Public theology remains a somewhat awkward and easily misunderstood concept for Chinese churches. Their social and political environments vary greatly, and public space is often constricted. Culturally, our experience of the “public” is limited, and “theology” often raises suspicion. Is public theology truly important? What exactly is its significance? If public theology is understood merely as a theological response to social issues, it may indeed lead to a dead end. Yet like all theology, public theology begins not with issues, but with the knowledge of God. It is “public” not simply because it concerns human beings and society, but because the God we believe in reveals himself to the world and is open to all things. It concerns how we know, interpret, and witness to this “public God.” In this sense, its foundation does not depend on specific contexts, but on our understanding of God, the church, and the world—that is, our ecclesiology, Christology, and overall worldview. Yet because God enters history and is present in the world, public theology must be expressed, practiced, and tested in concrete settings. Its foundation is consistent; its expression contextual. Because of this, Chinese churches in the global diaspora possess a unique advantage. Different systems, cultures, and public spaces lead to different concerns and responses. If churches in these different settings can listen to, converse with, and reflect upon one another, they can form a healthier and more holistic understanding and practice of public theology. The Malaysian Chinese church offers a highly representative paradigm.
From the Malaysian Chinese church to Anabaptist public theology, recent explorations in Hong Kong, and cases from Taiwanese church history, voices from different settings converse with and learn from one another. This issue unfolds against that background. David Doong’s lead article explains the significance of public theology for Chinese churches, especially in our present era.
These discussions also return us to a more fundamental question: How does the church exist in the world as the church? Through its independent and distinct existence before society, the church manifests that God is a public God. Public theology, therefore, is not a set of theories. It is establishing churches where there are none; holding fast to the faith where the church is persecuted; not being ashamed of the gospel where the church is mocked; and remaining humble and vigilant where the church is honored. It means the church neither fears oppressive power nor depends on it, and is willing to pay the price for this independence, whether in the mainstream or on the margins, in need or in plenty.
This is also an issue of church aesthetics. The church’s understanding of “beauty” affects its outward presentation of life, and aesthetic poverty and perceptual coarseness can make its witness rigid and dogmatic. For a long time, the church has perhaps been more accustomed to seeking to “be heard,” but not necessarily to “be seen.” Public theology must therefore confront theological aesthetics. How we understand beauty, and how we present the tangibility and visibility of faith in life, liturgy, and community relations, will profoundly affect the church’s public witness. As the essays in this issue remind us, we truly need an “aesthetic repentance.”
Finally, this issue includes a book review of a work on the public theology concepts and practices of Martin Luther King Jr. and Billy Graham. The book contrasts the two pastors’ public theology and processes of change, helps us understand relevant American history, and answers many of our perplexities. With compelling history and theological reflection, it can even be considered a practical textbook on public theology and excellent further reading beyond this issue.
