Background of the “Cultivating Peace” Project
Between 2012 and 2019, the social movements that occurred in Hong Kong presented two major unresolved public theology problems for the Christian context—the first was the problem of relevance, and the second was the problem of identity. Insisting on a Christian identity created difficulties for participation, while overemphasizing relevancy also posed a significant challenge. Public theology is often a “theology by the public”—public issues actually dictate our thinking. Christians appear to hold their own faith positions, but a closer look reveals that their methods and goals do not respond with a gospel-based theology. This is not genuine public theology.
After 2020, more than 300,000 people from Hong Kong migrated to the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Taiwan. Following the social movements, the church, the family, and the society fell into division. This division exists not only between different political positions but also between new immigrants from the mainland and the local younger generation.
Starting in October 2022, we collaborated with numerous educational and social institutions to plan and promote a “Cultivating Peace” project. Through participation in social services, social research, and art activities, we reflect on the true meaning of peace and put it into practice in the community. We promote the concept of peacebuilding among Christians and the general public to bring about social transformation and renewal.
The “Cultivating Peace” project attempts to encompass psychological, spiritual, social, and communal dimensions, which peacebuilding research recognizes as essential keys for achieving long-term social peace. It helps participants (both Christians and non-Christians) explore four dimensions of peace—inner peace, interpersonal peace, communal peace, and social peace. It shares concepts such as compassion, peace, truth, and justice with participants, and it provides them with experiential and service activities so they can understand peace and build peace with one another.
In this project, we collaborate with different educational organizations, social welfare institutions, churches, art groups, and individual artists to adopt a “relational-transformative” approach to peacebuilding. This relationship-oriented practice keeps us on the track of a public theology attempt, rather than merely a political action.
Using the “Cultivating Peace” project as an example, this article explores whether a “public theology of peace” based on Christian narrative is a theologically sound attempt in the current public context of Hong Kong. It also explains why we should position ourselves as a “public theology project,” and it introduces how narrative practice helps us develop and formulate this project.
Reflections on Being a Public Theology Project: The Relationship Between the “Separation of Church and State” and Public Theology
The term “public theology” is clearly a product of theological discourses in the United States. In the era of the rise of global Christianity, however, a public theology with American theological roots may be questioned as an expression of colonial power. Paul Chung, for example, calls for a “postcolonial reorientation” of public theology. He perceives this reorientation as a resistance to the dominance of Western colonial interpretations of history and culture.
Following this logic, the long-standing public theology tradition in the United States, which endorses the separation of church and state, democracy, and a liberal society, may be challenged by non-Western intellectuals as hegemonic. Alexander Chow, for example, argues that, undoubtedly, theological arguments related to the separation of church and state and the freedom of religion (at least in the ways many Western societies conceive them) have almost no relevance to the Chinese political and religious situation.
Under this postcolonial ideology and critique, we find that the traditional public theology of establishing a civil society may become a problematic project. The renowned Chinese mainland religious scholar Zhuo Xinping, for example,emphasizes that the separation of church and state is a political choice of the church and Christians. It is a theological construct (like liberation theology and Minjung theology), not an unchangeable core of the Christian faith. In his view, Christians throughout history need to make realistic political choices, and these choices can still align with authentic Christian faith. “State dominance and church abidance” (zhengzhu jiaocong) is the reality of church-state relations and the public engagement of religious institutions in China.
The aforementioned “postcolonial reorientation” destabilizes the equivalence between public theology and theological efforts to develop a civil society in an environment where church and state are separated. If we follow this line of thought, however, postcolonial experience and critique may become a means of self-legitimization for establishment political powers. It may subvert another important perspective of postcolonial reflection: postcolonialism is not only about criticizing Western colonial power, but it also includes a sensitivity to the voices of marginalized groups and victims. In other words, while the separation of church and state might be a product of Western or American political thought, the sensitivity of postcolonial public theology to social differences and marginalized experiences makes it an inevitably pluralistic project. It recognizes that the political reality of its context requires it to chart out a unique public theology proposal, but it should not accept the dominance of a certain power in society and use that as a theological norm.
Public theology, therefore, should be self-critical, open, and dialogical, aiming to promote a kind of civil society.
Although Max Stackhouse always emphasizes the “universal,” which may seem highly offensive to a postcolonial mindset, this concept can be translated as seeking common ground, common sense, and values for people from different cultures and beliefs to live together constructively.
In short, in the Hong Kong and Chinese contexts, public theology discussions should remain sensitive to cultural, historical, and social backgrounds. We need to discern, furthermore, the direction of power operations and pay attention to the voices of marginalized groups. Overall, we seek to promote the well-being of different members of society through theological discourse and practice, which in turn develops civil society.
Reflections on Being a Public Theology Project: The Church as God’s “Colony”
Besides postcolonial considerations, public theology may also be problematic because it is theologically “basically accommodationist—that is, Constantinian.” This is the view of Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon. The problem with Constantinianism is that the church comes to serve the state rather than the Christian God.
On the contrary, Hauerwas and Willimon encourage: “The church exists today as ‘resident aliens,’ an adventurous colony in a society of unbelief.”
“Colony” is a metaphor here, symbolizing a church that actively engages the unbelieving world with the call to follow Christ. It offers an alternative way of life rather than following the political agenda of the state.
All these theological critiques are highly insightful and important. When applied to non-American or non-liberal democratic societies, however, they may create unexpected difficulties for authentic Christian life. Some Hong Kong theologians, for instance, have used the concept of “Constantinianism” to argue that the electoral system should not be a Christian concern, and that Christians should not take politics seriously. Unfortunately, these theologians did not offer clear alternative Christian actions during political crises, even though they claimed that Christianity is by nature an alternative political entity.
On another front, the theological concept of the “church as a colony” may cause misunderstanding or even resentment in non-Western contexts. Many non-Western countries have painful and disturbing colonial histories. Describing the church as a “colony” projects a theological message that is completely different from the original intent of the metaphor.
Nevertheless, the importance of the “colony” metaphor lies in its emphasis on the mission of the church. It is a sign of an alternative “way of life together.” In other words, when articulating the nature of Christian life, one should prefer to use “aliens” or “sojourners.” An alternative “way of life together” indicates a connection, rather than a disconnection, between Christians and their non-Christian compatriots. In this sense, it is always essentially a public theology.
As Hauerwas states, “the virtues needed can only be displayed by drawing on a particular community’s account of the good, and that account necessarily takes the form of a narrative.” For non-Christian societies in missionary work, the “good” of the Christian faith can only be understood by translating it into native languages. Translation is not a technical task, but rather the work of adding, or even integrating, Christian stories with the native stories of non-Christian societies. The “good” and “virtues” of the Christian faith will enter into dialogue with the traditional narratives of non-Christians. In some instances, non-Christian narratives will be adopted by Christians and integrated with Christian narratives; in other instances, Christian narratives will challenge native traditions and call for change. The Christian faith is “intertextual,” joining the continuous narrative of the native people in non-Christian societies. The dialogue, discernment, and witness of Christians in these societies will inevitably make this a public theology project.
Narrative Practice as a Public Theology Project
Recognizing that narrative is the core human experience and a characteristic of Christian life, the “Cultivating Peace” project explores a narrative practice of peacebuilding in Hong Kong. Narrative practice guides the project in the following ways:
Narrative as Method
Narrative practice is the methodological orientation for the public engagement of the “Cultivating Peace” project. It guides the project to remain sensitive to differences and minority groups, and it helps the project become a practice that forms a Christian “habitus,” rather than merely a discourse.
First, narrative theology allows us to construct public theology through “critical correlation” as a hermeneutical method. Second, narrative theology allows public theology to be a “habitus.” These two models help us illustrate how narrative practice frames the theoretical contours and methods of the peacebuilding project.
Hermeneutical “critical correlation” as a method requires public theology practitioners to remain sensitive to the differences of others and to empathize with their needs. Our lives are “living human documents.” To borrow hermeneutical language, these “horizons” must be merged through a process of understanding and empathy to produce meaningful dialogue.
Living together while seeking common ground and preserving differences is always the goal of peacebuilding work. From a methodological perspective, narrative provides a way for peacebuilding participants to respect differences and gain understanding and empathy at the cultural, historical, social, psychological, metaphysical, and ethical levels.
Furthermore, narrative as hermeneutics reminds us that story is a human condition: “We live out of our own story,” and story “is how we relate to others.” Through stories, we realize that we share bonds and common ground with others. At the same time, it reminds us that the church is the fellowship of a common story regarding the salvation and hope of Jesus Christ. In short, it informs Christian peacebuilders to draw resources from the Christian heritage on the one hand, and it asserts that human beings share a common destiny even when in conflict on the other.
The embrace of differences and the affirmation of communal connections allow the narrative practice of peacebuilding to adopt “narrative practice” from psychotherapy as a framework. In narrative practice, counseling conversations shift from a “language of deficit” to a language of “reflexivity” and “partnership.” In addition, narrative practice adopts a strategy of “externalizing the problem,” viewing the problem not as the person, but as something the person faces. It helps us “name” the problem, enabling us to describe it in detail and realize that it is a product of circumstances. In other words, “externalization” reconstructs problem-saturated descriptions into descriptions with new possibilities for life and relationships.
Narrative as hermeneutics provides a framework for peacebuilding work, while narrative as “habitus” makes the current peacebuilding effort not merely a task, but a cultivation of our minds and hearts. Cultivating habits is an effort to build spirituality. It is a life journey of being open to the Holy Spirit, growing in Christ, and living in the communion of saints.
Narrative as “habitus” reminds us that Christian peacebuilding work is a cultivation of spirituality. It is not limited to conflict resolution; rather, it strives to cultivate a habit or everyday life of peace among people.
Through narrative as “habitus,” the “Cultivating Peace” project recognizes that peace is a multidimensional experience. It includes inner peace, interpersonal peace, communal peace, and public peace.
Biblical Narratives and Metaphors
Narratives in the Bible can be articulated as foundational metaphors for peacebuilding work. Metaphors are widely recognized as important elements in peacebuilding. As John Paul Lederach and Angela Lederach point out, metaphors and metaphor-phenomena like sound, music, and poetry can facilitate the generation of “ideas, suggestions, and qualities that stimulate the imagination about the challenges and mechanisms by which social healing may be observed and perhaps understood.” Metaphors are always summaries of narratives and stories. They are powerful precisely because they are shortcuts to core meanings and profound insights.
With the metaphor of the “Tower of Babel,” the project team describes “losing hope” and “fear” as a saturation of narrative. Division, hopelessness, or power cohesion becomes the grand narrative that dominates people. It saturates their lifeworld. The metaphor of Babel also deconstructs power narratives and the cognitive error of mistaking peacebuilding for “pacification.” With the metaphor of “Pentecost,” it explains that constructive and creative life relationships among people are achieved through different, diverse, yet mutually understandable and inclusive narratives. With the metaphors of “Noah’s Ark” and the “Eschaton,” they inform the importance of individual agency and the nature of hope in peace work.
Narrative Practice for People Affected by Conflicts and for Conflict Resolution
In a period when justice cannot be fully achieved, narrative practice records the voices and stories of the suffering and the oppressed. Through these stories, the intercession of Christians serves as witness and lament, mediating painful memories with God’s salvation and justice. Besides their theological significance, these narratives are crucial for achieving restorative justice and reconciliation in a divided society.
At the same time, narrative practice enables people to express and acknowledge their inner suffering and anger. It also helps them learn to be active listeners to build inner peace. More importantly, narrative practice helps people gain the capacity to discern and reflect on conflicts.
Although many conflict resolution methods in strategic peacebuilding focus on the objective analysis of conflicting issues, contexts, and parties, Lederach recognizes that the processes of social healing and reconciliation are not as linear as politicians or officials suppose. They encourage us to understand social healing through a narrative lens. We should realize that human beings construct meaning based on their responses to the past, present, and future. Our lives consist, therefore, of multiple realities that are simultaneously present in the ways we make sense of our lives, our place, and our purpose. In the context of protracted conflicts, these realities create a complex nexus of conflicting experiences. Lederach thus opts for “hearing voices” rather than imposing a linear concept of conflict resolution.
In the “Cultivating Peace” project, we organize “sharing and listening groups” for participants. The participants share their experiences in conflicts and learn to engage in empathetic listening to others’ stories—others’ stories are not limited to those of people with different political views, but they also include the stories of marginalized groups in the community.
Narrative Practice as a Ministry of “Being With”
Finally, the narrative practice of the “Cultivating Peace” project emphasizes the importance of the voices of marginalized groups and the primacy of their experiences and agency. We emphasize the strengths and agency of marginalized groups rather than their problems. Narrative peace work at the communal level can empower groups and position peace work as a ministry of “being with,” rather than a top-down “help.”
The concept of “being with” helps us recognize that we may not completely fix the problems of violence, but we should and must live with others. The best way to live out a meaningful life is to support others in exercising their strengths and enjoying their lives for their own sake.
In the “Cultivating Peace” project, we aim to develop the relationships, creativity, partnership, compassion, and joy of community members. We trust that empowering people to regain control of their lives can, in turn, form a cycle of “multi-empowerment,” which enlightens, enriches, and empowers the “helpers.”
Conclusion
Peace has four dimensions: inner peace, interpersonal peace, communal peace, and social peace. Based on these four dimensions, we can see what we can do or what the people around us need. The quickest to achieve are likely inner peace and interpersonal peace, which are also crucial cornerstones. If we lack inner peace, we cannot endure or face people who hold different opinions from ours. Regarding the communal dimension, the church can pay attention to the needs of different groups around it. The “Cultivating Peace” project also conducts community work alongside churches, but the focus is not on what the church wants to do; rather, it is on the church finding the constituent members within those communities, listening to their needs, observing their situations, and then discovering what they want. Churches like to engage in social care, often rushing to distribute materials or conduct visits, yet failing to see the true needs of the community. After completing these tasks, the church forms no real relationship with the community. When the “Cultivating Peace” project collaborates with churches, it encourages church workers to live with community groups, chat with them, and listen to their needs. The church is no longer just a partner or neighbor to the community; instead, it starts by purely offering help, observing their strengths, and utilizing those strengths through ministry. This transforms them from people receiving help from the church into partners of the church within the community.
As a narrative practice of public theology, the “Cultivating Peace” project aims to do more than resolve individual conflicts. It serves as a cultivation of everyday spirituality, allowing people to experience renewal across the four dimensions of inner peace, interpersonal peace, communal peace, and social peace. It articulates and strives for the common good and well-being of the entire society, though, of course, it may still face suspicion and challenges from various sides.
Peace in Chinese culture, for example, often means requiring others to be the same as oneself, whereas biblical peace means being able to live with people who are different. Jin Guantao argues that Chinese culture is an ultra-stable structure; people need stability and immovability, but this immovability poses a significant challenge to Christianity. Although the history of Christianity in China can be traced back to the Tang dynasty, it is still viewed today as a foreign culture or an alien entity, and alien entities bring instability. When we lack self-awareness, a stable culture can create major problems, turning into a state that appears inclusive but is actually quite exclusive. The Taiwanese scholar Chang Hao believes that Christianity offers great help to Chinese culture because Chinese culture lacks a consciousness of the dark side of human nature—that is, it does not gaze into the dark dimensions of humanity. Christianity possesses abundant resources because Christian peace is not merely harmony or silence; rather, it involves confronting sin, seeing the problems, and finding a way out through the gospel. This is, on the one hand, a reflection on public theology, and on the other hand, a reflection on culture.
The Chinese church is facing the challenge of being further marginalized or fully assimilated. As a marginalized and suspected group, the Christian church’s resistance should be something more than dissent. The church should not limit its practice of peace to practical nonviolence. Peace is more than a mode of action. The gospel’s vision of peace is a meaningful resistance because it enshrines cultural transformation and reconciliation. We seek the common good rather than threaten national security. The church can articulate an authentic and impactful public theology only by upholding the gospel’s vision of peace for the well-being of the people.
