<\/p>\n
Chan\u2019s aim is to refocus on how theology is to be done. It is more than just content; it is also about the process. Using sketches of elitist theologies, summaries of theology taken from sermons, devotional works, testimonies and popular writings by Asian Christians, historians, sociologists and anthropologists, and case studies, Chan presents his case for a grassroots Asian theology. He also shows how Asian grassroots theology can contribute to the wider church\u2019s theological efforts.<\/p>\n Since theology is about what we do as much as what we say we believe, then we could hardly have a better example than Jackie Pullinger who serves in Asia. Her example shows us how we can relate to the grassroots Asian Christian. Chan illustrates the distinctive Asian thinking.<\/p>\n This book invites itself to many dialogues but I will focus on points of discussion that are pertinent to our studies in Leadership and Global Perspectives<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n I am sad, however, that Chan insists on a hierarchical form of relationships for men and women. \u201cHierarchical orders or classes need not be oppressive,\u201d<\/a>[3]states Chan. But unfortunately in this sinful world hierarchies are mostly oppressive. He uses an analogy to support his patriarchy that has been blown out of the water years ago. He says that because the Father is over the Son, husbands must be over wives. First of all, I dispute the \u201ceternal subordination\u201d theology of the self-named Biblical Manhood\/Womanhood society. Christ is NOT subordinate to the Father. Second, maybe children honor parents but the husband\/wife relationship is not the same. And third, while gender for the Trinity is disputable, both are apparently \u2018male\u2019, not male and<\/em>female. Chan stated that he hopes that Asian theology will add to world theology, but I sincerely hope this part gets left out.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Chan\u2019s book was very helpful in dispelling some of the mythological thinking that I had about Asian Christianity. Really we are not so far apart. In some of their theological thinking they are closer to the Bible than westerners. They may seem a bit slower to accept progress and change, but traditions are important too. The important thing is our relationship to the Lord Jesus Christ. How exciting to have brothers and sisters everywhere in the world!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/a>[1]Simon Chan. Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up. <\/em>Downer\u2019s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2014. 7.<\/p>\n <\/a>[2]Ibid., 90.<\/p>\n <\/a>[3]Ibid., 58.<\/p>\n <\/a>[4]Ibid. 104.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/06\/SimonChan.jpg\")
<\/a>In his book, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up<\/em>, Simon Chan contends that most of what the West believes about Asian theology consists of what the \u201celitist\u2019 Asian theologians have written. The elitist theologians do not take grassroots Christianity seriously, but Chan believes that it is at the \u201cgrassroots level the we encounter a vibrant, albeit implicit, theology.\u201d<\/a>[1]<\/p>\n\n
\n
<\/a> hundreds of cast-off widows, fed thousands of homeless and starving people during famines, and opened schools which have since educated many thousands. Around the time of the Asuza street revival in the United States (1906) she prayed for revival in India and saw 25,000 souls come to Christ. Yes, she was one of those Pentecostals.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n
\n