PANA Institute for Leadership Development

Roy I. Sano delivered the inaugural lecture for the Sang Hyun Lee Lectureship on Asian American Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary on March 5, 2009. 

Photos of the lecture are online here.

INTRODUCTION

I am deeply grateful to President Iain Torrance for the invitation to deliver this lecture.  Congratulations to the generous supporters who established the first endowed lectureship named for an Asian North American theologian.[1]     Others could just as appropriately establish a lectureship or faculty chair honoring the Rev. Dr. San Hyun Lee’s contribution to Jonathan Edwards studies.  Edwards is still considered by some to be the greatest theologian we have had, and is after all the founder of this University.   I therefore welcome this opportunity to celebrate Dr. Lee’s contributions to Asian North American theology, which will be strengthened in 2010 with his forthcoming book, A Theology of Liminality, from Fortress Press.  In this presentation, I propose to build the momentum to his contributions in the growing movement of Asian North American theologies and beyond.  
                                        

    I. A NEW CREATIVITY

    Old Model: The approach I will follow differs from our earliest efforts.  Asian American theologies began as a tiny trickle in the late 1960s.  The primary agenda was to liberate ourselves from captivity to the prevailing Euro-North American theological paradigms, and create new ethnic theologies more suitable for the struggles of our people.  Our efforts were informed by our national ancestries, our generations here, and our gender experiences in North America.   The trickle has become a expanding stream with intermingling currents.  Asian North American women today out number and out produce us men.  So you are hearing a minority voice.
                                        
    New Model: I believe the fusion of cultures in the globalizing world calls us to move beyond what could become isolation in academic guilds.  Even our churches and homes are very quickly becoming inter-ethnic and multi-cultural.  Eighty per cent of Japanese Americans, for example, are marrying outside their national ancestries.  The challenge for creativity today is not simply to pursue deconstructionist enterprises for sake of distinct theologies, but to infuse the prevailing historic and recent theological paradigms with what we have developed in the interim.  This is what I see President Obama doing as he introduces into the prevailing national ethos his distinct  contributions forged out of the mix of his inter-racial, multi-cultural, and international experiences.
                                                
    Origins of the new model: The approach comes from my Japanese heritage which is heavily influenced by Taoism in Japanese Zen Buddhism.  According to Taoism, we are like water, fitting into the shape of the contours as we move down stream.  While fitting into existing containers, however, we reshape them.[2]    Although it required eons, the Colorado River cut a gorge a mile down as it flowed along the river bed and has presented us with the Grand Canyon.

    Examples abound in Japan of what they did with Swiss watches, German cameras, and US cars and CD players, TV and IT.  In all instances they fit into existing models and reshaped them.   We used to joke about students who went from Japan to study under Karl Barth.  “They went to out Barth Barth.”  This approach stands in sharp contrast to the typical iconoclastic models for creativity in this culture.  Newsweek Magazine, for example, outsold Time Magazine, albeit briefly by saying, “We don’t fit the mold. We break it.”

    The Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C.  An illustration of the approach I am proposing is The Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC.   From above, the Memorial looks like a single chevron of a private first class.   The chevron faces southward across a tidal pool to the Jefferson Memorial, the chief writer of the Declaration of Independence.  From the apex of the chevron, one wall rises from the depth of ten feet and runs eastward 246 feet toward the tall obelisk which acknowledges our debt to George Washington, the founder of the Republic.  The other wall of equal length rises westward from the apex toward a memorial to Abraham Lincoln, who united us in “a new birth of freedom.”

    The Vietnam Veterans Memorial, therefore, pays tribute to three moments in the myth of our civil religion, embodied in Jefferson, Washington, and Lincoln.  At the same time, the Memorial is now infused with Taoism in a black wall descending into a gentle rise in the terrain, and an underground stream uncovered during the construction.  The descent into a knoll with a black wall and the moisture represent a modest yin which powerfully balances the monumental yang in the tall, firm, and white marble of the three triumphant memorials.  Taoist elements in the Memorial should not surprise us.  The designer of the Memorial is Miya Ying Lin, a daughter of immigrants from China, and at the time, a 21 year old senior at Yale University’s School of Architecture.

    Although angry protests and threats on her life were originally directed at Ms. Lin, through time people discovered her design did not desecrate that sacred space.  Rather, Taoist cultural forces have finally helped us memorialize with dignity and integrity what we wanted to forget but could not ignore.  Books like Fire in the Lake and movies like the Deer Hunter did not bridge the hostile divide created by the Vietnam War.  Nothing has healed us as much as a descent into the depths of the Memorial to read and touch a few of those 58,000 names we see written across our faces mirrored on that black granite wall.  The stream still running underground comes coursing through us, as it were, in the tears shed by visitors.  We can now be hallowed even in humiliation and defeat as we honor “the last full measure of devotion.”

    Just as infusing Taoism into the Holy of Holy of our civil religion has transformed it into a healing space, I am proposing to move beyond creating in isolation our unique ethnic theologies, and begin infusing those distinct ingredients developed in the interim into prevailing theological models to reshape them for more authenticity and cogency.

    II.  DEVELOPING DISTINCT CONTRIBUTIONS                            

    The Taoist pattern of creativity first describes how I fit into the normative methodology of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral of the Bible, tradition, experience and reason.  According to the United Methodist book of faith and order, our 2008 Discipline,  “Scripture, as the constitutive witness to the wellspring of our faith, occupies a place of primary authority among these theological sources.”[3]

    Despite the tall claims for the primacy of the Bible, the resurgence in Wesleyan/Methodist studies from the last quarter of the 20th century fosters retrenchment in the glories of our 18th century forebears, without sufficient attention to the Bible.  We have not seen the critical and constructive efforts in Wesleyan studies as we saw in the middle third of the 20th century among Lutherans and Calvinists.  To take one troubling example to highlight the point, those who belong to the “biblical caucus,” as they call themselves in our denomination, are actually more doctrinal than biblical.   Jesus illustrates what I mean.  When the Pharisees complained that the disciples “break the tradition of the elders,” Jesus turned tables, and answered,  “For the sake of your tradition, you make void the word of God.” (Mt 15:2 and 6.  See too, Mark 7:13.)  I will show how the recent resurgence of the doctrinal traditions of our elders are nullifying the word of God and require significant changes.  

    While fitting into the Quadrilateral, it has become necessary to reorder the sequence.   The standard list implicitly suggests we begin with the Bible, then move through Tradition, Experience, and Reason.   In order to reshape the tradition of our elders which are muffling the word of God, I found it better to begin with Experience, and move successively with Reason, Tradition, and the Bible, and continue using those resources through a spiral.   While chronologically last, I believe my illustrations will demonstrate that the Bible actually has logical priority.   My consistent appeal to the Bible will correctly tempt you to say, “He is trying to out-Bible the ‘biblical caucus.’”  I hope I do.

    III.  CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERJECT

    A.  Expanding the Doctrine of Salvation

    I will turn next to two by-products of fitting into an adapted version of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.  The first proposes to interject new ingredients into John Wesley’s doctrine on salvation.  The doctrine has such sacrosanct status, we love to speak of it in Latin as the ordo salutis (or via salutis).  According to our view of church history, Martin Luther recovered Justification by Faith and John Calvin added an appreciation for Sanctification, but it was John Wesley who dared to call for Perfection expected of us in the Bible.  Thus, for us, the ordo salutis for personal salvation includes Justification, Sanctification, and Perfection.[4]    I cannot debate at the moment the substantive issues about Perfection, but will proceed to the development of a distinct ingredient which proposes to reshape the Wesleyan/Methodist doctrine of salvation and the ministries it promotes.    
                                    
    The distinct ingredients grew out of critical reflection on our new ministries in the last half of the 20th century.   We addressed racism and sexism, classism and homophobia.  We also participated in liberation movements in former European colonies in Africa following WWII, and in the movement for human rights in South Korea and the Philippines in the neo-colonialism, East and West, during the Cold War era.  One of the welcomed, if surprising, results is that the fastest growth in our church is occurring where we supported liberation movements.

    Many in the church, led primarily by the “biblical caucus,” did not notice any disparity with our tradition.  Their practices within narrow confines of traditional doctrines led them to claim the ministries mentioned earlier were secular or secondary at best, and at worst prompted by an evil spirit.[5]    Those of us who participated in those ministries, however, felt we were prompted by God’s Hallowing Spirit.

    My quest “to test the spirits” proceeded with the adapted Wesleyan Quadrilateral which I will slightly expand here what I outlined earlier. I began by focusing on experiences, and reflected critically, or analyzed them with reason.  The descriptive function of reason meant examining those experiences through the lense of traditional doctrine of salvation.   It produced a cognitive dissonance because the traditional doctrines were out of sync with the sanctity we had experiences in our ministries.   Through the prescriptive function of reason, I explored options in neglected traditions in church history and the Bible to see if there were other traditions that explained what we had experienced.  As for traditions in church history, I found them in late 20th century scholarship on the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth century Revolutions energized by the Reformed heritage.  

    By exploring biblical traditions behind those revolutionary movements, I backed into Ezekiel 36:22-32.  This passage from the Bible combined a witness to God actively working for transformation in society and nature which we had pursued, as well as God working for the transformation of individuals so important for our traditional Wesleyan doctrine.  However flawed our actual practices were, I could now say it was not an evil spirit, but God’s Holy Spirit, even God’s very self, Yahweh, directly prompting the often controversial ministries in the last half of the 20th century.   As the passage also said (Ez 36:23b), people would come to know the Lord, when Yahweh staged the History of Salvation through us, thus explaining the rapid conversion of individuals I mentioned earlier.
                                        
    I will first describe Ezekiel’s witness to the wider sweep of God’s work, and second the witness to God’s work in personal salvation.  The wider sweep of salvation is summarized in three words – take, gather, and bring.  The three words have not been noticed, even in standard commentaries on Ezekiel, although they appear together seven times in Ezekiel (See, Ezek 20:34-35, 40-42; 34:13, 22-25; 36:24; 37:21; 39:27-28).  They probably functioned as clue words for what van Rad might have called a credo summarizing what Yahweh will do in Ezekiel’s History of Salvation.
                           

History of Salvation - Ezekiel 36:24

God’s actions    Theological Concepts

TAKE refers here to Yahweh staging liberation from captivity, as Yahweh delivered Hebrew slaves from their bondage;    Redemption

GATHER refers to reuniting the scattered tribes, as they were united at Sinai in a covenant with one another and with God; and      Reconciliation

BRING refers to Yahweh leading the scattered people home to rebuild a liveable space in society and in nature, and thus with enough to eat,  as was done for the children of Israel in the promised land.      Re-Creation

(See, Ezek 20:34-35, 40-42; 34:13, 22-25; 36:24; 37:21; 39:27-28.)
(Nature becomes particularly prominent in 36:28-30)           

Within God’s actions in this broader History of Salvation, Ezekiel included his version of the Order of Salvation for personal transformation.  

    The Order of Salvation -    Ezekiel 36:25,26, 27

    God’s actions    Theological Concepts

    25 I will sprinkle clean water upon you             Justification
    26 A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit      Sanctification
    27 I will . . . make you follow my statutes         Perfection     
            . . . [and] observe my ordinances

    Whereas Ezekiel’s sequence follows precisely the Wesleyan Order of Salvation, the locus classicus for the ordo salutis in Jeremiah 31:31-34 (reappearing with slight variation in Hebrews 8:8-12), ironically reverses Wesley’s order.  

    Relevance If we incorporate the neglected witness to God’s salvific activities, we will expand the traditional doctrine of salvation.  This reformulation has become even more urgently needed in the post-Cold War era.   Former revolutionaries in de-colonization movements have consistently become George Orwell’s Pig in The Animal Farm – liberators turning into tyrants over their own people, and stashing foreign aid funds into personal bank accounts in Switzerland.   Nelson Mandela represents a towering contrast of combining the social and personal transformation we noted in Ezekiel 36.  Mandela lived out the History of Salvation by advocating liberation, building unity between blacks and whites, and rebuilding the nation.  In addition, Mandela embodies personal transformation associated with the Order of Salvation.  We see it in the warm relations he had with the jailors, and forgiving those who imprisoned him for 27 years.                                 

    B. Witness of the Spirit Redefined

    I turn next to the second ingredient which I am proposing to interject into our doctrines concerning the witness of the Spirit with implications for our pneumatology.  The witness of the Holy Spirit for us Methodists is so holy, it frequently weep when we retell John Wesley’s “heart warming” witness of the Holy Spirit.  We can give you the date, time, and place – May 24, 1738, about 8:45pm, at a Moravian chapel on Aldersgate Street, London, England.

    Wesley experienced the warm heart because he finally met what the Moravians required, namely, true faith must comes with a witness of the Spirit that he trusted in Jesus Christ for his salvation.  Without that witness, he could not be a Christian.  Although Wesley eventually rejected the requirement, the reference to Romans 8:16 remains normative for our understanding of the witness of the Spirit.  It is the “Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God.”
    
    Pursuing the Quadrilateral further with critical reflections on our experiences and practices in ministries during the last half of the 20th century, prompted another dissonance with the inherited doctrine.[6]    The doctrine skews the witness by stopping at Romans 8:16.  We can restore authenticity to the witness of the Spirit if we read verse 16 in connection with verse 17: “it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ – if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.”
 
    What is crucial to see are three interconnected ideas in Romans 8:17: being a child of God, being joint heirs with Christ, and suffering with Christ, or again three words – child, heir, and suffering.  These words offer leads to reinterpret the witness of the Spirit so it rings true.
                                    
    Amidst the ecumenical discussions on baptism in the 1980s, I came to see the best lead into the meaning of child and heir appears in the neglected witness to Jesus at his baptism and transfiguration.  I will discuss the third word, suffering, after discussing baptism and the transfiguration.  Time does not allow me to quote the relevant references on the witness of the Spirit as I did on the doctrine salvation.  I have, however, made those citations and others available on a handout so you can evaluate more carefully the case I am building.
    

    Jesus at his baptism 

At his baptism, we hear essentially the same witness in all three Synoptic Gospels.  Jesus is the Beloved Son.   We will focus on the Son here, and the “Beloved” at the transfigurations.  When the early church heard Jesus is a son, they probably heard echoes of Psalms 2[7]   and 110, since those two Psalms are cited frequently in the New Testament.  In Psalms 2:7-8, the words “begotten” is connected to a “heritage.”  That is, the idea of a child and heir appears together as they do in the Spirit’s witness to us in Romans 8:17.  The connection comes from the widespread practice of the law of primogenitor where the (first, or only) child was the heir.  So, in Psalms 110:1, probably the passages from the Hebrew Bible most frequently cited or inferred in the New Testament,[8]   the son was seated at the right hand of the Monarch according to protocol in the royal court. (Ps 110:1) Seated meant the son “already” shared a measure of the reign, but seated at the right hand meant the son is an heir apparent, and therefore “not yet” fully in charge.  In this case, we do not need a “death of God,” that is, the reigning Monarch does not need to die before passing on the heritage!  Rather, the son must fulfill awesome assignments before fully becoming the heir.  Mention of violent actions by the son in Psalms 2 and 110, like “dashing heads,” are difficult for us to read. (Ps 2:8; 110:1, 5-6)  We can, however, surmise that drastic measures by the son will be required to overcome evil and spread good in the reign and realm of the Monarch.  Similarly, we can assume drastic measures are required of us as children of God and heirs, when Jesus urged us to “strive first for the kingdom of God.”  (Mt 6:33)

    In Psalms 2 and 110, we are not dealing with the divine source nor substance of the son, as was so hotly argued in the early 20th century.  We are, however, focused on the future scenario for the son in the divine mission on earth, which we have as the children of God and heirs have with Christ.

    Transfiguration of Jesus 

I turn from the baptism of Jesus to his transfiguration.   (Mt 17:1-9; Mk 9:2-10; Lk 9:28-36)  A voice says Jesus is the beloved Son in Matthews 17:27 and Mark 9:7, and he is a Son and chosen in Luke 9:35.  These identities bring with them specific ministries to fulfill in God’s mission and drastic measures mentioned in Psalms 2 and 110.  Those identities and ministries appear in two Servant Songs from Isaiah which are cited during controversies Jesus encountered in Matthew and Luke’s Gospel.  The writer of Matthew (Mt 12:18-21) quotes Isaiah 42:1-4 to explain the controversial ministry Jesus was practicing.  He is given a rich cluster of identities as one anointed by the Spirit, a beloved son, and the chosen.  These identities meant he is not only to advocate but also to achieve justice as well as practice kindness, and thereby spread God’s reign and realm.

    In Luke’s Gospel, Luke 4:18-19, Jesus reads Isaiah 61:1, about one who is anointed by the Holy Spirit and has the tasks to preach good news (not bad news) to the poor, to release the prisoners, to recover sight for the blind, to liberate the oppressed, and to announce all of this is to happen then and there.  The rewording should convey the outrageous ministries we miss in those familiar lines.

    If at the baptism Jesus as a son and an heir apparent is given a mission to spread the reign and realm of God, at the transfiguration, with additional identities Jesus is given specific ministries to fulfill the mission, including justice, kindness, and healing, with a proviso to accomplish them now.

    Suffering in Intercession 

When Jesus announced at the synagogue that he was fulfilling that very day the prophecy in Isaiah 61, his townspeople tried to kill him.  The references to controversies and threats on his life remind us of suffering with Christ in Romans 8:17, as we earlier noticed also mentioned child and heir.  To explain the suffering involved, we go on to the additional verses which follow, namely, Romans 8:18-28, where a child of God is called to a ministry of intercessory prayer.  That is not as innocuous as it sounds.  The setting for prayer is the whole creation writhing in labor pains to give birth to the redemption of our bodies, the salvific liberation of people.  The Spirit helps us enter into those travails and lift those sighs and groans too deep for words as intercessory prayer to God.  The suffering recalled here brings to mind yet another Servant Song from Isaiah 53 where we read about the servant suffering with “anguish” in “intercession.”  (Is 53:11-12)

    I saw the connection of these three words, suffering, child and heir in Romans 8:17 at the 1992 Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Canberra, Australia.  In her lecture on the Assembly theme, “Come, Holy Spirit, Renew the Whole Creation,”  Hyun Kyung Chung offered what in part was an intercessory prayer.  She drew on her animist and shamanist Korean heritage to give voice to the voiceless cries of Han echoing throughout creation.  She articulated those cries from victims of injustice who have not been vindicated and lie forgotten in shallow graves across the face of the earth, or were vaporized into the atmosphere in gas chambers and by the atomic bombs.  That priestly ministry in Dr. Chung’s lecture proved to be very costly for her.   Consternation exploded at the Assembly.  Even the assembly newspaper published by the young adults, accused her of being the witch of Endor!  (1 Sam 28:7)  The schedule went out the window for public forums which dealt with threats of the Orthodox to withdraw their membership in the WCC.   When she returned home, Professor Chung lost a faculty position and faced threats on her life.[9]    Such is the suffering in service when the Spirit enables a child of God as heirs articulate the cries of the people, whether verbally in intercessory prayer or in acts of public advocacy.  

    We saw intercessory prayer as public advocacy happen in South Korea and the Philippines during human rights struggles.  Supporters resolutely turned the sighs and groans of pathos and anguish into intelligible utterances with protests and demands, and into comprehendible acts of rebellions, elections, and legislation.  Dictators were toppled and we saw the beginnings of a fragile democracy.[10]     This fulfills the promise of the Bible cited earlier.  Those anointed by the Spirit  “will not break a bruised or quench a smoldering wick, till s/he brings justice to victory”!  (Mt 12:20)

    Summary

By tracking the leads implicit in witness in Romans 8:16-17 that we are children of God and heirs who suffers, we have drastically reinterpreted the witness of the Holy Spirit.   By turning the witness into a warm fuzzies, our traditional understandings of the witness “dumbed down” the Holy Spirit, that is “dumbing” or silencing what the witness says.   The anointing of the Lord names us with a tall order of identities and yokes us to awesome and costly ministries to fulfill in God’s mission for the History and Order of Salvation.       

    CONCLUSION

    I have been rather pedantic and ponderous with details this evening.  So I want to turn to a lighter picture of momentum I wish to add to Dr. Lee’s contributions in the expanding currents of Asian North American theology and beyond.

    I ran across this vivid picture in the food section of The Los Angeles Times.  The article by Jonathan God depicted for me what I was getting into when I moved from Denver to Los Angeles in 1992.  Jonathan Gold calls his column “Counter Intelligence,” no leads to health food there.  To alert the reader, he entitled this article, “Trans-Global Junk Food.”  When I saw he was reviewing an Oki Dog fast food stand, I thought, great!  People from Oklahoma have neutralized that pejorative name, “Oki”, as African American had done with the word “Black.”  The owner was playing another word game.  First, the Oki Dog stand is not run by descendants of migrants from Oklahoma, but immigrants from Okinawa.  And second, “Oki” means big in Japanese.  The Oki Dog is therefore an “in your face” to the Big Macs at the Golden Arches and the Whoppers at Burger King.

    When Jonathan Gold is excited, he does not stop for a break.  A single sentence runs for a full paragraph.

"The best of the Oki creation, a Chinese-American-Jewish-Mexican thing made by Japanese cooks for a mostly African-American clientele, is the pastrami burrito, a foil-wrapped grease bomb the size and weight of a building brick, bursting with fried pastrami, sauteed cabbage, onions and peppers, mustard and pickles, and a healthy dose of Oki chili, enough food to feed a medium-size family for a week."[11]

Jonathan Gold’s humor captures the delights we frequently experience in encountering the escalating mixture and fusion of cultures in our communities, families, and churches.  He also depicts the stomach wrenching experiences which can come with creative contributions to the mix, as we saw in Maya Ying Lin and Hyun Kyung Chung.   Whatever the difficulties coming down stream, I am proposing to build the momentum of Dr. Lee’s contributions by infusing distinct Asian North American ingredients into the prevailing theological paradigms.  I am hoping they will reshape those paradigms with greater cogency and integrity to build up Christ’s Body for our witness and service in the world through the History and Order of Salvation.   May it be so, Dear God.  Amen.

    END NOTES

1.  The efforts began as “Asian American theologies,” but has been expanded so we now speak of “Asian North American theology,” acknowledging the importance of Asian Canadian experiences and contributions.  

2.  The Taoist qualities in this text appears in the following verse.

 Nothing in this world
    is as soft and yielding as water
Yet for attacking he hard and strong
    none can triumph so easily
It is weak, yet none can equal it
It is soft, yet none can damage it
It is yielding, yet none can wear it away

Everyone knows that the soft overcomes the hard
    and the yielding triumphs over the rigid
Why then so little faith?
Why can no one practice it?

So the Sages say,
    fulfill even the lowest position
    love even the weakest creature
Then you will be called
    “Lord of every offering”
    “King of all below Heaven”
– Lao Tsu, Tao Te Ching: The Definitive Edition, (NY: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, 2001), translation and commentary by Jonathan Star, Verse 78, p. 91

 3.  The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church, 2008, (Nashville, TN: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2008), ¶ 1094.  Section 4–Our Theological Task, “Theological Guidelines: Sources and Criteria,” p. 77-78.  A recent sampling of discussions on the Quadrilateral appears in a collection of essays, Wesley and the Quadrilateral: Renewing the Conversation, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1997), edited by W. Stephen Gunter.  Numerous references are included to consult the broader discussion.

 4.  See the summary of Justification, Sanctification, and Perfection noted as a “Distinct Wesleyan Emphasis,” ¶ 101. Section1–Our Doctrinal Heritage, Part II Doctrinal Standards and Our Theological Task,” The Book of Discipline of The United Church, 2008, (Nashville, TN: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2008, pp. 46-47.

5 .  The conflict between progressives and conservatives has taken on new shades of differences in the last thirty years with the emergence of the Religious and Political Right.  From the view point of the analysis here, conservatives and the Religious Right extend without adjustments personal faith and morality into social ethics.  Issues of traditional personal faith appear in opposition to secular education in public schools, including advocating creationism.  It led to a proliferation of “Christian schools” from the civil rights era, which covered up white flight.  Traditional morality appears in opposition to homosexuality and abortion, and legislative action represents an ironic contradiction of an earlier motto heard from evangelicals in the 1940-50s, “You cannot legislate righteousness.”   

    Because of the absence of biblical foundation in traditional Wesleyan theology for social ethics, evangelicals had no biblical foundations to correct patriotism turning civil religion into nationalism.  Thus, conservatives had no restraints to offer for foreign policy abroad under President HW Bush.  
                                
    Appeals to John Wesley’s reference to “Social Holiness” among progressives represents an anachronism, and appeals to John Wesley’s eschatology which included the social and natural transformation was never explicitly incorporated into the traditional doctrines of salvation, even in the 19th century when eschatology drove the church’s mission. [See, for example, Theodore Runyon, The New Creation: John Wesley’s Theology Today, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1998), pp 112 163-164.] )

 6.  A collection of recent essays discussing John Wesley’s Aldersgate experience appears in Aldersgate Reconsidered, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1990), edited by Randy Maddox.  An earlier, but still very instructive study appears in The Doctrine of Assurance, with Special Reference to John Wesley, (London: Epworth Press, 1952), by Arthur S. Yates.

7 .  The references to Jesus as the Son of God are legion.  See, for example,
Mt 4:3; 8:29; 16:16; 27:40 (attributing the title to others); Mark 1:1; 3:11; 5:7 (Son of the Most High); and 15:39; Lk 1:32; 4:9, 31; and John 1:34, 49; 3:18; 20:36 (God as Father; Jesus as Son of God);11:4, 27; 17:1 (God as Father, Jesus as Son). So too in Rom 1:9; 8:32 and Eph 4:13.

 8.  See references to“seated at the right hand,” if not clear inferences.   In Mt 25:34 (at right, inherit God’s reign and realm); Mk 12:36; Lk 20:42.  So too, Rom 8:32; Eph 1:20; Heb 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22.

9 .    We were seeing an early signs of the Third World People, in the Third Millennium, creating a Third Church, as Walbert Buhlmann prophesied in 1982, in
The Coming Third Church (Paramus, NJ: Orbis,1982).  Buhlmann based his prognosis on his outline of Christian history.   As the First Church in the First Millennium based in Constantinople, could not absorbed the distinct contributions of the Second Church based in Rome, they parted ways in the first century of the Second Millennium.   Buhlmann was saying that the inability to incorporate new and distinct contributions into existing molds, would create another division, and hence the emergence of the Third Church.

10 .    I have viewed prayers through signs and groans too deep for word in labor pains as the “third gift of tongues.”   If the first gift is to speak someone else’s language intelligible so hearers can make an informed response, the second gifts appears in supra-rational outbursts, and the third gift is to express signs and groans too deep for words into intelligible utterances in word and deed to restore justice and righteousness.  All three gifts of tongue are finally expected to be comprehendible and to produce an orderly, inclusive community. (Acts 2:4-8; 1 Cor 14:6, 13, 27, 33)

11 .  Jonathan Gold, “Trans-Global Junk Food,” (Oki Dog, 5056 West Pico Boulevard, Los Angeles) in his column, “Counter Intelligence,” The Los Angeles Times, October 4, 1990, p. H1.