In this review essay by seasoned missionary-scholar Dave Johnson, he takes a more nuanced approach to globalism, colonialism and the Filipinos efforts to contextualize the gospel and Church practices in the Philippines.

Hannah Keziah Agustin, “Colonialism Brought Evangelicalism to the Philippines. Churches Are Now Untangling the Two: Five Filipino Christian leaders weigh in on the American church’s influence on worship, culture, and politics” Christianity Today (June 28, 2023).

I would like to thank the editor of Pneuma Review for the opportunity to respond to Hannah Agustin’s article. I will divide this response into areas where I agree, issues that I think need clarification and points where I respectfully dissent. But first, I need to challenge her demographic facts. While she is correct that 80% of Filipinos are Catholic, the waters get muddied in identifying everybody else. The Pentecostal-Charismatic (PC) movement crosses all denominational lines and defies neatly packaged definitions. It also challenges statistics related to size. For example, the Catholic Charismatic movement, which holds as dearly to the Bible as do Evangelicals, numbered over ten million in 2008.[1] This does not include classical Pentecostals, such as the Assemblies of God and other groups, which are normally counted as Evangelicals, or Pentecostal Third Wave independent churches, some of which are huge. The origin of the majority of these churches, as well as some Pentecostal denominations, are indigenous. Considering that the population of the Philippines was 109.04 million in 2020,[2] it is safe to say that PC Christians comprise of at least 10% of the total Filipino population.

That said, she is correct in noting the strong impact of American evangelicalism in the Philippines. I share the respondents’ frustration about the importation of American culture, intentional or not, along with the gospel. While this is unavoidable to a certain extent, much could be done to reduce this by equipping missionaries with the tools of cultural anthropology. Unfortunately, most do not take advantage of this training. But the assumption of cultural superiority, intentional or not, also needs to be nuanced. This is not just an American problem. It’s a been a human problem since the time of Nimrod (Gen. 10) and Filipinos are no exception. Moreover, I have been appalled that perhaps as many as 95% of missionaries working here, whether from the West or other Asian nations, have made little effort to learn any of the indigenous languages.

All of the respondents mentioned things that the American missionaries brought into Filipino churches and allegedly forced on Filipinos. While much of this is true, none of the respondents mention efforts made by Filipino leaders to change things once the churches were turned over to them. This reflects the Filipino attitude of bahala na, which loosely means, “whatever will be will be and cannot be changed.” Fortunately, this is now beginning to change and I applaud these efforts.

Furthermore, the Filipino churches may be more indigenous than the respondents realize. Here, let me be clear that I am speaking from within my own PC tradition. In the Filipino Assemblies of God (AG), for example, the national ecclesiastical structure is almost a carbon copy of its counterpart in the States. How those leaders function within the structure, however, is completely Filipino. On the local church level, the differences between the churches in the Philippines and the United States are substantial.

More importantly, Obed Reliquette’s comment about American Evangelicalism’s attitude towards animism is largely true, but also needs nuancing in regards to the PC movement. PC spirituality, with its focus on the person and miraculous power of the Holy Spirit, resonates deeply with the Filipino’s original indigenous religious spirituality, which is focused on supernatural power. This morphed into Folk Catholicism in the Spanish era and continues to this day. This is probably the most significant reason for the stupendous growth of the PC movement in the Philippines in the last fifty years.

Finally, in an article about the Philippines, I do not understand why the author included a Filipino respondent living in the United States. The situation of Filipino-Americans, as reflected in their comments, is vastly different from Filipinos living at home. This should not have been included.

In summary, I agree with much of what has been said and share the respondents’ desire for greater indigeneity. I also think that the author should have done much more background research. Had she done so, she would likely have discovered that the situation is much more complex and nuanced than is reflected in this article. Thank you again for this opportunity.

PR

Notes

1. Christl Kessler and Jürgen Rüland, Give Jesus a Hand: Charismatic Christians: Populist Religion and Politics in the Philippines. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila Press, 2008.
2. Population of Philippines 2020 – Search (bing.com) https://www.bing.com/search?q=population+of+philippines+2020

The First Nations Version[1] is “An indigenous Translation of the New Testament” that provides an Introduction ([ix]-xiii), including “Why the Name First Nations Version?” (x), “Partnering Organizations,” “Church Engagement,” “The Translation Council” (x-xi), “Other Native People Involved” (xi), “Consultants and Support” (xi-xii), “Community Checking and Feedback” (xii), “Reader Aids” (xii-xiii). These are followed by a “Prologue” that gives an overview of the Old Testament, including introductory sample translations from Genesis, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Daniel ([xv]-xviii).

Throughout the New Testament text, commentary or explanatory notes are inserted and indicated by a left-justified grey vertical bar to the left of each note. For example, “Spear of Great Waters (Pilate) was the local governor representing the People of Iron (Romans). He had the power to decide who would live and who would die.” This note explains to whom Creator Sets Free (Jesus) was taken by “the tribal elders, the scroll keepers, and the Grand Council” (Mark 15:1b). Also, throughout the FNV footnotes are supplied that include Literal translations (e.g., 1 Corinthians 14:22) and Old Testament references for 1 Corinthians 15:3 and 4). Further, “To Help The Reader with the historical and cultural context” [2] A “Glossary of Biblical Terms” is supplied. For additional information one is invited to visit: www.firstnationsversion.com and www.facebook.com/firstnationsversion.[3]

[From InterVarsity Press] Terry M. Wildman (Ojibwe and Yaqui) is the lead translator, general editor, and project manager of the First Nations Version. He serves as the director of spiritual growth and leadership development for Native InterVarsity. He is also the founder of Rain Ministries and has previously served as a pastor and worship leader. He and his wife, Darlene, live in Arizona.

The Translation Council “was selected from a cross-section of Native North Americans. Elders, pastors, young adults, and men and women from different tribes and diverse geographic locations were chosen to sit on the council” (x-xi). Also, “to minimize bias” the Council included “a diversity of church and denominational traditions” (xi). The “Translation Council humbly submits this new translation of the Sacred Scriptures as our gift to all English-speaking First Nations people and to the entire sacred family, which is the body of the Chosen One” (ix). This translation “is not a word-for-word” rendering, “but rather … a thought-for-thought translation, sometimes referred to as dynamic equivalence” (ix).

Now let us examine a few samples from the First Nation Version and other translations.

The Lord’s Prayer

⁹ Pray then like this:

“Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name.^[a]
10 Your kingdom come,
your will be done,^[b]
on earth as it is in heaven.
¹¹ Give us this day our daily bread,^[c]
12 and forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
¹³ And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil^[d]” (Matt. 6:9-13 ESV. [See linked footnotes for additional translation notes]).

The Way to Pray

“9 … when you send your voice to the Great Spirit, here is how you should pray:
‘O Great Spirit, our Father from above, we honor your name as sacred and holy. 10 Bring your good road to us, where the beauty of your ways in the spirit-world above is reflected in the earth below.
11 “Provide for us day by day—the elk, the buffalo, and the salmon. The corn, the squash, and the wild rice. All the things we need for each day.
12 “Release us from the things we have done wrong, in the same way we release others for the things they have done wrong to us.
13 “Guide us away from the things that tempt us to stray from your good road, and set us free from the evil one and his worthless ways. Aho! May it be so (Matt. 6:9-13 FNV)!

“Our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9a ESV) is translated in the First Nations Version as “O Great Spirit, our Father from above.” Besides, “Great Spirit,” other names for God are used in the FNV, such as “… Creator, Great Mystery, Maker of Life, Giver of Breath, One Above Us All, and Most Holy One” (xiii).

For many White North Americans, their staple food is bread. But for Indigenous North Americans traditional basic foods include “the elk, the buffalo, and the salmon. The corn, the squash, and the wild rice” (6:11b-c FNV). Such a rendering of this portion in Matthew 6:11 illustrates an example of the “dynamic equivalence” (ix) principle in operation. Bannock is “a type of bread made with wheat flour, shaped into round, flat cakes and fried or baked” and that was used “(originally in indigenous Canadian cooking).”[4] So, bannock is another staple or basic food that might be considered in Matthew 6:11 (FNV).

Compare:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to [sic] him and eat with him, and he with me” (Rev. 3:20 ESV).

 “I stand before the entrance of your tipi, asking you to welcome me in, I will sit down with you, and we will share a good meal together” (Rev. 3:20 FNV).

Kudos to everyone involved in producing this unique “dynamic equivalence” translation of the New Testament! To anyone—especially a non-Indigenous person—who takes seriously one’s need to understand and communicate better to First Nations or Indigenous people in North America, the reviewer highly recommends utilizing the First Nations Version of the New Testament.

 PR

Publisher’s page: https://www.ivpress.com/first-nations-version

Dedicated page: https://firstnationsversion.com/book/first-nations-version/

Read an interview with the FNV editor, “Terry Wildman on the Making of First Nations Version, a New Indigenous Bible Translation.”

Notes

[1] First Nations Version: An Indigenous Translation of the New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2021.
[2]  Op. cit., [475]
[3]  Op. cit., [485]
[4] Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages (Accessed: Nov. 17, 2022).
[5] Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages (Accessed: Nov. 19, 2022).

Richard Twiss, One Church Many Tribes: Following Jesus the Way God Made You (Regal Books, 2000), 216 pages.

What can the church of the 21^st Century learn from the mistakes of the past?

Richard Twiss could be a budding new personality in the Christian world. I recently noticed his name on a column in Charisma magazine, and this new book has endorsements by many well known, respected Christians and I was asked to review it for the Pneuma Review.

The book features a photograph of Richard all decked out in his native clothes on its cover. Twiss is an American Indian, which is nomenclature he does not like since it tends to demean his culture. He also does not like native American and instead asks all of us that come from family origins different than his, call Richard and others of his culture First Nations People, an expression which I have adopted but still find difficult to use.

Twiss’ book repeats comments I had earlier heard from Pastors who ministered to the First Nations People, comments that deal with the lack of success the church has experienced as it reached out to our country’s original inhabitants. The book also criticizes many of the political decisions the elected and appointed officials of the US have made about First Nations People. Richard resents that his ancestors openly offered friendship to those who left Europe for the new world, but were instead exploited and ignored by what today’s Americans call our founding fathers.

Richard Twiss (1954-2013).

All of us familiar with early and not so early missionary effort realize that the early missionary often confused piety with the fashion that existed in the culture from which the missionary came. That confusion led to banning many local expressions of praise and worship being offered by the new believer to God on High. In retrospect, we now teach our potential missionary to become part of the culture to which they are sent and not to reform the culture. Careful reading of Paul’s theology and his missiology leads to the conclusion that Paul knew and practiced what we missed. Better results are obtained when we work within a culture and not when we attempt to replace that with things dear and familiar to our ideas. The question “How then shall we live?” has answers that vary from people group to people group. Twiss’ book reads easily and quickly. I would describe much of his discussion as a lament over what could have been, a polemic over what should have been and as a hope over what might now be experienced in his native culture. Twiss has a burden for his people and he needs our help and understanding to undo some of the errors that were made trying to reach the First Nations People. It can be done. We can be one people.