FIGURE 3 - THE BOTH/AND PATTERN OF THE CHINESE (Wan 1998:121)

(Note: This is a pictographic symbol of “tai-qi” in Chinese thought pattern.  Reader is forewarned that its inclusion here is neither a subscription to Taoism nor an endorsement of folk superstition.  Please keep in mind that just as no Korean Christian will have any conscientious objection to the fact that this symbol is used for his national flag; here it is employed for the sake of scholarly discussion.)

This both/and of ST is totally free from the Aristotelian logic and is in contrast to the either/or of TWT.  Theologizing is a matter of conceptualization closely related to cultural conditioning.  Perception of reality and conception of spirituality cannot be separated from the enculturation process of members of the cultural group.  The cultural theme of the Chinese is unity/harmony/integration/union/equilibrium /wholeness/balance: e.g. emphasis on the unity of “heaven” and man; equilibrium of “yin” and “yang;” social harmony with others;  unity of knowledge and action; solidarity of family and nation; inter-dependence of the living and the dead, ancestor and descendents; the balance of “cold” and “hot” for good health, etc.  Thus the focus on and striving for both/and is clearly a cultural characteristic of the Chinese in thought, action, relationship, sentiment and institution.  Therefore both/and should be the pattern for ST theologizing. 

The Jewish thought pattern of the OT, the traditional Chinese and the New Testament writers all shared the same both/and pattern and all are free from the either/or paradox that has troubled many great thinkers and theologians of TWT.  According to Christian orthodoxy, the doctrine of the Trinity teaches that there is only one God and one only.  This God exists eternally in three distinct persons: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.  These three are fully equal in every divine perfection.  They possess alike the fullness of the divine essence.  In other words, God is one in essence and three in existence.  God is both one and three.   God is both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit at the same time.  God is not either the Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit as in cases of extremists, heresies and cults.  There is both unity and diversity.  This both/and paradigm is found in both orthodox Christian theology and Chinese cultural tradition.

The menace of dIchotomistic dualism of either/or is clearly described by Arnold Yeung’s observation quoted below:

“Furthermore, New Testament writers were not the only ones who fought fiercely against dualism.  Throughout the 2,000 years of church history in  theologizing, at the critical moments time and time again, there have been those who discerned the destructive forces of dualism and rallied for an integrative understanding of facts and truth: early Hebrew patriarchs (of the many schools of Chinese philosophy, Taoism is most distinctive in this aspect); the church fathers Irenaeus, Damascus, Athanasius, Calvin and some Lutherans of the Reformation; contemporary theologians such as Barth, Pannenburg…Karl Heim, Torrance, etc.”  (Yeung 1986, 41, translated from Chinese)

As shown in Figure 4 below, failing to employ the both/and pattern of theologizing will result in the left-hand column:

FIGURE 4 - THE TWO PATTERNS OF THEOLOGIZING (Wan 1998:122-123)  

The only exception to Figure 4 is the few “conservative Christian leaders in China during the period of the 1920s to the 1940s (such as Chia Yu-ming, Wang Ming-tao, and Watchman Nee),” who according to Arnold Yeung’s analysis, “had been influenced by fundamentalist missionaries who fought against humanism and the 'social gospel'." (Yeung 1988, 60, translated from Chinese)

V.  THE SAD PRECEDENTS OF CHINESE WHO ADOPTED THE EITHER/OR WAY

In recent history, there have been two groups of Chinese who departed from the traditional both/and way with serious consequences.  First, there were the scholars who chose to embrace the either/or philosophy during the May Fourth Movement as reported by Arnold Yeung,

“…but the ‘law of cause and effect’ of Plato and Aristotle had shaped the Newtonian cosmology via medieval scholasticism.  Since then, the Western thought world had been imprisoned by the (dualistic) closed system of cosmology for two thousand years.  Pitifully, though the traditional pattern of Chinese thought had been similar to that of the Hebraic, being integrative and open, yet ever since the May Fourth Movement, Chinese scholars have indiscriminately embraced Western thought.  Gathering the tares with the wheat, these scholars have lost their distinctive Chinese cultural heritage.  Thus under the spell of foreign dualism (of either/or), they have viewed the ‘law of cause and effect’ as an impenetrable and unbreakable net.  Until the day when this net is broken through, we will continue to be imprisoned in the dark dungeon of Medieval thinking.” (Yeung 1988: 24, translated from Chinese)

Another group is contemporary Chinese Christians, affected not in their faith but in their practice.  Again the prophetic voice of Arnold Yeung should be heard:

“You ask, ‘What do contemporary Chinese have to do with ancient Hellenist philosophy?’  May I answer by raising some questions?  How many of our cosmology that is neither polytheistic nor dualistic compartmentalizes spirit and matter ? …God’s participation and man’s duty?…Maintaining the balance between God’s work and man’s freedom? Or are we practically living in the 20^th century version of dualism? Holding God, eternal life, heaven, hell with one hand and Newtonian causal law in another? …Are we Christians not impoverishing ourselves by this type of dualism?…”  (Yeung 1988:30, translated from Chinese)

VI.  CONCLUSION

Critique of the either/or pattern in TWT is offered to show the necessity of formulating ST.  It is to our peril when we utilize the either/or pattern for ST.  Since the both/and pattern is the cultural theme of the Chinese, it is both right and good to employ it in the formulation of ST. 

References Cited

Wan, Enoch: Banishing the Old and Building the New: An Exploration of Sino-Theology. Toronto, Canada: Chinese Christian Communication Inc. of Canada. (in simplified Chinese script), 1997. 

__________. "Liberating Paradigm-shift: Theologizing from the East,"        Unpublished paper presented at the EMS SE Regional Meeting, March 7-8, 1997, Dayton, TN. 1997.

__________. Sino-Theology: A Survey Study. Toronto, Canada: Chinese Christian Communication Inc. of Canada (in full Chinese script), 1998.

Yeung, Arnold: Introduction to Christian Cosmology Taipei, Taiwan: Campus Evangelical Fellowship. (in Chinese), 1986. 

This article was originally published in the November 1999 issue of Chinese Around the World (A Ministry of Chinese Coordination Centre of World Evangelism).  Used by author's permission.

Readers are welcome to send comments to the author: wanenoch@aol.com