Asians Meet Jesus the Asian

Asians Meet Jesus the Asian: A Historical Reflection (歷史的 反省)

An Asian Perspective

The task of this reflection is not to investigate the history of theology in Asia or the historical development of Christology or Jesuology in Asia, which will require extensive research to determine the concrete developments of Asian Christology or Jesuology.[1]  The task in this essay is rather to reflect on an Asian history of theology and on Jesus in Asia from a historical perspective. Here we will seek to clarify how Asian peoples have met Jesus, in the hope that the Asian identity and reality of Jesus will be clarified from an Asian historical perspective. The ultimate task is to bring to light the living reality of Jesus among Asian peoples today, to witness to the living Jesus among us. This is a Kairotic task for the Asian Christian community.

Jesus and Empire as the Pivotal Point of Reflection

The historical context in which this reflection takes place is the Empire. This relatively new context is the result of geopolitical changes along with globalization, especially in its economic dimensions. The life of Asian people and all other living beings is now set in the new context of global Empire, the regime of globalization.

In recent decades, Asian theologies have sought to be relevant to the historical context of the Asian peoples, overcoming the Western theologies of domination, which are closely tied to the Western political (colonial) and cultural powers and influences. For example, some biblical studies in Asia have sought to investigate the question of “who Jesus is” in an Asian way. However, they have often operated under the dictates of Western norms in terms of their contents and methodologies. This is more so in the dogmatic and applied theologies. The Asian theological community has the strong passion to liberate Jesus from Western captivity and to dismantle the Western Christology that dominates Asian theology. Furthermore, the ecumenical thrust of Asian Christianity in recent decades recognizes that Asian peoples are invited to meet the Jesus who is already in Asia, as the “Asian” liberator and savior for Asian peoples. This is the meeting of Asian peoples with Jesus the Asian.

Presently, “globalised Western Christianity,” especially in its conservative and fundamentalist forms, seeks to dominate the world in order to create a global “Christendom” in conjunction with the dominant global Empire and its allies.[2] There is a new, deep penetration of conservative Western Christian forces into Asia today, not just into Asian Christianity. Global Christianity as a whole is caught in this dynamic of domination by Empire. Though the “proposal” for World Christendom is not new, it has new implications. Global Christendom is unimaginable without its interconnections to global Empire.  Insofar as Christianity in today’s world—growing rapidly, especially in the so-called global south—is closely connected with the dynamics of imperial domination and globalization, the Asian Christian community is faced with a profound theological dilemma.

We want to look at Jesus in a fresh way. At stake is the Gospel of Jesus among the Asian peoples, who can no longer accept geo-political, economic, political, cultural and religious domination by the global powers. The future of Asian Christianity and of global Christianity is at stake as well.

The question about Jesus is not merely a continuation of the hermeneutical quest, beginning with the quest and new quest for the historical Jesus and continuing with other hermeneutical attempts. Neither is it the acculturation of biblical/Western theology and Jesus into the Asian cultural soil. What has been happening in the community of Asian theologians is an attempt to overcome the colonial vestiges of Western Christianity. It has brought some fruits, making Jesus feel somewhat familiar and close to Asian people. Our task is radical:  to look afresh at the history of Asian Christianity and to search for the Jesus who has lived among Asian people. It is a recovery of Jesus the Asian in history, in search of our present global witness.

Re-reading the History of Christianity to Recover Jesus the Asian

John England and T.V. Philip, together with some Asian theologians, have begun a new history project that traces the development of theologies in Asia from its beginning.[3] This is an effort to restore the new integrity of Asian Christianity and theology. It is remarkable also to find Samuel Moffett[4] claim that the beginning of Christianity is Asian.[5]

What this claim means is that New Testament theology may be regarded as “Asian theology.” Traditional Christology may be regarded as a process of enculturation of the “Asian” Jesus into a Western culture (Greek, Roman and then European). Therefore the task of the study of “historical” Jesus and of the Asian history of the early church would be a recovery of the original Jesuology,[6] the historically “Asian” Jesus and the early Asian[7] Church history.

The Claim that “Jesus was Asian”

T.V. Philip presents Jesus the Asian. He writes, “Chandra Sen told the Indians on the subject: Who is Jesus Christ?, ‘Gentlemen, go to the rising sun of the East, not to the setting sun of the West, if you wish to see Christ in the plenitude of his glory and in the fullness and freshness of his divine life.’ He told them to recall the true Asiatic Christ. ‘Behold he comes to us in his loose flowing garments, his dress and features altogether oriental, a perfect Asiatic in everything.’[8] The complaint of Sen was that Jesus Christ was presented to the Asians as a western Christ and the history of the Asiatic Christ in Asian soil had been replaced by the history of western missionary organizations in Asia.”[9]

While Paul and other Christian missionaries were converting Greeks, Romans and the barbarian tribes in the west, there was an equally great movement of Christianity to the east -- Edessa, Persia, Arabia, Central Asia, China and India.

The territory of the Roman Empire lay mainly in Europe and in that part of Asia to the west of the Euphrates. But to the east of the Euphrates, at the time when Rome was at the zenith of its power, there existed the Persian Empire, which extended to and included part of northern India. In this vast empire Christianity spread very rapidly. Beyond the borders of the Persian Empire, there were Christian communities in Central Asia, China, Arabia, and India. In this process of the eastward movement of Christianity, it is noted that the Apostle Thomas played the central role.[10]

Jesus is Asian.

This claim has many meanings. It means that Jesus was born in Asia in a geographical sense. Palestine and Judea are part of West Asia, continuous with Asia Minor and with the Asian continent, not part of Europe. It also means that Jesus was born in the Asian cultural context. The culture of Palestine and Judea is not a part of European culture or of Western culture, but an organic part of Asian culture.

This claim has several other implications. Jesus cannot be depicted as a Western figure in historical and cultural terms. This means that the Western depiction of Jesus is a form of Western enculturation. Often the Western theological formulation has been regarded as the classical, and therefore universal, theology, whereas Asian theologies are regarded as contextual, meaning not universal.

The Asian origin of Christianity and the eastward movement of early Christianity are very significant for Asian Christianity and theology today. This is to set the expansion of Western Christianity in an Asian perspective.  To discover the history of Asian Christianity is to radically reassess Western mission history and the history of Western Christianity’s entry into Asia as the standard and only perspective from which to view the world history of Christianity. Furthermore, this indicates that the Western and Eastern (Orthodox) theological traditions in Asia have different meanings for the integrity of Asian Christianity and theology.

Thus far, Asian theologians have regarded the early Asian history of Christianity and theology as a kind of endnote to the predominant West-centered history of Christianity and theology. The history of Christianity as Asian history has not been taken seriously in our Asian theological reflection. Even when Asian theologians have spoken about the indigenization of the Gospel, the process was through the West to Asian cultural soil. It was not regarded as a recovery of the original Asian Christianity, nor as an Asian interaction with Western Christianity from the Asian historical base. Asian Christianity stood on Western footing and regarded the Asian history as pagan and gentile. Asian theologians stood on Western theological footing and looked into Asia for indigenization, acculturation and contextualization. This dimension calls for self-critical reflection among us.

Ancient Asians Meet Jesus the Asian.

Historically, a stream of Asian Jesuology developed at the time when the Christian community moved to various Asian regions. When Christianity built up churches in Persia and moved through Persia to South, Central and East Asia, Jesuology was developed in Asia in diverse ways. Then it moved to India, to Mongolia and to China. This was the movement of Asian Christianity. One of the most interesting examples is that of the Nestorian Jesus.

The Chinese meet Jesus of the Nestorian Church and call him MISIA [Messiah=彌施訶] to save the people from the Sea of Suffering (苦海). Jesus appeared to East Asian people in the image and language of Buddhism and Taoism.  Misia is a Buddhist word that is associated with Meitreya (Messianic Buddha). This is a very natural Asian cultural and religious association. The rise of Buddhism against the caste system and the rise of neo-Buddhist faith in close association with the liberation of Dalits in India suggests a great deal about the development of the original Asian Christianity, which should be differentiated from the Western mission churches in Asia. “Western Christianity” in Asia could not appreciate this Buddhist Christian convergence.

When Matteo Ricci came to Asia as a missionary from Western Christendom, he had to introduce Jesus to Asian people. It was clear that when the Chinese looked at Jesus, they compared him to the Chinese sages. It was very natural to compare Jesus and Confucius. Matteo Ricci[11] tried very hard to reach a pivotal point of contact between the Chinese and the Christians, between Confucius’ teachings and Jesus’ teachings in his book, Truth of the Heavenly Lord (天主實義). He to tried to create an Asian Christianity, not an extension of Western Christendom. He was limited, however, by the fact that he came from Western Christendom, which determined the strategy of his mission. His precious efforts failed because of the Roman attitude, representing Western Christendom. For example, when Matteo Ricci introduced Jesus as true divinity and true human (神人), East Asians could not catch this, but understood Jesus as a human with a spirit, meaning a “crazy” human. The Western Christology or Jesuology of Matteo Ricci was not intelligible to Asians. Though Christianity as Asian wisdom shared deep points of convergence with Confucian wisdom, this convergence could not be developed due to the mistaken identity of Christianity as a Western religion.

We have tried to construct an Asian Jesus, rather than meet Jesus the Asian.

What are we seeking to discover in our reflection on Jesus in Asia? Who is Jesus to the Asian peoples? When the Asian Christian community introduces Jesus to Asian people, do they recognize him? How would Asian people today meet Jesus in their present historical context? It may be that they would neither recognize the ancient Asian Jesus nor accept the Westernized Jesus. In this Asian historical reflection on Jesus we need to chart a way for Asian people to meet authentically with Jesus in Asia today, beginning to recognize Jesus the Asian as one of them.

Now we can definitely state that there are two historical streams of Asian theology: one from ancient Asia and one from Western Europe. Western Christian history belongs to Western Christendom and Asian Christian history from ancient Asia belongs to the history of the powerless Asian people.

This distinction may be very significant, for Asian Christianity has never been an established Christianity in political or cultural terms. Even Philippine Christianity, where Christians are the majority of the people, retains the identity of a colonial Christianity of Western Christendom. The disestablished context of Asian Christianity is quite different from the established Christianity of the West.  Asian Christianity is the religion of the people, whereas Western Christianity is the religion of the powerful (Christendom).

Western Christianity: Jesus the Political, Cultural and Spiritual Conqueror.

The most important historical and theological problematic of Asian Christianity is the fact that it is the religion of the powerful. This requires new reflection on present-day Asian theologies, which by and large are formed as a continuation or as a response to the Western (Roman Catholic and Protestant) theologies. Asian Christology was used to support military conquest in the Crusades, in the colonial wars (in Korea and Vietnam), in the Cold War and in the Imperial Wars. This thrust operates in the collusion of the power of the Empire with conservative Western Christianity in relation to the War on Terror. It is manifested in the US policies of “religious freedom,” “just war” and “war for freedom.”

The exclusive claim of salvation only through Jesus or Jesus Christ is a correlative model of Jesus for Western cultural and religious conquest that has been strongly present in Western Christian missiology. “We will conquer China in this generation” was a motto of Western mission in the 1930’s.[12] This claim has deep roots in North American Christianity, which proclaimed the manifest destiny of the United States of America at its foundation. The Native Americans, blacks, Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese are to be treated as pagan or gentile, as against the European migrants, the “chosen people.” Such missiology contains the image of Jesus as the King of religious and cultural or “spiritual” conquest. This is the Jesus whom Asian peoples have met. He was a Western colonialist, a white racist and also a male chauvinist.

Jesus Acculturated as Westerner and Politicized as Powerful

When the wise men from Asia visited the cradle of Jesus, it was perceived that Jesus was Western while the wise men were from Asia. The birth story of Jesus should be read as an Asian resistance story against the Western Roman Empire[13]. Asian wisdom discerned the messiah, while the Roman power sought to suppress Jesus. The first three hundred years of early Christianity was a struggle between East and West, culminating in western victory under the Roman Empire. Christianity became the imperial religion, in a story of collusion of the Christian faith with the power of the Empire. This is the beginning of the story of Western Christendom. The point here is that Jesus the Asian and his Asian community were encountering the Western imperial power of Rome.

Western Christianity and its theology have used the Greek and the Roman languages to interpret the Gospel of Jesus. Eastern and Asian history and theological traditions have been ignored and suppressed—not only Eastern Orthodox history but the entire Asian history of Christianity.  The Western history of Christianity has been regarded as the universal history of the Christian faith, which is an imperial vision of world Christian history.

Western Missionary Movement under Western Colonization of Asia: Jesus as the “Colonial Conqueror” of Asian Peoples

The Western missionary movement was a spiritual as well as political and cultural movement. One cannot separate the colonial religion from the colonialism. Political, cultural and spiritual are inseparably fused into a symbiosis of power, and this presents a profound question about the future of Asian Christianity, in consideration of its past and present. Simply put, the Christianity brought by the Western missions to the Asian people is a colonial and imperial religion. There is no escape from this historical reality.

Western colonialism conquered the Asian peoples and imposed its culture, destroying the cultures of Asian peoples, and propagated the Western Christian faith among Asian peoples through its Western creed, theology, ecclesial and spiritual life and mission work. This created problems for Asian Christians, living as Asian people. In this situation the question is, “Is Jesus a Westerner or an Asian?”

Debates on enculturation and indigenization do not answer this question; they only arbitrarily dress the Westerner in Asian clothes—a very shallow incarnation. Jesus the Asian has been Westernized and now Jesus the Westerner needs Asian clothes to get along with the Asian peoples. It is not a question of faces or clothes, but the question of the soul and body of Jesus that will decided Jesus’ identity.[14]

Asians Meet Jesus in Asian Revolutions.

Asian national revolutionaries, both religious and secular, and their peoples regarded the Christian mission in Asia as an integral part of the colonial conquest. Even T’aiping Christianity, one form of authentic Asian Christianity, regarded the Western mission as colonial. Chinese revolutionaries, however, both nationalist and communist, identified T’aiping as a revolutionary religion. Today, Chinese Christians identify themselves with the Chinese revolution and seek from that base to construct their theological thought. It is a type of Asian Christianity that seeks to be radically discontinuous from the Western colonial mission in Asia and from Western imperial Christianity.

In 18th century Korea, Chung Tasan (Chong Yagyong, or Tasan [1762-1836]) made contact with Roman Catholicism through a Korean believers’ community that was born without the missionary, though it was in contact with the Chinese Christian community created by Matteo Ricci. Chung Tasan’s Confucian thinking was profoundly influenced by Christian beliefs, leading to its role of revolutionary inspiration in 19th century Korea. In Chung’s writings Jesus does not appear as either Western or Korean, but in silence and shadow, very powerfully.

When the Tonghak movement met Jesus, they recognized him as familiar, but later came to regard him as a Westerner. Tonghak means “eastern learning,” which is contrasted with Western learning, that is, Christianity. This was the political stance of the official Chosun dynasty. Yet when one reads the scriptures of the Tonghak, their stories of religious experience and their history, Jesus is powerfully present, though incognito.[15]  One can easily recognize a close affinity between Messianic politics and the Tonghak Messianic politics.

Jesus the Asian was presented to Asian Marxists such as Ho Chi Minh, Mao Tse Tung and Kim Il Sung. Jesus the Asian lived at a time when these Marxists inspired and led the Asian revolution. M.M. Thomas did his reflections on Jesus the Asian alongside of Asian revolutionary Marxists as well as Asian national revolutionaries such as Nehru, Sukarno and others. What this means is that Jesus the Asian Liberator was political actor as well as cultural figure among these Asian revolutionaries.

Mahatma Gandhi of India recognized Jesus as familiar insofar as pacifism was concerned, although he could not recognize Jesus as Asian and Dalit, his vision being blocked by Western missionary Christianity. There is a pervasive recognition of Jesus in the Indian reform and revolutionary movements. Why was this recognition not fully appreciated by the Asian Christian Community? The Western character of the Asian Christian community shadowed the value and creative potential in the Indian recognition of Jesus. Manifested in Dalits’ recognition of the messianic nature of Buddhism was their premonition of Jesus. The Buddhist and Christian convergence in their messianic aspirations could easily lead to their meeting with Jesus the Asian. This may explain why Dalits were attracted to Christianity in India. Now Dalit theologies are exploring the full implications of this question.

Asian revolutionaries have sometimes recognized Jesus as a revolutionary among the peasants of Palestine. This recognition has always been blocked by the Westernized Jesus of Western Christendom, which is the major barrier between Jesus the Asian and the peoples of Asia. Western Christian Mission invariably sought to domesticate the revolutionary spirit of Asian Christianity[16]—politically and culturally as well as historically and religiously.

Asian revolutionaries rejected the Christian religion, seeing it as the Western political religion. They did not accept the creative role of religion, especially of the Christian religion, in Asian revolution. Why did they not explore the revolutionary potential in both Asian and Western religions? This is a complex question. Religions had long been used as political religions by the established powers. This may be the first important reason. Also, Asian revolutionaries adopted modernity as the chief dynamic of the Asian revolution. They wanted to isolate modernity from the Western political and economic powers and apply it to the cause of Asian revolution. Asian revolutionaries rejected the Christian religion in both political and cultural terms. If Jesus had been recognized as Asian and revolutionary, he would have been in company with Asian revolutionaries.

Asian people have had many historical occasions to meet Jesus the Asian, not as an acculturated Jesus of Western Christendom, but as an authentically Asian and liberating revolutionary with no Western mediation.  There can be direct links between Jesus the Asian and the Asian people in political and socio-economic as well as cultural and religious dimensions.  It is unfortunate that the Christian faith is mediated through the Western churches, which are closely associated with the Western powers.

Jesus of Modernity is a Western Product.

Western modernity has played a great role in the modernization of Asian nations. Modern Western science and technology was taken up by Asian reformers and revolutionaries to build their nations. Modern Western ideas of liberal polity, modern social values and modern cultures were adopted by Asian national revolutionaries insofar as they served the national aspirations of Asian peoples. Asian nations followed the Asian version of modernization and “secularization” insofar as it did not serve the ideological and political cause of the Western powers but served the cause of Asian revolutions.

Modernity had a great impact on the minds of Asian intellectuals. Their modernized attitudes were turned against the cultural and religious traditions of Asia, even as they affirmed Asian identity. This is a Janus-like attitude of high ambiguity and irony. Asian modern intellectuals doubly object to Christianity, as an integral part of Western colonialism, and as an anti- or pre-modern religion. Asian Christian intellectuals and theologians have had to deal with this complex situation.

The impact of Western modernity upon modern theology has also been great. Western modern science has greatly influenced the Western theological enterprise. In modern biblical scholarship, Jesus has been scrutinized as a modern historical figure:  the quest for the historical Jesus.  But this historical Jesus of modern scholarship and modern philosophy is a stripping of life from the living Jesus, and it is contrary to Jesus the Asian, to the Biblical Jesus, who is neither Western nor modern. The historical Jesus is a Western construct that uses historical rationality to dismiss what is biblical and therefore Asian in Jesus. The Asian identity of Jesus has been destroyed or dismissed in modern Western theology, just as the Western missions discarded the cultures of the Asian peoples. This is another side of the Western and modern construction of Jesus and of Christian theology. In recent decades, questions are being raised about the modernity and secularity of the Jesus construct.

Modern Western theological methodologies have deeply influenced Asian Christian theological minds in the 20^th century, an intellectual colonization process. Due to this modernization of theology, Asian theology has not been able to accept the traditional or pre-modern Asian Jesus. Just as the Asian revolutionaries adopted Western modernity as a tool of national modernization, Asian Christian theologians have adopted the modern version of Western Christianity. For Asian theologians Jesus has to be Asian and modern.  Modern theology of the West has to accept the norms of modernity in its theological discourse.  It has endeavored to interpret the Gospel into the modern culture, but the net result has been that the Gospel suffers Cartesian captivity in the modern world.

But the problem is that modernity is a form of Western cultural colonialism. When modernity is understood as Western technocracy, a modern form of the Western dominant power, it is therefore a challenge to Asian identity, for Asian Christian intellectuals as well as Asian national intellectuals.[17]

Modernity has been deeply involved in the globalization process dictated by modern science and technology in technocratic form. In Asia, modernization has been a continuation of Westernization, leading to the current form of globalization and to the hegemony of Empire.

Ambiguity of Indigenization, Acculturation and Contextualization

The contextual theologies and indigenous theologies of Asia have presupposed Western theology as a universal and classical theology. Often the in doctrines— as well as church order and life—of Western theologies have been regarded and practiced as the “orthodox” standard and norm of Asian theologies. In the inter-religious dialogue and interfaith processes as well as in the indigenization of theologies in Asia, the tacit assumption is still that Westernized Christianity in its present form is the foundation.

We should look at this situation critically. We need to begin with Jesus the Asian. Asian theologies need to be freshly constructed to overcome an Asian theological situation that is so dominated by Western theologies today.

There is, however, a historical stream that has maintained the original Asian way of theology in the tradition of Asian wisdom. Jewish Christianity, Persian Christianity and the Christianity of Asia Minor and of the Asian continent persistently maintained the Asian cultural traditions as the natural abode of their theological reflection.[18] This may be a fresh source of strength to overcome our theological ambiguity.

Doing theology with Asian historical experiences and cultures strengthens the witness to the Gospel in Asia.  It is wrong to assume that any fusion of the Christian message with Asian religious and cultural resources weakens the message.  The case is quite the contrary.

Not Jesus with Asian Faces, but Jesus the Asian Liberator

Where there was “success of Western missions,” including the Protestant missions, there was colonial domination by the Western powers. In overcoming the limitations of Christianity in Asia, we must deal with the absence of Jesus as either Asian or liberator.  When Asian Christianity fails to resist the Western colonial powers and to work for liberation of the Asian peoples from the colonial powers, the Jesus of this Christianity is an ambiguous figure, if not a colonial conqueror. The real need is for Asian Christianity to be a radically revolutionary religion in an authentic sense, and for Jesus to be a radical liberator/savior of the Asian people.

Many believe that Western Christianity in Asia has brought many reforms to traditional society, and this may be true. Here, reform is understood as a continuation of Western cultural and social modernity. But such reform is secondary to the independence and liberation struggles of Asian peoples, if it is not engaged in this revolutionary struggle. Many have regarded the West-directed reforms as neo-colonial in their nature. Is Asian Christianity a neo-colonial dynamic?

Jesus in Asian Face(s)

The Roman Catholic Church in Asia has initiated a significant reflection on “Jesus in Asian Face(s)” in the 1990’s. About this process one could ask, “Is it a recovery of the Asian Face of Jesus, or an exercise in painting Jesus like an Asian?”

"What is now growing in the Asian context can best be described as a Jesuology of liberation, thought out in the context of religious and cultural pluralism; or, better still, as a liberation Jesuology in inter-religious dialogue.... It fosters in fact an approach to the man Jesus, which Christian believers can develop in conjunction with those of other religious faiths, in a common effort to respond religiously to a concrete reality shared by all.[19]

An FABC study reports the case of India: “The first significant encounter between Jesus Christ and Indian culture and religion is that which took place at the beginning of the century in the context of the meeting of Christianity and Hindu mysticism. The following models have been suggested: the Jesus of the Beatitudes, the Christ of Bhakti, the Christ of neo-Vedatin philosophy, the Christ avatara, the Yogi Christ, the Christ of Advaita mysticism. One will note that among all these models, with the exception of the Jesus model of the Beatitudes of Mahatma Gandhi, the discourse is directly Christological rather than Jesuological.”

Asian Faces of Jesus or the Face of Jesus the Asian?

It is reported again that the “Synod Fathers” made explicit mention of such features as "Jesus Christ as the Teacher of Wisdom, the Healer, the Liberator, the Spiritual Guide, the Enlightened One, the Compassionate Friend of the poor, the Good Samaritan, the Good Shepherd, the Obedient One". The result is that what is now growing in the Asian context can best be described as a liberation Jesuology in inter-religious dialogue.[20] In the Asian context, by contrast, enculturation, dialogue and liberation fuse together into an organic whole, and one Jesuology of liberation is progressively emerging from the praxis of inter-religious dialogue.

This observation would apply to the titles of healer and liberator, of guru and enlightened one, to give only some examples among those that have been mentioned earlier. Theologians will always have to be concerned at once with the contextual appeal and the hoped for adequacy of meaning of the models they propose in a bid to give — or to restore — to Jesus his "Asian face".[21]

 Asian Artists Meet Jesus the Asian

Jesus the Asian has lived with an Asian flat-nosed, yellow and black people. Throughout the history of Asian arts, Asian artists recognized Jesus the Asian in cultural terms.

The story about Jesus' life has been depicted aesthetically and even artistically by many Asian artists. Jesus the Asian has become a continual source of inspiration for the fine arts. The result is that many Asian artists have interpreted the figure of Jesus according to their cultural perceptions, religion, and ethnicity, and through their artistic areas of specialty. Western artists have produced fine arts depicting Jesus the Westerner, which has been dominant.[22]

The works of Asian artists are the “Asian Faces of Jesus” par excellence.[23] Jesus is presented as“Jesus the Idiot,” and as the “suffering servant” in the eyes of the Korean artist.

JESUS, THE CRUCIFIED PEOPLE [24]

C.S. Song’s book Jesus, the Crucified People breaks the theological stranglehold on the figure of Jesus and glimpses him in a new, Asian way. Against the rich cultural background of Asia, Song’s book explores the story of Jesus so that, from the beginning of time, it now comes poignantly to us in the stories and testimonies of women, men and children. Song eloquently fashions a people hermeneutics to sketch an account of Jesus’ life, ministry, death, and resurrection for our world today. In the powerful Asian transposition of Jesus, C. S. correlates the suffering of Asian women, men and children struggling for life in the face of death, with the passion of Christ in our neighbor. Song groans, cries, shouts, protests, and argues passionately against the God who crucified Jesus among the people of Asia. Song’s theology is a great leap from Western and Latin American liberation theologies.”[25] The image of Jesus discovered by Song anchors his monumental trilogy, The Cross in the Lotus World, Jesus and the Reign of God (1993), and Jesus in the Power of the Spirit (1994). In the post-colonial era of Asian revolution many Asian theologians have participated in the struggle of their peoples for liberation. C.S. Song has done great work on the presence of Jesus as Asian and liberator.[26] M.M. Thomas and Indian theologians discovered Jesus among the Indian people, including intellectuals.  Masao Takenaka has discovered Jesus among the Asian minjung and Asian art.

Asian Women Meet Jesus the Compassionate Asian Liberator.[27]

Asian women’s rich insights and wisdom about the Asian Jesus are emerging among Asian women theologians, who are seeking the Sophia of Compassion from their faith traditions in Asia. Jesus the Asian is the foundation for this search. In the same manner, “Asian Christians have for centuries sought to develop religious terms and symbols for their faith from their own soil.  For example, a seventh-century Chinese text refers to Christ as "Enlightened One" and "Lord of the Universe" (a Chinese Buddhist designation for the female bodhisattva of compassion (Kwan Yin).

“Today traditional folk tales are used both to speak of Jesus in familiar ways and to honor the "Cool Wind" of the Spirit known by previous generations. This is to uncloak Jesus from the arbitrary Western clothes and garb him in natural Asian clothes. Korean theologian Lee Oo Chung used the story of the Emille bell.[28]

Jesus the Asian for the liberation of Asian women has been emerging from the work of Asian women theologians such as Kwok Pui Lan, Chung Hyun-Kyung, Mary John Manzanan, Marianne Katoppo, Aruna Gnanadason, the community of theologians of In God’s Image (journal) and many other Asian young women theologians. Dalit women theologians are seeking the Sophia of compassion from their ancient suppressed religious tradition of goddess. Minjung theologians are seeking the same from Korean women’s experiences of Han.

The re-emergence of Jesus the Asian and the Liberator of Asian Peoples is taking place in the Asian theological community, just as bamboo shoots emerge from the earth after a spring rain. Fortunately there are some moments of Asian mission history that may be regarded as anti-colonial and revolutionary. Christian leaders in Indonesia, Philippines, China, India and Korea have engaged in anti-colonial struggles for their peoples that shaped the substance of their theological outlook, although they lived and worked in the Western mission church context. The existential question was whether one could become a Christian and at the same time remain an Asian. It was the aspiration of Asian Christian leaders to be true Asian Christians among their people, sharing their struggles and hopes.

Jesus the Asian Against the Empire

Jesus as an Asian and as an Asian Minjung meets Asian peoples in the context of globalization and global empire. Christianity is still closely associated with the process of globalization and with the power of the Empire. This implies that Jesus stands against global Christianity, which is in captivity to globalization and to the Empire. This global Christianity includes Asian Christianity, which has close ties with the global Empire.

At the root of Asian Christianity we discover Jesus the Asian against the Empire. This is the beginning of our theological reflection in Asia today. We need to consolidate Jesus the Asian, and we need to “deconstruct” the Asian Christianity of the present day and the Christianity of the West, which are under the influence of the Empire.

In this context “Jesus the Asian against the Empire” provides the theological foundation for the future of Christianity. There is a need to scrutinize the discourses on the Empire. There are two streams: one from the belly of the beast, and the other from the outside of the beast. There may be a need for these two streams to converge. However, Jesus the Asian should be fully recovered and “resurrected” for life in Asia.

This statement has several implications.

1.    Jesus is physically and historically an Asian. Jesus was born of Asian parents in Asia. Jesus grew up, lived and died in Asia. Jesus dwelt among Asians and all living beings in Asia.

2.    Jesus stood against the Western (Roman) Empire and other empires. This means that Jesus stood against the Asian empires as well, and against the empire today. Jesus means Great Peace, making peace on earth and throughout the universe.

3.    Jesus was a poor Asian, living among the hungry and sick.

4.    Jesus the Asian Minjung is the starting point of any reflection about Jesus today. Jesus has a collective identity among Asian peoples, rising as the collective subject in solidarity with all Minjung in Asia. Jesus means the participation of all living beings.

5.    Jesus lives in compassion. Love your neighbor as yourself, for you are in your neighbor and your neighbor is in you.

6.    Jesus is culturally Asian. The program of acculturation and indigenization in Asian theology is problematic in a strict sense, for Jesus is not a cultural alien in Asia. Jesus was a cultural alien in the West, acculturated into the Western culture. Jesus defends his identity against the cultural domination of the past, the present and the future.

7.    Jesus is an Asian who inherited all religious heritages of Asia as his own.

8.    Jesus is an Asian living being among all living beings. Jesus has a convivial identity in the Asian continent. Jesus is a partner in the garden of life. This is a new horizon in which Jesus meets Asians.

Jesus the Asian did not know the Western metaphysical or modern God but was familiar with Asian religions. He hates any theological manipulation of God.

Jesus the Asian is Galilean by birth and rearing. Galilee is Asia. Or Asia is Galilee vs. Rome. Geography is about the abode of living beings. Geopolitics is about the order of life and peace. Home is one’s cultural abode of life, having religious and spiritual heritages. It is the locus of community of living beings. Jesus the Asian stands against Rome, the seat of the imperial power of domination, which is designated as the power of Death.

Jesus the Asian is a holistic and whole living being, with no split between body and spirit, between physical and metaphysical, between individual and community, or between human and the “other living beings.” Jesus the Asian connects all living beings and their wisdom for fullness of life.

Jesus the Asian is the liberator of Asian people. Jesus the Asian belongs to the poor, the sick, the weak, women and the alienated, and stands in solidarity with them. Jesus the Asian stands against the powers of the Empire. Jesus means justice and liberation for all living beings who are victimized. In Jesus the Asian, Asian liberation theologies converge with each other for Asian identity and liberation. Minjung Theology in Korea, Asian Women’s liberation theologies, Dalit theology in India, Buraku Liberation Theology and theological reflections against the Emperor system in Japan, the theology of Homeland, the Theology of Struggle in the Philippines, the “construction of Chinese theological thought (中國神學思想建設)” in China, theologies of the Maori people and the Aboriginal people, the liberation theologies of the tribal communities, etc., have been emerging and converging on the Asian theological horizon for liberation of the Asian people and living beings. Now is the time when a broad convergence of Asian theologies of liberation should consolidate their understanding of Jesus the Asian and the liberator of Asian peoples in the context of globalization under the global regime of the Empire.

Jesus the Asian provides the foundation for the meeting of wisdoms and wise people in Asia. He is the foundation for the inter-faith, inter-religious and inter-cultural dialogues, solidarity relationships, and inclusive convergences amidst diversity for the liberation of life in Asia. Jesus the Asian becomes the foundation upon which all Asian religions meet for the wisdom to search and struggle for justice, peace, participation and conviviality of all living beings. In Jesus the Asian the people of Asia meet the wellspring of wisdom rising from the mystery of life. The life that Jesus the Asian gives is different from the life that the Empire promises to give. The new vision of life on earth is promised in Jesus the Asian.

Jesus the Asian was born and grew up in Asia and dwelt among the Asian peoples. Jesus was crucified by the power of the Roman Empire. Jesus the Asian resisted such powers of death and created the movement of peace for all living beings. In the 21st century Asian Christian communities are recovering Jesus the Asian to overcome the power of death caused by the global Empire and to restore life as a whole.

This task is nothing other than a construction of Asian theology and of Asian Christian community. We need to excavate Jesus the Asian who has been buried in the history of Asia, while we dismantle the Christianity and Christian heritages that are subjugated under the powers of Christendom and Empire. Thus the emerging theologies of Asian liberation and of Asian religions and cultures are attempts to find the path that leads to Jesus the Asian liberator of life.

---

[1] John C. England, et. al., ed., Asian Christian Theologies (3 volumes), and T.V. Philip’s writings have begun this task.

[2] Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, Publ: Oxford University Press, March 2002, is an illustration of the argument for global Christendom. The Next Christendom argues that Christianity is shifting from a northern hemisphere-dominated religion to a southern-centered world religion. At the same time that the numerical force of Christianity has been essentially dying in Europe (and to a lesser extent the United States), "over the past century... the center of gravity in the Christian world has shifted inexorably southward, to Africa, Asia, and Latin America." The problem is that Western “classical” theology seeks to dominate global Christianity. Its suggestion that ancient Asian Christianity did not prosper because of its lack of an imperial sponsor is troublesome.

[3] Asian Christian Theologies, three-volume book, ed. by John England and David Suh, et. al.

[4] A conservative American missionary to Korea

[5] “Christianity began in Asia! Jesus spent all of his earthly life in Palestine, on the continent of Asia, and the early church had its strongest congregations in Asia Minor, (which has become modern Turkey). When the church began on the day of Pentecost there were plenty of Asians there, people from Persia, Medea, and Mesopotamia (modern Iran and Iraq), Cappadocia, Pontus, Phrygia and Pamphylia (modern Turkey). Some of these Asians were undoubtedly among the three thousand who were baptized that day. They returned to their homes with much to tell about Jesus. The apostle Paul went first to the cities of Asia Minor. Galatians, Ephesians, and Colossians were epistles written to Asian churches. The churches of Revelation 2-3 (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, etc.) were all in Asia Minor.”

[6] The distinction or separation between Jesus and Christ is also the product of the Western theologies.

[7] Here “Asia” is used broadly, inclusive of Western Asia.

[8] Keshub Chandra Sen, Who Is Jesus Christ? Calcutta, 1919.

[9] East of the Euphrates: Early Christianity in Asia by T.V. Philip

[10] St. Thomas: The Apostle of The East:  It was the story of the church’s expansion to the west that was told by Luke and taken up by the western historians. No contemporary historian has recorded the Gospel’s eastward march, but there is no doubt that the Gospel did move east even while Paul was opening his mission in Europe. In this eastward movement, St. Thomas was the central figure. "And however Western scholars may write their histories of the church, from time immemorial Asia has linked the church’s expansion eastward to the missionary travels of the apostle Thomas. (Moffett, op.cit., p.25)

Thomas was one of the twelve disciples. (Moffett, op.cit., p.25) The name Thomas is the Greek form of the Aramaic name Thoma. In St. John’s Gospel, he is called Didymus (twin). The later tradition speaks of him as the twin brother of Jesus. Nearly all that we know of Thomas comes from St. John’s Gospel (John 11:16; 14:5; 20:24; 21:2), in which he plays a fairly prominent part. While other disciples tried to prevent Jesus from going to Judea, fearing trouble from the Jews, Thomas told them, "Let us go that we may die with him." When Jesus had told his disciples that they knew the way he was going, Thomas asked how they could know the way since they did not know where he was going. Thomas was one of the seven who participated in the extraordinary catch of fish and to whom Jesus appeared on the shores of the sea of Tiberius. Thomas is best remembered for the event recorded in John 20:24-29. Jesus’ statement, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe" has influenced the later tradition of unfairly referring to Thomas as ‘doubting Thomas’. In the fourth Gospel he displays a mature and strong leadership, and his confession of the risen Jesus Christ as "My Lord and my God" is the greatest confession ever made, perhaps greater than that of Peter at Caesarea Philippi. Is it not on this confession that the church is built?

A second passage reads, "Indians and Chinese and Persians and other outlanders and those in Syria and Armenia and Ionia and Romania bringing worship in commemoration of Thomas to thy Name, our saviour." These passages do not say that St. Thomas went to all these places or founded churches there by himself. The important thing is to note that a number of places in the East are associated with the name of Thomas.  A.C. Moule points out a number of references where the names of Bartholomew , Addaeus, Aggai and Man are mentioned as companions or disciples of Thomas. A thirteenth century Syriac writer, Ebed Jesus, writes: "The holy Apostles, masters of the eastern shore, Thomas and Bartholomew of the number of the twelve and Addacus and Man of the seventy, bore the sacred leaven which they had kept to all the churches of the east for the accomplishment of the mystery of the Body of the Lord until his coming." (Quoted in A.C. Moule, Christians in China before 1550, SPCK, 1930, p. 24. See also p. 19.) Whether it was Thomas personally who went to all these places associated with his name, or whether it was his disciples, Thomas is considered as the great Apostle of the East just as Paul is the great Apostle of the West.

[11] Founder of the Catholic missions of China, b. at Macerata in the Papal States, 6 Oct. 1552; d. at Peking, 11 May, 1610.

[12] Van Dusen, Union Theological Seminary, New York.

[13] Richard Horsely, Jesus and Empire

[14] Jesus is a Jew who stands against the Roman Empire and against all empires on earth. Historically this has created a problem. German nationalism took the Westernized Jesus as the defender of Western civilization (German nationalism) and hence persecuted the Jews. Today the Jewish state of Israel sides with the Western Empire to suppress the Asian people.

[15] Kim Yong-Bock, Historical Transformation, People’s Movement and Christian Koinonia, 1976 (Ph.D. Dissertation).

[16] For example, the U.S. Mission policy was separation of religion from politics in the context of the Korean revolutionary struggle against colonialism.

[17] Theo. Van Leeuwen, Christianity in World History; Arnold Toynbee, The World and the West

[18] John England, et. al., op. cit.

[19] It is worth quoting the “Second Report” of Cardinal Paul Shan Kuo-hsi of Taiwan in this regard:

“All the Synod Fathers agreed that there must be a new way of presenting Jesus Christ to the peoples of Asia. It is the person of Jesus Christ who needs to be presented and not doctrines about him. …There are many ways of presenting Jesus Christ which are intelligible to Asian peoples: Jesus Christ as the Teacher of true Wisdom, Jesus as the Way of the Spirit, Jesus as the Teacher of Truth, Jesus as the Spiritual Guide, Jesus as the Enlightened One, Jesus as the one who shares the kenosis of the Asian Peoples. …The presentation of Jesus Christ could come as the fulfillment of the yearnings expressed in the mythologies and folklore of the Asian peoples. This was done in the early Church. A gradual doctrinal catechesis about Jesus will then be able to give a sure foundation to the faith of believers (n. 15).”

[20] There is no space here to enter into a detailed analysis of the contribution made by individual authors to the emergence of such an Asian contextual Jesuology. We must be satisfied to recall, without prejudice to others, some of the important names which immediately come to mind as being especially significant in this respect. In the Indian context, they would include: S. Kappen, M.M. Thomas, S. Rayan, G. Soares-Prabhu, F. Wilfred, M. Amaldoss, Ahn Byung Mu, C.S. Song, A. Pieris, Kwok Pui Lan, Chung Hyun Kyung, and R.S. Sugirtharajah[20] among others.

[21]  Dupuis, J., Jesus Christ at the Encounter of World Religions, Maryknoll, New York, Orbis Books (second edition), 1991.

Samartha, S.J., The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ, Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1974.

Thomas, M.M., The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, London: SCM Press,1969.

[22] Thousands of classical works of art that originated in Europe show the figure of Jesus interpreted anthropologically. (Refer to Bernini's sculptural work or Caravaggio paintings of the 17th century.) Here Jesus is depicted with a Jewish profile, which is the case in some paintings of El Greco. This artist, in fact, depicts Jesus as a powerful Jew with a Rambo-like physique. In Greco's mind, Jesus is a perfect man and is glorified as "the beloved man of all humanity", or deliciae generis humani. This is like the vision Michelangelo had when he was depicting the figure of God in the Sistine Chapel in Rome.

[23] An Asian artist discovers a Western exception that is remarkable. Paul Gauguin painted “The Yellow Christ” in 1889. “His version of Jesus is not that of a typical Jew with long hair; to the contrary, Jesus has a neat haircut more like an office staff person. The bold vision of Gauguin is further clarified in another of his paintings in which he places Jesus and Mary in Tahitian costumes and background. Generally, the viewer does not notice the occurrence of the nimbus (light that encircles a holy person) in Gauguin's depictions.”
In Asia artists meet Jesus the Asian.
Isa, or Jesus Christ, is a spirit. The body is an apparent medium which sometimes stands for the incarnation and phenomenon, and sometimes functions as a form of communication between humanity and God. In Javanese terms, this is known as an act of "manunggaling kawula lan Gusti".
In Yesus Sang Penebus, Remy Silado's Jesus is a Malay (with a Javanese face) and travels in a becak. Remy has a reason for this spiritualistic interpretation: "After the resurrection and ascension, Jesus Christ must be viewed theologically, not anthropologically".
The spirit of Jesus in Indonesian fine arts is apparent in the works which appear in the exhibition “Variations on the Theme of Independence.” Initially this exhibition was to celebrate the fifty eighth year of the independence of the Republic of Indonesia. However, artwork has been exhibited from Christian themes. Here we can see paintings by I Ketut Lasia, a senior Balinese traditional Christian artist. Lasia is known for his Biblical works using traditional forms and styles. Some of his paintings, which are done in black and white, utilize idioms from the Ubud style of painting. Back in the first quarter of the twentieth century, Ida Bagus Made Poleng and colleagues, under the supervision of Rudolf Bonnet and Walter Spies, developed this style. Bonnet and Spies taught that paintings need not feature only Hindu religious mythological themes which feature wayang puppet narratives or the gods. The result was that the art of Ubud was broadened to include depictions of everyday life, including farmers in the rice fields and women selling at the market.
Lasia, who often participates in exhibitions abroad, has returned the use of religious themes to Balinese traditional painting. But the only difference here is that 'religious' is not Hindu, but Christian. His paintings include many episodes of the life of God's children and of the majesty of Jesus. In one painting Jesus preaches to the masses from a hilltop. In another Jesus is in a boat fishing with his disciples. He also paints Jesus' crucifixion and his washing the feet of his disciples.
In another instance we are drawn to the work of I Nyoman Darsane, another popular Balinese Christian artist. Darsane began with a traditional orientation. However, he then began working in more modern styles. As this developed much was written about the presence of traditional elements in his art. Darsane's work came to be described as 'contemporary.' Darsane utilizes a principle of realism in his paintings to create mythological figures or wayang that are usually seen in the Hindu world. However, these mythological figures he makes as characters from stories whose inspiration and substance is taken from the Gospel. And so emerge symbolic realist paintings like Sang pembebas (The deliverer), Sepuluh Anak Dara (the ten virgins) or the narrative of Mary and Martha.
The same spirit of realism is seen in the paintings of Ni Ketut Ayu Sri Wardani. The difference, however, is that while Darsane's work may be classified as decorative, Wardani's paintings are essentially expressionistic. Every figure moves with deep feeling and is transformed as a record of the event. The despairing face in Jeritan Ibu (A Mother's Scream) grasps the viewer. In a similar fashion Eloi Eloi Lamasabakhtani shows the face of Jesus at his death. Wardani often references the passion narrative of Jesus. One of his most interesting works is “Golgotha.”
If Darsane and Wardani move from obedience to realism, then Komang Wahyu, Gede Sukana Kariana, I Gede Yosef C. Darsane and Tina Bailey are walking towards efforts to dissolve forms. Accordingly their paintings serve impressions only, the beauty of colours dominate the whole canvas such as in Josef's painting, Kebimbangan Maria (Mary's Hesitation) and Kebangkitan (Resurrection). Beautiful ornamentation leads the paintings of Komang Wahyu: Yesus Memberkati Anak-Anak (Jesus Blesses the Children), and Baptisan di Sungai Yordan (Baptism in the River Jordan). Abstract elements dominate Gede Sukana's Pengharapan (Hope) and Tina Bailey's Tidak Dapat Hidup dalam Kesendirian (We do not live in Isolation).
In the artists' work, Jesus often appears indistinctly as light. Jesus is not to be understood in physical terms; rather he has become ultimate reality, knowing no barriers of space or time. Having reflected on these images, we see that Jesus has been made visible through symbols placed in aesthetic frames.

[24] by C.S. Song

[25] C.S. Song is Professor of Theology and Asian Cultures at the Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, and Regional Professor of Theology at the Southeast Asia Graduate School of Theology in Singapore.

[26]Jesus, The Crucified People. New York: Crossroads, 1990.; Jesus and the Reign of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Jesus in the Power of the Spirit. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.

[28] “A devout Buddhist king wanted to protect his people from invasion. His advisors told him to build a huge temple bell to show the people’s devotion to the Buddha. A specialist was commissioned but repeatedly failed to produce a beautiful sounding bell. Finally the decision was made to sacrifice a pure, young maiden. Soldiers were sent and came upon a poor woman with her small daughter. As they took the child away she cried, ‘Emille, Emille!’ The molten lead and iron were prepared and the little girl was thrown in. At last the bell maker succeeded. When it rang people praised the bell. But whenever the mother of the girl heard it, her heart broke anew. As in the tale, the political and technological achievements we celebrate are often accomplished by cutting short the lives of those considered ‘expendable’ or ‘acceptable collateral damage.’ Jesus, like the little girl’s compassionate mother, feels deeply for these. The mother image, important to some Asian women, has biblical roots in Jesus’ longing to gather the children of Jerusalem under his wings as a mother hen (Matt 23:37). It also has resonance with Asian images of compassion in female form.”