to find our bearings in a situation that t-7as very different from -vrhat
_we expected. He
the need to dialogue with a theology "t-mich in one Ha)T' -at- tracts. .us, but in another Hay makes us uneasy .
. :-,
._As an -Anabaptist pacifist e I don 1 t support the violence t hat seems to be accepted
by:
of the net-T theologians, but at the same time, I admit that the insti.:..
tutional , violence of an imperial political system can be even more: crue l. As an
Anabaptist, I have problems vTith the_ ne1-1 theology 1 s concept of the people of God, a
certain universalism that could erase the distinction ben1een the church anrl the world,
but I admit that a church urapped up in itself is ver.; far from the Biblical standard.
I also fear for the place of the Bible, as the revelation of the vlord of
in the
new theology v7hich, in some Hritings appears to be relegated to the level of secondary
authority, but I confess that I had not allm7ed the Bible to speak to me as it should
in the context of the poverty of an oppressed and dependent >wrld. The Gospel is not
the property of the rich. The Biblical good news is directed to the poor . Sometimes
there seems to be a confusion between redemption (from sin and death) and enancipation
(from oppression) in Latin American theology. Hhile insisting on this distinction, He
shouldn't think that redemption is an experience limited to the spiritual and emancipation to the
Bill Cook notes that Jesus evangelized his questioners in
socio-ethical terms. The Biblical Gospel of liberation underlines . the
redemption and emancipation.
I appreciate
freedom of expression and teaching that
enjoy at the Seminary,
and I hope vre will be f;1ithful to the Lord of history in our efforts to interpret the
Hard of God in the context of a lmrld that is poor. I also appreciate the fellm-TShip
of the brothers in CLAUE, and I hope vre can continue dialoguine and cooperating in
spite of certain tension$ and conflicts.
. i .

Brother Cook underlines the problem of semantics in the communication and contextualization of the Gospel. His use of the uord "incarnate" helps us to study the
problem of contextualization in a Biblical frame of reference . He could add other
that vrould help our disc1.1ssion such as "actualizing" and 11 re-presentation. "
Perhaps my greatest problem has to do 1-1ith the relation betvJeen t-rhat r,od does in this
process and what it is up to. ma.ll to do. I am concerned about the tendency to leave
very little room for God. The use of the
"incarnate" or "become flesh" in Rill
paper suggests that the vTork i s His and Hhat He do is by His grace. He remember

-- 2 -

the l'JOrds of Paul in I Cor. 15 : 10: "But by the grace of God I am Hhat I am: and his
grace Hhich was bestoued upon .me uas not in vain ; but I labored more abundantly than
they all; yet not I, but the !jrace of God lJhich was 'irith me." In the final analysis,
it is the Hord of God that brings us \lhere tne are and not we who make the Word relevant. It is a '"ord that is kept permanently in heaven (Psalm 119 : 89) but at the same
time a tvord that speaks to us in a
tr ay . in eac.l} situation if ne are , ready to listen
and. .obey
without
being
tied
to
r:rays .

. . . .. : .
.
'

Although.the presentation of this subject in Brother Cook's paper doesn't lack

Biblical examples, I . l-TQuld like to see .a broader exposit,ion of
of contextualization in the history of salvation throughout
Dible :and of
hist;:ory of
the
as guide . and background for our task. I see the Biblical story as an
account ' of the continua,! ' 1re-pr_e sentation" of t;he great \-TOrks of God . . Biblical hist .ory doesn't go in cir.c les. Neither is it linear. It is rather. are-actualization,
a
of what God .has done for His people in each riel-1 situation. Here,
perhaps, might be a pobt, oi' contact Hith the Iberl.an concept described- in the paper.
It is .a process that follolIs. the t.1hole Biblical pro ression and the history of .t he .
church. rn each feast, Israel ce.l ebraten r,Jhat C:>Od has done (Deut. 26:3-10). It :i8 .not
sl.mply a matter of remembering, though that is a necessary step, but also of reactualizing what God has done. History becomes present v1ithout being cyclical.
After the re-presentation in the nevr situation in the celebration o_f the theophany, a
ne-i-r response is needed on the part of the
to Hhat God does. He should -underline, ho\-1ever, that this reneHal
an act of . God. Han. praises it and .responds.
Because it is God's work, man acts '111ith confidence. His efforts mean something .
He is 'not 'alone . Grace, though not .
demands human effort.

is

A' study of the Biblical progression betT:reen the promise and its fulfillment vTill
help us to understand our situation. The fulfillment of history is always partial
and unfinished, a step toward the
goal. Goci as the God of . the future moves
history tmvard Himself. The Biblical man trusts that under God his tory trill not be
devoid of meaning and that 'the goal lilill be the Kingdom of God on
ner:r earth (one
that is not

Let us look at a fe\-T of the more graphic expressions of this Biblical : proce$s.
In the Pentateuch we note that the proiirlse given to Abraham of land, nation and
blessing is fulfilled little by little, but at the sam"e time .it faces many. dangers,
primarily because of the bearers of the promise themselves. Each patriarch is faced
tlith a new situation in
the promise is re-presented. In Deuteronomy the net-T
conditions in the land of promise require a netl interpretation of the Mosaic teach. ing (reac.t ualization). In the historical books the process continues . until it
its higl1est expression in the Ness4nisrn of II Samuel 7 and of prophets such as
Isaiah and
The prophets find themselves at the point where tradition meets
the reality' of the moment. In this state of tension, the true prophet re-presents
the l-lord of
a contextualization, something
th e false prophet is unable
to do.
l-Ie rememb er the lilOrds of
:'Ye have heard that it t:ras said by them of
old time but I say unto you . " . He speaks of new wine and new wineskins (Ht. 9: 17-18 ),
of prophesies fulfilled and re-presented. Above all, He renews the
of the year
of jubilee in relation to Hl.s ministry and the good net1l'S of the Kingdom of God .
(I.uke 4:18-19). In facing a ne"t>r situation of taldng the Gospel to: the
Paul
continues Hith the same process but: not vrithout great strug:0les t,dth the traditiona. lists in Jerusalem "l>mo reject the challenge ' of the reality of their time. There is

- 3 -

a similar process in the .J.ong history of the church. For

I see Radical Reform not so much a reformation or a revolution as an effor t to rene"t-.r the Ne't-J' Testament
Church in a
-situation.
Our task is the
daneerous, but necessary. It is so urgent that
in this effort we. cannot just Malk. .He mus:t run. He cannot put our trt!St in yesterday's accomplishments. Today :there are netv 'challenges. There are net-T moldS of modern
thought that need to be filled 't'lith the re- presented Hord of God. The problems are
many: a growing inhmnan poverty, nuclear threat, ecological deterioration, ideological conflicts, and the might of the fallen p0'<-7ers that appear to dominate our t>7orld.
As Christians we need to work together, trusting in the God of all grace who by His
Spirit leads the hermeneutical community in the task of re-presenting His Hord in our
context. I trust that in the spirit of Brother Cook's paper tm can find the road to
dialogue and tvork together that the Gospel may become flesh in our time as the task
of evangelization Hhich God in His grace has entrusted to us.
There are still a few other observations and questions related to the paper
l'1hich has been presented. Quoting Jacob Loewen, the need to allor.11 each group to
theologize freely t'lithin the context of its reality tms pointed out. I agree. Hot-rever, it seems that we don't want to permit the traditionalists to do this. Is it
not true that traditionalism with its pietistic roots cor.ununicated an authentic
message for its context? Or is it that when it became fundamentalist it had already
lost its authenticity and therefore become decontextualized and alienated? I have
been concerned over the subjectivism and dogmatism of c e rtain streams of the nm7
theology . I ass ume there is a danger of a leftist fundamentalism which can also
lead us to a new decontextualiza tion because of having been petrified in an earlier
time. Uhe ther it be of the right or of the left, decontextualization is idolatry
because it gives :'ultimate concern 11 to what is less than God.
Each net-r current of theology scares us because of the suspicion that it might
be false prophesy. The basic criterion of the Old Testament (Deut. 13) is whether
or not it is in line ,;-lith trhat God has already r e vealed . In the prophetic Scriptures, it is the ability to incarnate this word in the r eality of the time . For
Jesus it also has to do with the fruits . We need to subject all theology , old and
new, to these ti1ree Bib lical criteria.
The words " alienation" and nescap i sm" form a common part of the new theological
vocabulary . There is a certain fear of talking about eschatoloeY and of s ingin g
hymns that express this Christian expectation. I a ccep t the danger of escapism and
alienation but it s eems to me that without this eschat o logical dimension the Gospel
is left truncated and the churches empty. t believe that only by putting the Gospel
in the framework of the eternal can He talk in a neaningful T.TaY of the contextualization of the Hord of the eternal God.
This paper underlines the necessity for the communicator to identify himself l'rith
the reality of thos e r..Jho Hill be receiving the communica tion. If the social r e ality
of Latin America is that of poverty 9 t o what d egree should the communicator be poor t o
communicate the message? It is obvious tha t the lifestyle of the communicator can hinder connnunication. Hhat degree of poverty should the communicator of the Gospel assume?
material poverty (which is against the will of God)? Spiritual poverty

........

- 4 -

(an inner indifference without !laving to sacrifice very much)? Or po verty as a

Christian vocation alongside those
are oppressedp in order to abolish it? For
too long the Gospel has been the property of the rich. I doubt that the rich can
take the Gospel to the poor without being poor themselves.
I
to. thank Brother Cook for the way in
he has developed the theme of
contextualization. It is a very positive contribution to our dialogue.

' .

'

, '

; .

:ppJN?:_ OF:.

FID\1 A
........ .

My

.:-..

_:..

. . ....

Persooal

..

: :'

.1 .. ,

by -Alvaro II'fufioz, M. :

A
.

..

:':. . = - . :

:'

i a ppreci,ate the opp:>rtunity to pcutlcipate. in this coloqui.um because of the

personal benefit that I have derived fran the study of this subject and because of . .
the
to
11 opinion about this with yoq. I regret 1:00_
, '.
I was given such a short t.ine to prepare this.
. . . .
.' .
_:_: .. : .

: :-.:

. i. : -

. It
this is the work of a layman who is
pret:..4 sUbjeCt
is debatea in theological and acadEmic circles;
.rrr.i: ..
ri:iaffiqn is t hat of a
brother who sits in the pew and often un.dei"StandS Oill.y
1o%
iS
.
. . : .'
.

. -

. '(

. . ... =. : _:- :- ::

r!::-f

I share with Brother Cook his preference for the word "incarnation"; it see:ns
.nore di<Je$tible than "oontextualization'' ; . alth0ug:h I -am fu doubt as to whether they
are synonyns, . since ."c:ontext" speaks to rre- of backgrounds, and !'contextualization"
of pla.ci.n<J into that situation saoo giveruressage, while "to- incarnate"
of supernatUral acts, the Divine World taking bunan flesh upcin Himself and that of
a life that is .made irian:i.fest is mankind. .
. .
.

I differ with Brother Cook with regard to sare of the opening ranarks in that
while i t is true thai: . "the
.<?f.: the Son of Cbd in_ the world ha:? : profound
implicaticns," it is
the written -WOrd "Which WaS iiicamate. I find in Jdm' s
statenent that it was G:.xl who was incarnate in Jesus , and it is the .life of Jesus,
not the Scriptures which becare incarnate.

...

nOt

.
.
"Fbr.while. we liye we are always being given up to death for Jesus' sake,
so that .the life of Jesus may be-manifested .. in our nortal flesh." (II Cbr o 4 : 11)
'f'

, :

'!

, ;

,,

'Ibis incarnation . o::>I1tinues in the degree: that hrist is fcnred in man and :in
the degree that I
Christ :in him. .'Ihi.s frees us fran the danger of nEll Who are
full of the
,but d() not._. _
ha,ve the Jd.fe of: the l.Drd in than .
' . " : J

:-

-:: -.:.:-:-_;: l i:' \_ :_:

: .

. : :::

IDoking .at
,i :b>is jnpossible to do battle against
the fact .that:.
as : mesSel1gers
El spirituq.l. :and -social-. altemative,
to ccintextualize or inCarnate Our nessage and our life styleo In sther
is essential in Olristian ccmrunicatian. "'lbe mystel:y of the incarnation or the
miracle -<;>t (Jod's
..Qc;:>es.not allw to have -an
or
()f that .whieh Jesus -Xeally preached. "'lbe I)rd's :i.ricat.nation Within
a historiccil, geogra};iti.cal., linguistic1.socio-cultural and J;OlitiCo-e<:Xn<:inic oontext"
is sarething I believe in fil:mly, it is being carried out and will be carrded out
in every
of history and it delights r.'e that He has
as

a
for this o:Jlltextualized cx:mmmication .

. .;

.
. .. !

'

(' _ -

.; :

.. , ..

. ,_ .

...

'l

. . .

-:.__

. : , - .

-21.

Gld:--x:il r calitv/ or realities?

I am not sure what i s Jreant 'by Global RealitY , beCause I think that if in the
experience of the Catholic Olurch' s ccmmmity cell groups, the context is synonym::ms
of a unique reality that exists in all of Latin Airerica, persona1+Y J t.h:4tk the
definition is too restricting. Because if this is the
I w::)uld ask-, is Costa
Rican reality the sarre as that in Nicaragua, or that in Cuba?
a . lot of similar
sit.uaticns in Latin 1\nerica, btit: cilso a great deal of differenceS.' A' <Dntext should
refer to: a . local reality. I have atways wondered- why, -when Latin 1\nerican reality
is referred to, do we always talk in te1ms of the
of oppresion,
and of alienation in which so many Latin Arrericans are found? For the purpose of
cx::mmmicating the G:>spel aren't there other realities to be taken into acrount,_ contextualizing the :rressages for them? Aren't the situations in whim the middle .classes
or the daninating classes of Latin llrterica live, also separate realities or
contexts? Should we take thenessage that i..c; Within (a rcessage of justice, redatption and total liberation of the human be:ing) and make it m:>re available to all
Iren or is our abject simply to eJ:TPlasize the wretched situation in which the. majqrity
lives? If the latter is our purpose, it seems that the Word is being USErl a5 a :
pretext.
1

-:__ : J

. .

I share. and ,rnake C!Wlication of the words of r.fi:'. ' Cook when he says ievecy
at rontextual:ization. should take into acrotmt all these diiteriSi6ns of our _(;l.OOal __. . . .
Reality.; .'J JnfortunatelYI-' this d005 not take place
whiGh
we represent :are
of touch with 'Iatin
_<;Jw; gl:eat challenge wowd
be not just to break out of the six boxes 'Which COOk'
but rather to break
out of whatever situation in which we might be ooxed in.
- -.
.
:,-,
. -:--:
: ,_
;':'
..
.. .

.ManY

.: _;;

2.

In relation to the-Principles of

2. 1

'Jhe divine factor in ccmnunication

':timUnicatia)

'

...

.....

I belive I understand the process of ccmmmication to be that transfer

of a message between the anitor and ;the
I shiire. with Mr. ,
the
concept that the nessage consists iri Scm:lthing that iS wrapped u:P in parti.:..
cular fonns (language, words , synbols , signs) . I a lso agree
pr:i.rr:",
ciples of. cormumication that are llaltiened, but I react agairist the_
that 100% of the.,weight of resi_X>nsibility rests en the capacity of the
,
cx::mnuni.cator and no mention is mctde of the Divine side of things, the participation of the Holy Spirit in the prcx:ess of the cx:mrunication. of the _.
G:>spel, because if we are talking about ccntextualization fran the Bili+ie<;il .
p:>int of viM, we cannot forget that Paul often mantioned that..
abilitY
was supem.;ttural.

'

..

his

..

. .....

By this . I dan' t rrean to davngrade the capacitY the cx:nnui'Ucator should

have. . My ooncern, r a ther, is this : If the
buiden is on _the preparaticn
of the camunicator r where is the Divi..ne factor of our xressa9'e? ,
.-..

2. 2

Election or instraction?

. '.

I also react to the idea that the receiver has veto :p:wer over the :rressage.
I realize that the receiver tends to "tum the kncb and shut off the receiver, "

-3-

"Ye

spiritually speaking, but is it not also true t.llat :"JesUs said,

have not chosen me f but I have chosen you"?

2.3 Identification With the ' Feality

: '

::

.'

' - ,

I believe one of the IIDSt acute proolems in contextualized a::mmmication

is the lack of credibility which Brother Cook p:>ints out, which I prefer to
calla lack of living-out the m=ssage. In Jesus' life we can note the
eXtraordinary living.....out of this that He practised even though
riSks
were .. involved. Kraft is not acxurate when he says that Jesus was
accused of being a stranger. John notes :

'

never

"'!he Jews answered him,

not right in. saying that you

(John 8: 48}

are a Samaritcm and have a denon?'"

. , :.There<are people Who. are very Soc'ially Serisitive ,; Wh0': 'grasp

given oontext, but they have never lived it out, ci..'1d s0 I ask reyself: Up'
to what point can they really interpret the reality that the.. .?Xe tiying
to reach?. I knew po--rsonally a Costa Rican political leader wtri.
a
child with an inherited forttme and I still raranber viVidly the tJ.Ire
.. all of us neighborhood children were selling papers to survive, "l"le
... .
.. literally kick out thos e who stole in ln1der the door of his IIDV'ie
to see the films that we were never able to affo.i:d. And so, I repeat,
of the rrost :i.Irp:>rtant principles of contextualized CCimD.liiicaticn is true . .
identification with the reality one is tt'yif,lg t6 reach.

....
::

hbus: .
....,

3 . . , Regarding levels of

,.

I. m:mtioned previously that T recngnize the need of cantextualizatloo .J.il'-damunication, so I agree with Brother Cook in that the language errployed shOuld
:t :he
language on the right psycho-social , ethnological and ideological level.

3 l . Linguistic level

Regarding tP.is point it is said that the concept of "the death

rrection of the language of faith ," according to Alves: is based oo the . --.. ,
incarnational principle of the Cbspel. I woUld suppose that this stat.errerit,
although not quoting the
is based on the words of our IDrd:

"Truly I tnlly p T say uhto you, tfuless a' grain of wheat falls :infu . .' . . ... .
the
and die s ; it remams alone; but if it dies, it .l::leai:s inuch ..:.
fruit." : (John l2 g24)

:'
.; '
':

Can this be appliecl to language? 'Ihe IDrd's

his awn death and r e surre ctiOn, not to language.

...

was tO

.; .._ . .: :;, ..=:

i:o. -''''

.. . '

Many :who are sincere in trymg to avoid thE;! "paralyzing effect" of. stereotyped, dead
have beCCiTe s laves to another language to which they would
never object, because to do so they
would , :appear
to be reactionary or ignorant.
. .
. -- . . . .
.
.
..
. ' . :
;

I . react
to the
that Mr .Cook
is t.l-Ie
,:a:Illll.ll'U.cated ..and hOW can theological concerns be irrpart:d with tlx:>se who
anot:P..er theological Ol.ristian language?" Scmetines I den' t knew whether
am to regret it or whether I am to thank Cbd when I don't ln1derstand what
brethren are trying to say, due to the fact that their language goes over
heads of the ordinary Christian.

Q)spel
speak
I
SC'II'e

the

-4362 Contextualization on the

c.:

level

Did G:xl accept the polygarrous and blocxly context of the surrounding
cultures in which the people of Israel lived? .:: ;or 4i-9.
\>1ith his feeble spiritual light, attribute to Q:rl s revelation his oonoepts
_of .jU$tioe and marriage?

'. -..

::

!:

, . Mai:ty cormrun.ication m:xlels employed by Q:xi in the Old Testanent were

Q:xl Himself. 'Ihe author of the book of Hebrews calls these figures
"shad<:MS," and, in
he says:

of the tabernacle (cne m::rlel of conmmicatiori)",

"See that you make everything accx:>rding to the pattem which was
sl"nvn you on the rrountain o " (Heb o 8 : 5)

I note a serious danger Of getting off the track if I cx:nstruct my faith

upcn human nodels which are as imperfect as the Ren who produce than .
.,

our efforts :recently has been to put into effeCt the principle of
"t:aJqng,-as a starting point the receiver's reality-,'' and we believe that in
... .

doing .$is we have found positive. fruit in oor . cx:mnunica.tion efforts. We' have
based on our belief that this was Jesu5' cx:mraiDicative:rrethcx:L But
en my avn theological ccnoepts, I feel myself responding negati'Vfil.Y when
"t:l'lere. is. an attanpt to give to .t he .-words "salvation and eternal life"
whiCh I rleither see nor perceive in the Scriptures. It's true that tl'lE(NeW
Test:analt ccnoept of etemal lifu and salvation is not just related to a
spiritual dilrension . But it is also true that_:this c;:ncept is not scXrenthing
that is just naterial either 1 If we pretend t:h:lt the Sciptures speak of
-eternal life just as a presentstate, we are setting out on the road of Christian
. materialism, or, , what .i s. ;worse, we are exchanging the Christian IreSsage for
materialistic hunanism. . :.

I am concerned esl:x:>ut an exaggerated enphasis on any given truth smce rrost

errors are nothing rrore than truths that have been over-atP'lasized. So I am
concerned, :I; repeatf
as we try to contextuiilize the G:>spel an the interpersau:U. leveJ;.,-.in
extrare . funn of c6ntextualizatioh , not arlly .is :the
spiritual
lost_, but :there may . be an open redectidti
beyOnd the
realm.

,
given i.mp::>l:tance to .his study of the fire of the Baptism of
the Holy Spirit,. is: going to take nuch care in referring to this, or' preaching
about it, t."'lat this is perceived as nothing rcore than a pleasing experience,
because the Word doe not all<M for this concept anyplace. Rather, there is
an anphasis that it is the receiving of the Divine Nature with the clearly
defined purpose of making us
in a world which tends to secularize
everything, including faith, which tendency is by no rooans ageeable to us. 'lhe
Sc.r:Wture speaks of this beautiful experience as sanething personal and lifegiving1 I don't think John the B:lptist mixes things as the paper does.

3. 3

Ccntextualization on a socio-cultural level

Brother Cook :p::>ints out that it was Anglo-Saxon missionaries Who pioneered
.-

...

._ ; '
a.{ ,_.,

.. . I'

-5the study. on social behavio:r-. . He also reoognizes that the u. s. missionary

, riove:nent .has
paid enough attention to critical-analytical sociology, and
' aise accuSes- front- iine Evangelicals of not devoting to these disciplines the
tine they deserve. He concludes by saying, "l'le need the contributions of both
scienc:x=s o "

:-

--- r. .-

Any person or rroverent which does not accept the teaching of experience
is condemned to relive than. If the Latin .Arrerican Omrch or the missionary
rrovarent fail to pay attention to the help these and other sciences can give
than, they are offering a very p:x::>r
our people. I just feel uneasy
when I see these sciences alienating the very rressage to classify,. and instead
of being helps they beccrre dictators which attarpt to change the messaqe. 1he
could be said of 0 dynarnic equivalencer 11 or of any other h\li'Mil tool.
'

' :;

.j' ":

.. 'o,iltu.re is
camiuhica:te the G6od

that cannot Oe :ignored if we really desire to : :, ' .:.-/7

of. Jesus Ol.rist to any people. 'lhls :is:' Why it. Concerns
1m to
theological problems i.mpJrted fran other latitudes beCx:m:ihg:Latin
American. problans.

with the quote. fran Newbigin that "culture is not neutral". Certainly it has been affecter..l by sin, by a detennined world view and by scme ideology.
But to what p:>int do we believe i..'1 the inspiration of the Word?
I"

Tc;>.
J;Oint
. .what
.

. ..... .

.... r

ccmm.micate
to Paul his world view and his ideOlogy?
.

:r!: ..

"But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached
of
is not after man. Fbr I neither received it of man, . neither
was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Olrist." (Gal. J1: 11-12)

rre

Did Qx1 fail in oontextualiZin'J

His rressage to Paul?

to

'With :r::egard
Brother
s words, " the exorcism of darons is necessary
<X'l. the
level as well., as .on a personal level," It ClCitlrei'lt is: What
iS the struct\lre? It is the result of ITen and the ideolCXJies that they ilrq?ose;
to exorc,ise. the.,.structures,
we .must free the man
,
0

'

'

3. 4

..

: .: ;

i .

Contextualization on the socio-p?litical level

One doesn't have to be very sensitive, socially, to notice the poverty of
majorities in Latin Anerica 1 and that this spring; fran the m:xlel for developnent
that h:Jlds sway :in our countries. 'lbe Olurch as a divine alternative sh:Juld
play a very .i.rrq;:ortant role in the developnent of the countries and in helping
to level out this economic disparity . Every Orristian should o::mni.thimself
to denouncing injustice and abuse by the dan:inating <JrOl.1PS (be they rightist
or leftist) . '!he critical-cmalytical contributions of the theologies of
liberation can help us see truths that the Clmrch has neglected, but they
can only be of help when they cane out of a drawing close to God and a loyalty
to the Christian position .
I also react negatively to the phrase Mr. Cook quotes fran Juan Luis Segundo where he st=eaJcs of the impossibility of applying the Word of Q)d to
hunan Reality fran \vithin an antiseptic lalx>ratory inmune to all the present
ideological tendencies and struggles . '" Is Christianity not a position in itself?
To my way of thinking, these words speak to me of dough that is leavened with

DISCUSSION (sumnarized)

1.

Observations of i1r .Cook regarding the reactions of nutschm&"'l: and Uuiioz

A.

Regarding Dr. LaVerne Rutschman's reactions :

.

a.

Our theological pilgrimage is similar. I also began !dt!'l dispensational ftmdamentalism, but never Hent into liberalism. I also feel attracted to t.'-le anabaptist
position.

b.

the very incarnation of: Christ gives us some guidelines. -to help .us understand the . relationship between human ;md divine activity in bringing the message
up to daee. and alive. lJhen the Virgin Hary said. she was "tTilling, to receive the
Holy Spirit in .her .v10mb . . (Luke .1 :38), t>!'e see clearly the interaction beb-reen the
divine and human {n the incarnation. Hhen the incarnation then took place,-- the
presznce of Christ among men u-as subject to acceptance or rejection (John 1:12).
The _
ll.qs
last vJord:! . On the other hand, i f it is true that in libera:...
tion _tl;leologies the Catholic emphasis on the co-action of .man in history and in
the saiyq"tion process is heavy, as a Protestant I have to admit that our emphasis
on divine
may ;.have - de-incarnalized salvation, overlooking entirely rrian' s
participation in salvation.

c.

I appreciate the suggestion that instead of isolated illustrations regarding contextualization, .I , might have. gone through the action of God within and through His
people in the Sciiptures .and . in the history of the church. - Last nigh-t,
Costas
s_aid th,at
emphasis on justification by faith and r:Jesley 's on sanctifica-
tqe_re examples. of taking the divine message and bringing it up to date (tontextualizations) . Here is uhere Dr. Rut.s chman'scontrihution rep;ardinr, the Biblical
traJectory be_tueen. the promise and the fulfillnentAits in. But there is a point
"t-rhere the incarnation of the message by the church differs from the incamational
pattern
see in Christ. Christ took huma."l form, but Has Hithout
our incarnation l'Till
be deeply affected by sin. The divirtet>romise is incarnate
in the patriarchs, the prophets and the church. But the' fulfilluient of that
promise is distorted by sin and there has to be a continual ' process of incarnation. In other Hords, a continual bringing up. to date of :the: 1'1\essage is demanded
not only by the diversity of human culture, but also by virtue'- of the very sin
. and rebellion of the htu:1an race.
.!

d.

Although I agree that 1>1e should pemit the more traditional people the right to
theologize -vtithin their reality, I see some ' dangers in this. :l,fiHit is 'thcit reality?
Is it some subjective reality that has filtered through our ideologies? Or is it
objective, historical and real? In the final analysis all reality, \<7hether it is
traditional or neH, should be subject .to the judgment of the l-Jord; of the historical and :universal church, and of the concrete reality in which w e live.

B.

Regarding the reaction of P..ev. Alvaro Uuiio z

a.

The relation betueen contextualization and incarnation. It seems to me that l-Te

are \'lrong in ,pitting
Hords against each other, 3S if one 't-Jere huma:ri and the
other .divine.. _ One of the most severe tensions in the primitive chu':i'ch was this
extremely rigid separation beL\een the -avo natures of Christ. T bel1eve' that He
, ; ; ; -

. . . ...

?. :-

can say t hat the Son of God Hns contextualized ; i. e. , coming from a divine backcround. He moved into the human context--Hithout s uspenrling, of course, His divine
nature ; Hhoever contextualizes uithin a p.;iven reality can never leave behind completely that lvhich he '!-7as before. On the other hand the incarnation (see my reply
to Dr. Rutschman) tTas not an action that u as 10()% divine.
The Sovereign God becane incarnate because H.:lr'J rms 1:-rillinB to permit the Holy
Spirit to enter her t-Tornb.
b.

Incarnation includes not only the Son of Cod but alsq the nord and the church, because these are the extensions of Christ in the t.;orld . The parallel beb Teen tl.te
incarnation of the Hord (Christ) and the tHitten Nord io not perfect, but bet:t,reen
the two there are various points of contact. That's t-rhy tTe see a close parallel
between .C hristology, theology and ecclesiology. . That :as I do . .. you also ' '
(John 20:21) tells me th'a t as the Son of C'.od "t-Tas incarnate, the church and her
message also must become incarnate.

c.

I aeree. Global reality consists of individual, particular realities . Fe shoulrl

not err by generalizing too much . But t"e' s hould likef.rfse not err by iooking .' lt
specific situations so much that tTe excuse ourselves from a cot!mlitment riith Reality.
And there are general patterns Hhich characterize Latin Arnerica.'l _r,e ality.

d.

I also appreciate the observation that we should not forp.et supernatural activity
. in communication. It seems incredible that a ''c.."l1arismatic" as I am should forget
the Holy Spirit! I took for granted that He is sovereign, that 'there :ls a point
uhere the communication of the Gospel overcomes natural cotiiiJunication barriers by
Go4's. pm-1er. But
can fall into the mistake of leaving everythins, so to speak ,
in His hands, and use Him as a pretext for not takinp.: seriously the reality of
. the receiver, in t-Thon the Spirit is also at l..rork . I am surprised that a hrother
tThom I supposed to be Armenian should not believe in the "veto potrer" (free ' rill)
of the receiver:

e.

As . to divine models, God accepted the

contex t i n r1 hich the people of Israel
lived to such a degree tha t the very tabernacle and the
if 1 a M hot mis tal,en, find parallels atoong the people of tha t tine . As God cornmtinica ted tdth
His people through the symb olism of the tabernacle and the tel'lple, He employed
architectural and liturgical symbols that they t--rere fa!!lil:i.ar u ith . ' T:Jhere did
Bezaleel and Aholiab l e arn to :-tak e the tabernacle? Has it celestial art or
it
contetnporary?

f.

The baptismal fire of the Holy Spirit

presented, of cours e, as r:somet6inp, lifegiving; '' but .never as something Hholly personal. It alHays has dimensions tha t
include the larger community . . In the case tha t I referred to, for his i-ie arers
John the Baptist had ve ry specif ic and severe lanp,u;u;e ("11e speal:. s o f fire a10
times) .,First he says "every tree that does not bear good frui t '"i l l h e cut dmm
and thro<.m into the fire'' (Luke 3 : 9). Hhen h e i s asked '!Hhat sh a ll ue then do? "
he replies, ' 1s h are your goods, '' etc. This message rais es the que stion :cotild
this be the Chris t? " (meaning that t h e y expected t h i s kind o f message f rom the
Christ ! ) . "No, n s ays John, ''!:Ie
comes uill baptize you in" the "Holy Spirit and
in fire . His wi.nnou ing f ork i s in his hand, he
cle an his threshinp, floor ,
he
3ather the -Hheat into his g ranary and h e
b urn the chaff trith unquenchable f ire ., .And he still has the ,qudacity t o say, "H:i.th this and other exhortations John announce d the good n eus to the
(Hha t good news ?) Then
John accuses Herod r egarding the ma tte r of his
and i s t h rmm into jail.

::

- 3
=

g.

The question is raised as to

it isn't a Divine
vieH (or ideology)
that is being transnitted. God, as communicator, obviously has a world viev, but
lle could only conmnmicate Hith us by transferring the content of His messagP. to
receivers like us vrho also have our Horld vie1-1s. Han does not live on an island:
everyone is part of -a social, h istorical; political anrl ideological context, and
it's in this context uhere t-te find the structuresp and there exorcism or clenouncing
has to taka place. Christianity itself has al,;;ays been subject to formation of
ideologies and philosophies from Greek Platonism to the doctrine of national
ity and i1arxism--all these are philosophies and Christianity cannot escape theM.

h. As to the popularization of the message, l7e all sli'o uld try to express the message
at the people's level. I '<las referring rather to that uhich we call 11 cheap Brace, "
a message which has lost its divine content by trying to secure a broader acceptance. In that case it's a popularized message.
P. Pretiz :

:::

At times it is said that the Gospel has to be couched in the language of the people,
that it sh ould take on local characteristics because some day the missionary is
going to have to leave, or because sot!le day 'H e'll have governments of one tyPe or
another- .w hich 'rill not allou missionary
Up to
l7e have placecl a lot
of emphasis on indigenization (or contextualization), but in negative terms. I
think that Hhat
have seen tonight is something . quite positive :; that it is essential that the Gospel be contextualized, not just so that the Gospel should
remain in some place in case the oissionary can ' t stay, but rather 1>1e have seen
that the Gospel has to be Latin, or Cllinese, or Japanese, so that the Hhole l7orld
may
God . operates in such a culture and that there rnay be a -.:ritness to
the
of lvhat is going on.

T. Hanks (directed to

l-1. Cook) ;

Last night
heard tHo expositions regarding the Gospel, one insisting on Biblical
elements which 'ile find amone many people in the U.S. and in the First Horid,' and
the other with elements which attract attention in Latin 1\.merica--oppressfon,"
liberation, poverty, etc. Hust 1.>Je keep the elements . of the other culture to maintain a balance or can liTe go further
Orlando's eJq>osition t-ihich emphasized
elements uhich are a creat concern in Latin America?
To!. Cook:
He have to be careful
the vrord balance. I wonder TIhether balance could be a
mistake in sol!lC cases ; functionalist sociolo31 speaks of
tn
any given system, and I think the prophetic function o f the church is rather to
unbalance . Hhen He communicate in a context Hhich does not ha ve; pe'rhap-s, reference points to help understand l-That l.Te are sayinr. (as in the case of North Arilerican
culture, a culture Hhich has no idea of uhat poverty is, something Hholly outside
of its reality), uhen it is a threat to talk to them about this, He either
traumatize them, or ue contextualize the message in terns Hhich they understa.'ld,
and little by little we bring them along so that they can understand . res a
prob-iem I face continua.tly . I don ' t
lvhether that is, in part, Hhat you Here
asking about. \Je have to understand their realities s too . I accept uhat Orlando
uas insisting upon last night, that
cannot detach Latin American reality from
global reality, because there is so much interrelationship in this \-torld.

- 4 -

P . Pretiz:
I '1:-JOUld like to ask a question of
r'Iuiioz, ,"rho knoHS the P-entecostal situation
.so well, and
churches
have found f?Udl: a great acceptance in this conOn one ha..Ttd ue say that cqntextualization here t-_'ls to do uith iclentification ..:Tith the poor and a struggle against . oppression ;. -nevertheless, these churches
have taken another route . They in other \-rays ; for example,
appealing .to the., great .need on t;he p_a rt of many people for healing .

A. lluiioz:

brethren think that X. knoH .a g.reat deal ab-out the Pentecostal

only ones ;t1ho
so
the .Pentecostals, because .I am not allot.red to
sp_eak it:t .some of their churches! I don.'t know- t-7hether I ca..'l speak of this vrith
authority, but Latin American
have contextua!ized a great deal, and not
just Hith regard to the Divine healing messar,e. Last Saturday I r.vas in the
Community Pentecostal Church in Cartago T:There !!.aul Cabezas is pastor, and r co.uld
note the social l>TOrk that they are doing there in a poor neighborhood, a
th the youth .o f .the colll!'lu..Ttity,. Perhaps Roger Cabezas, a graduate of this sem-inary, soued tlie seeds of this concern among them, and t.'Jis .thing . keeps on
his father, RaUl, a layman. I have seen openness on the part of the Pentecos.tal
Church tmtYards ne'1 forms of preaching the Gospel, some taking up social tasks,
othe_r s in literacy
others . in publications . An Argentine
once
stopped a group that uas accoapanied by a priest
he asked them, "l-Jhere are
you going?' 1 nTo burn -automobiles . He are fanning a uave of u.."lrest here in the
city and ue uant to get the people excited. 11 "And Hhere is your car?"
is __.Tell protected in our . garage. :; There it is : often
talk about . gettinP, into
the context, but only uhere the .context doesn f t get us dirty and where -t hings are
easy.

H.N. Kerr:
First of all, I -v10uld like to say
a great pleasure it is for me to be here
and how verJ l'lUch these sessions have meant to ne. It has been a great learninf"
experience, not only in terms of the -knotTledge that has been imparted but in
getting dmvn .to the basics of communication a'1.d to knotT people .
I really don 1 t knou to "Vlhom I should address my question, since some of the
speakers of last night nou are gone since I got the question together. I uould
like to ask something about the relationship of Liberation TheoloRy to
fectiveness of the communication of the Gospel
the churches.
.

:. . . ..,

H. Cook :
I have problems nith much of \-mat I read in Liberation Theology, but I
that the analysis
is made of Latin American reality is something
Evangelica:l.s , . as ,eyangelists, and communicators, have to make and take
:Tm-1 the comunidades e.c lesiales de base* (at least those that I VJlOH in
:r

believe
v7e as
seriously.
Brazil)

*Literally :
church .coP.JOtmities 1!--small groups of Ca tholic lay people
\vho oeet fo.r fellOITShip , :Bible study, usually .i n homes,, etc. (translator' S note)
.;
=

...
- ._:_:

- 5 -

.are
cornnumities 't"lhich are interested in changes in social structures, but
-rather
are responding to the '"hole problem of a church Hhich has lost its
. contacts: ll:rith the grass. roots and 111hich has to be
1iTI1.en they speak
of. .re-:-eva.ngelization, . they are not just employing a'!euphemism to speak of . poiitical
aad structural change (although this is a basic part Cif 'i7hat they are saying).
They are thin.ldng also about . helping the church t:o reflect on the Hord of God and
understand t-That that t-lo-rd means at this mbment in histciry. They are issuing a
call -to the Catholics . to be .reconverted (or to a conversioii process), a cdnversion
to the \'lord.. of God, to. Christ Himself, to one's neig.ltbor, and to responsibility tosociety. I see in these co1!11ll\mities an expression of what is; in' some dimensions, something more authentic with respect to the Gospel, something more N6v
Testament in a Latin American context of oppression,- than many 'Evangelical .. churc.ltes.
;

tv. N

: ..

Kerr:

The \l Ord on the Roman Catholic comrnnnities is a tremendous thing; but I Honder
what effect this is having on the 20 - 25 million Protestant Christians.

T. Hanks:
I thought. the question had to do t-tith the evangelization o"f Latin
Hhen
lle have a church that is alienated ,from the t>rorkers ' and the lm-rer classciJ and
suddenly_ so many grass-ro.o ts groups . appear (accordine to some, one ht:mdreO. thousand
in Latin America)--and these are groups, not :lndividuals; they are not decisions,
they are g.r oups that .are follo"t-titig on in discipleship--it seems He have the potEmtial to begin uith the grass roots, incorporating- this dimension of . the Gospel
.,message. . I don't knm-1 lvhether there a:re statistics as to the Evangelicals llho
may be incorporating Liberation theology perspectives in their evangelization.

U.N. Kerr:
In what vtay does Theology .of Liberation help the Evangelical communicate ..the
Gospel?
Il. Cook:

It's very difficult to reply to Dr. Kerr's question because in: a .,.; ay the Evan.:..
gelical Church has not allm-1ed that Hhich might be of va lue in Liberation Theology
to speak to her. I \-tould say that it is the fault of Liberation Theology for precisely the problem that Alvaro pointed out. The language in which it is cOr.:nnunicated' is a theoretical languaBe, a language that's up in the
Only noH
is - a language I?eing developed that reaches. dm-m to the
nie cathblic _Churc;
in nrazil has a lot of instruction nate rials v7hich attract"ny 'attention. nut .
basically they
not cormnnicating. Liberation Theology is a
should
take seriously and tve should begin to theologize tvithin the evangelical context as
. people \-Jho are
to evangelization and to the conversion of
from
dart--ness to the light and all that that implies .
'
C. Rivera :

It's hard to tie in the intent or thrust of Liberation Theology trith that t-rhich "1'7e
might
to be the more historical dimension, as -our brother mentioned
..From a .f.ormal .. approach, or. ,from a -matter of its orig:lns, it's ' thrtist takes off from

- 5 -

.are no_t just .cornmmities -.;-rhich are interested in: changes in social
hut
-rather they are 'responding to the .H hole problem of a church Nhich has lost its
. cont.a cts vlith the grass roots and l>7hich has to be re:..evangelized. vJhen they speak
of. .re7evangelization,. they are not just einploying
to speak of poiitical
.. and structural change (although this is a basic part of 'irhat they are sayirig).
TI1ey are thinking. also about : helping the church to reflect on the Hord of God and
un.derstand "t-7hat that tfor d means at this mbment in history. They are :l:ssuing a
call to the ;Catholics . to be -reconve-rted (or to a conversion process), a cdnversion
to the \Jord.. of God, to. Christ Himself, to one's neighbor, and to responsibility to1i7ards society. I see in these connn\mities an expression of l.:rhat
in' some dimensions, something more authentic vrith respect to the Gospel, something more Nm.;r
Testament in_ a Latin American context of
than many
H.N. Kerr:

The uord on the Roman Catholic communities is a trefuendous thing; but I

what effect this is having on the 20 - 25 million Protestant Christians.

T. Hanks:
I thought. the question had to do vtith the evangelization of Latin
Hhen
tTe have a Church that is alienated from the workers ' and the lO't<-Ter class'clJ and
suddenly so many grass-roots
(accordingto some, one ht:mdred. thousand
in Latin America)--and these are groups, not individuals; they are not decisions,
they are g.r oups that .are follovling on in discipleship--it seems He have the poto begin uith the grass roots, incorporating- this dimension of . the Gospel
..message. I don't knm-1 lvhether there a:re statistics as to the Evangelicals who
cay be - incorporating Liberation Theology pe'rspeC:tives in their evangelization.

U.N. Kerr:
In what vmy does Theology .of Liberation help the Evangelical connnunicate ..the
Gospel?
ll. Cook:

It's very difficult to reply to Dr. Kerr's question because in: a r..iay the Evan.:.
gelical Church has not allotTed that v1hich might be of value in Liberation Theology
to speak to her. I would say that it is the fault of Liberation Theology for precisely the problem that Alvaro pointed out. The language in which it is c6romuilicated ' is a theoretical langua8e, a language that's up in the
Only ncM
is a language being developed that reaches do'l-m to the
The cathblic :Church
in Drazil has a lot of instruction nate rials
attract ny .attentiori. But .
basically they are not
Liberation Theology is a challenp,e we should
take seriously
l-le should
to theologize lvithin the evangelical context as
. people Hho are coJ:TJmitted to evancclization -and to the conversion of people from
darYJless to the light and all tl1at that implies.
, :
C. Rivera :

It's hard to tie in the intent or thrust of Liberation Theology Hith that
He
might understand to be the more
dinension, as otir . b'rother mentioned .
..From a .formalapproach, or _,from a -matter of its orig:.lns, it's ' thrust takes off from

... .
- 6 -

a statement that is merely sociological or

It's an effort of a
humanistic or philosophical nature which leads to praxis, or human action, in a
relationship that attempts to explain and give meaning to life. From this point
. of view, traditional theology, and Biblical,experiential theology, has lost certain dimensions, not because of their content, but because of the
it has
been .interpreted and becal,lse- of the Hay it has been lived out. Because of these
failures to practice the Gospel, Liberation Theology has taken more root, it makes
more sense, and motivates more strongly. The other point \-7as vocabulary--the
nuil!ber of terms that are loaded. l..rith particular connotations which make more
sense . within a structuralism of a higher level. This has been recognized -by
Liberation . Theology,
nm..r it is descending to the masses.
Hevertheless
concerns me is the starting point, because it takes - off from
a presupposition that is purely social and humanist, in which there is no room
for God's revelation, nor is it an essential point. Therefore, as a theologian, ..
I react against this. Nevertheless, Liberation Theology is taking roots because
of the deficiencies in our communicating of the message.
A.
Although I don't knmT much about church
I have seen that usually a movement _that really shakes_ the church is one that starts at the grass roots. At the
present I can't think of any movement uhich has come from the top dolfm , _ bl,lf;
rather from the bottom up. The Theology (or Theologies) of Liberation help
create a conscience in the church in its social dimension and projection. But
as far as; evangelization itself, I believe it has a paralyzing effect. -. If some
11ethodist is present, please forgive me, but I remember
a lot of emphasis
was made
the Methodist Church regarding this, some five or six years ago when
Bishop Pagura tvas in Costa Rica, and \-Te could note a halt in the proclamationtype efforts of the church itself because she got involved in discussions
almost caused a division. The crisis passed; the church became atTare of its .
social role; the strongest elements left the country ; the
went back to
normal and has got back into step, -and this year I have noted that it has progressed even more.
T. Hanks:

According to Bill, Liberation Theology came up from the grass roots; nm" we _are
saying it has not descended yet ; so there's discrepancy here as to this theology's
. . origins. In some situations any theology can paralyze evangelization. If
Hethodist Church
divided over the issue, it is very understandable. But r
always remember the Campus Crusade survey in the university here which revealed
that of every ten people \-Tho rejected the Gospel, nine said that it tvas because
they
the church to be an element of oppression; of reaction, an institution in favor of the status quo and against justice. If that is the situation
in the universities, I can assure you that tve can evangelize better by incorporating certain Liberation Theology perspectives which insist on God's justice,
on social justice, incorporating into our evangelization those elements which
are Biblical in any case, and not leaving them out as if they didn't matter.
A. Munoz :
If the people, and :the maj.ority. of .the church, does not understand the language
of the Liberation
how .can it have :come up from the grass roots? en

- 7 -

..

:.

the oth'er hand perhaps I tried -to_ he too brief when r said that the;Nethodist
Church was divided just because of tensions ; it was the very theological position itself. I myself hear yotmg people say that Christianity and all that we .
have traditionally conceived of as Christianity is not relevant today. For them
worship, praye+, Bib.le st_udy; evangelization as vre understand it are no
relevant, but that . nm7 there is :a het-7 t-vay to
: '!uid here is where( we
.cometo
new "language of fuith, 11 regarding which the only thing I grasp
that they \ant to push me into understanding that
the lvord itself does not
speak.
:.., .;.. .

the

i's

. ..

lvhat . has happened is that at least those Liberation Theologians which I have 1:een
reading
priests who were working in their churches in their theoretital
tasks, and
:began to go to the gross roots for one reason or another/
Brazilia.tl.- hieraJ:'chy discovered that it had lost the people completely; And when
the .. pr,iests desce.n ded .to work
the people, they bega. to theologiZe in those
.communities. But the p:r;:oblem I see (and in this Alvaro is right b a t.7ay) , is
that they have broken all!aY. from the
roots, and I see now it is an Ivory
tm.Ter theology which has to come. dmm again to the grass roots: Some, like
Boff in. Brazil, -have strong connections with the grass roots noH. Nevert hefess,
I
...th<;lt in general that theology has lost contact tvith its own people, "71th
the :;lang,uage .the people speak, l-J"ith the people's exper ience-, and therefore
t<?. .
th:i,s return.
-

Just one illustration : Gustavo Gutierrez is an

but that doesn't
keep him from being identified t-7ith the poor barrios of Lima. He also travels
to the remote areas of Peru. He ah1ays Has there, traveling, \'lalking about,
walking with the
man, the mountain people, the people in the jungle,
those on the coast. He is a grass-roots maLl, who knot-7s, lives, and suffers, and
is very much identified. Hhat can you say about him? Is he just an ivory-tm-Ter
person, shut up in there, or is he a man dmrm beloH? Hhat he thought and t.Trote
is because of what he live d, suffered, and graspcd--that
was in his reality.
C. Rivera :
Liberation Theology come s as an effort of sociologists and anthropologists to
interpret man's task in rela tion to God. The refore they c a ll it " theology,"
but really it is a humanistic e ffo=t. Paradoxical!y church leaders often have
to suffer shame because these oth8rs s peak of subj e cts which are Biblical and
have been forgotten for a long time. In view of the absence of these
values which should hav-e been put into practice in the churches, Liberation
Theology now finds fertile ground.

T. Hanks:
As an Old Testament professor, I
Liberation Theologies, a nd in
I also find entire pages ,.,here I
!my theology has its specialists
they leave us non-specialists up

find it h ard to understand much in certain

in my mm reformed t ra-Jition, in Berkhrn-1er,
get ccmpletely lost, as Hhen I read Karl Barth.
who vTrite mainly for other theologians, and
in the air. But we can't reject the emphasis

- 8 I

.
'.,: ., 1
.:/'
1

of a whole movement because Tve don't understand certain theologiaqsi

has its specializations and its special
./ .
.
.

E. Orellana:

, I

Y. area

It would be interesting to come back :to Dro' Kerr's question : To--t:that degree
does Liberation Theology affect ' the Evangelical Church in Latin America in its
daily task?
l.J. D. Roberts:
I think that the answer up to nmr has had more to dci "lith the Catholic Church.
!Is to the Evangelical community, we t-rould have to agree "'ith tvhat Bill Cook

said, that it is a theology mainly of the elite. There are places where it is
known to -some degree: in Peru, for example, if one speaks of Liberation Theology,
at least they kn.Oll l>7hat you are talY.-.ing about. Presently in Chile it is n.o t so.
In Argent.ina you can't. talk about that theology except in the classroom. And in
Brazil they have other concerns. Only here, in Costa Rica, is where Liberation
Theologies are discussed the most in Latin America. And here it is a term that
is more recognized among pastors and leaders of the church, but it still has
not had sufficient impact so that we can an5TNer Dr. Kerr's question . l-le'll
have to wait at least five years. Alvaro tried to interpret it from the situation in a single denomination here and it seems that the answer is too generalized. We would have to wait five or ten years to be able to answer the question
with regard to the tvhole Protestant Church. As to the Catholic Church, there is
a basis for generalization, and we have already heard the answers in that regard.

: !

-. !

.. . .

:.

' .