Ever heard the Filipino saying, “Papunta ka palang, pabalik na ako!” (You’re on your way there? I’ve been there and am on my way back!) This timeless wisdom, often shared by our grandparents, reminds us that they have already walked the path we are about to take. Even though we do not always take all their advice, learning from their experiences can surely enrich our journey.

Just like casual conversations with our biological grandparents unlock nuggets of wisdom, engaging with our “spiritual grandparents” can be equally enriching. Imagine sitting down for a cup of coffee with people like Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus of Lyon, or Perpetua of Carthage. I imagine this to be a very meaningful exchange. Though we cannot hear them speak directly, their writings invite us into a dialogue that transcends time and space.

Dialogue with Our Spiritual Grandparents

Not all evangelicals were initially open to engaging in theological conversations with our spiritual ancestors or church fathers and mothers. Historically, this stemmed partly from anti-Catholic and anti-tradition stances within certain evangelical churches.¹ I for one once believed the church during the Middle Ages was entirely corrupt. I used to think that the true church only reappeared with Luther and Calvin.

Ironically, these stances cut off evangelical theology from its historical roots, creating a disconnect. As theologian Gavin Ortlund aptly observes, this has fostered an “alarming restlessness” among some evangelicals, manifesting as a longing for a deep historical rootedness.² Arguably, this yearning mirrors a recent denominational shift among Western evangelicals, and its ripples are now being felt in Asian evangelical circles, creating a sense of urgency to address this issue.³

Maya Angelou famously said, “You never know where you are going until you know where you are from.” Along these lines, I would like to suggest to Asian evangelicals the strategy of retrieval theology. Retrieval theology is the process of carefully recovering valuable theological insights from our spiritual grandparents. By delving into their perspectives, we can gain fresh insights and avoid repeating past mistakes.

The Reformers just like Luther and Calvin are often stereotyped as anti-tradition, unengaged with the church fathers and mothers. However, early Christian thought played a crucial role in the theological dialogues during the Reformation.⁴ The Reformers embraced and adapted teachings from their predecessors, always evaluating them through the lens of Scripture. Theologian Stephen Nichols is right to say that Protestant evangelicals “stand on the shoulders of giants like these, just as they built upon the work of those who faithfully proclaimed God’s Word before them.”⁵

Given the various approaches to understanding theological wisdom from the past, I will focus on John Calvin’s method. As a key figure in the Reformation, Calvin holds a special place in the hearts of many evangelicals worldwide and his approach can be a valuable foundation for building a strong evangelical theology for the church in Asia.

Embracing Calvin’s approach offers two crucial benefits: deep historical rootedness and rigorous biblical engagement. First, it deepens the historical roots of Asian evangelicalism by connecting it to a rich theological heritage. Second, it promotes rigorous biblical engagement, encouraging critical analysis alongside the insights of past thinkers. Arguably, this combination is crucial for developing a theology that is historically informed and biblically rooted in Asian evangelical seminaries and local churches. Let’s tackle them one by one.

Deep Historical Rootedness

Calvin’s frequent use of the church fathers in his writings, speeches, and even an impromptu debate like the Lausanne Disputation underscores his argument: evangelical theology was not a sudden Reformation invention but a return to the early church’s teachings.⁶ Throughout his work, Calvin consistently argues that it was Rome that had strayed from tradition, while the Reformers, embracing the consensus of the teaching of the church fathers were closer to the faith’s historical roots (Oort, p. 665). Calvin argues,

If the contest were to be determined by patristic authority, the tide of victory —to put it very modestly—would turn to our side. Now, these fathers have written many wise and excellent things…But we do not despise them; in fact, if it were to our present purpose, I could with no trouble at all prove that the greater part of what we are saying today meets their approval.⁷

He confronts the errors of the church using the right interpretation of the Scripture and teachings from the church fathers. Yet Calvin does not agree with the fathers on everything. In one of his statements, Calvin makes it clear that the church fathers are still under the ultimate authority of Scripture:

For, although we hold that the Word of God alone lies beyond the sphere of our judgment and that Fathers and Councils are of authority only in so far as they accord with the rule of the Word, we still give to Councils and Fathers such rank and honor as it is meet for them to hold, under Christ.⁸

A closer study of Calvin’s usage of the theology of the church fathers reveals that he cites relevant testimonies selectively with a theological purpose in mind. Theologians David W. Hall and Peter A. Lillback note that,

(Calvin) cites a litany of the Fathers to show that the Church of Rome has imposed many things that the ancient church did not accept (such as abstaining from meat, the begging of monks, images of Christ or saints, transubstantiation, participating in only one kind in the mass, many canons and doctrines without any word of God, laws of fasting, and celibacy of the clergy.⁹

While Calvin studies many church fathers, Augustine of Hippo stands out as a frequent “go-to” dialogue partner. Calvin engages with Augustine in many areas, including theology, history, and even rhetoric.¹⁰ It can be argued that Calvin viewed Augustine as an “ecclesiastical authority” whose ideas resonated most closely with the principles of the Reformation.¹¹

Building on Calvin’s own words, Hans argues that “Augustine clearly is on our [Protestant] side,” reflecting Calvin’s strong connection to Augustine’s theology.¹² This suggests that our evangelical faith does not stem from a brand-new set of beliefs invented by Calvin. It is a retrieval of what was passed down from the apostles to the church fathers.

A clear example of Calvin’s reliance on the church fathers is his position on the trustworthiness of the list of books or canon of Scripture. When arguing against the inclusion of the Roman Catholic deuterocanonical books, Calvin writes:

Of their admitting all the Books promiscuously into the Canon, I say nothing more than it is done against the consent of the primitive Church. It is well known what Jerome states as the common opinion of earlier times. And Ruffinus, speaking of the matter as not at all controverted, declares with Jerome that Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon, Tobit, Judith, and the history of the Maccabees, were called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read.¹³

This gives us an idea that it was not the Reformers who decided on the number of books in the Protestant Bible. They were just carefully following the “tradition” handed to them by their predecessors.

Engaging with church history and the wisdom of early church fathers reveals a liberating truth: our faith does not simply begin with the Reformers but stretches back to the church fathers, to apostles, and even Christ himself. Through his meticulous study of church fathers, Calvin serves as a powerful example of this approach. He successfully connected contemporary Protestantism to its historical roots, showcasing the enduring continuity of our faith.

Inspired by Calvin’s example, we, as Asian evangelicals, can unlock a deep sense of belonging by embracing our shared heritage with the early church. Instead of confining ourselves to Western denominational founders or even the Reformers, let us embark on a richer exploration of letting the gospel speak to our unique situations. This broader perspective not only enriches and strengthens our own beliefs but also lays a firm foundation for future generations.

Rigorous Biblical Engagement

Another benefit of incorporating Calvin’s retrieval theology lies in its emphasis on rigorous biblical engagement, a core value for evangelicals. Even if Calvin champions the historical-grammatical approach to interpreting scripture, he does not dismiss the insights of the church fathers. His method involves a dynamic interplay between proper biblical interpretation and the wisdom of these early theologians. Calvin frequently consults and quotes the church fathers to support his conclusions.¹⁴

Yet Calvin was keenly critical of the exegetical findings coming from his predecessors.¹⁵ Whenever possible, he pointed out areas of disagreement. According to S.J. Han, Calvin did this to “make it clear that any authority which he attributed to the fathers was a result of their faithfulness to Scripture” (Han, p. 79).” Thus, dissent is warranted when the theology of the church fathers is incongruent with the faithful interpretation of the Scripture.

Among the Greek church fathers, John Calvin holds a particular fondness for John Chrysostom. He favors Chrysostom as an interpreter of Scripture, especially the New Testament (Han, p. 73). Walchenbach further highlights this admiration, emphasizing how Calvin praised Chrysostom for his commitment to the plain meaning of Scripture and the simple meaning of its words.¹⁶

Even if Calvin deeply admires Chrysostom, he feels free to go his own way. It can be observed that Calvin’s selective approach to his theological method reveals his own “hermeneutical, pastoral, and theological values.”¹⁷ As a theologian constrained by his own culture, this is inevitable. Calvin could not simply parrot Chrysostom.

Calvin’s work as a commentator, pastor, and theologian required him to analyze both Scripture and his contemporary world to tackle the challenges of his time. This remains relevant today. While we can significantly benefit from Calvin’s retrieval theology, we must always apply it within our unique context. In essence, we can learn from Calvin’s wisdom, but we also need to independently study present-day issues in the light of Scripture.¹⁸

The church in Asia can find valuable guidance in Calvin’s approach to biblical interpretation guided by the wisdom of the church fathers. His method combines the core evangelical value of meticulous biblical study with careful consideration of early church writings, integrating them only when in harmony with Scripture. Asian evangelicals are known to be bible-believing Christians. By practicing retrieval theology, we continue to be bible-believing Christians but those who are in close fellowship and healthy dialogue with early bible-believing Christians.

Calvin’s emphasis on scriptural fidelity provides a robust foundation for Asian evangelicals as they navigate their distinctive cultural context. In a world filled with diverse interpretations and applications of Christianity, Calvin’s approach offers stability. His method, deeply rooted in tradition and engaged with Scripture, protects us from the influence of shifting contemporary ideologies.

Bridge and Compass for Asian Evangelicals

Calvin’s method demonstrates a powerful blend of retrieval and innovation. His method can serve as a bridge and a compass for Asian evangelical contextual theology, both in seminaries and local churches.

First, Calvin’s method acts as a bridge, highlighting the continuity of our faith across space and time. He displayed the unbroken link between Protestantism and its deep historical roots by engaging with the church fathers. This approach can similarly connect Asian evangelicalism to its global heritage, fostering a sense of belonging within a vast and enduring tradition. Imagine Asian evangelicals drawing inspiration from Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus of Lyon, and Perpetua of Carthage, seeing their struggles reflected in the theological debates of centuries past.

Second, Calvin’s method exemplifies the evangelical commitment to rigorous biblical interpretation. He carefully evaluated the writings of the church fathers, adapting them only when they resonated with robust exegesis from Scripture. This approach offers a valuable model for Asian evangelicals seeking to faithfully interpret the Bible and make theologically sound reflections within their cultural context. Instead of uncritically adopting Western interpretations, Asian theologians can use Calvin’s method as a compass, guiding their engagement with Scripture while remaining true to their cultural realities.

While harnessing the past for the present holds exciting possibilities, it requires dedicated effort from both seminaries and local churches across Asia. Imagine seminary students delving into the writings of early church fathers and mothers. The goal is not only to discover echoes of their struggles in historical debates but also to foster a profound sense of belongingness within this vast Christian tradition.

Local churches have a unique opportunity. They can engage with both historical interpretations and contemporary scholarship through Bible studies and sermons. This approach empowers communities to faithfully interpret the Bible. It also helps them remain true to their cultural realities. By embracing this exchange, the wisdom of the past can illuminate our present and guide us toward a brighter future. Who knows, we might be amazed at how the voices of the old can offer fresh perspectives and inspire bold steps forward in our faith journey.

Modesto Biolango III is an ordained minister within the Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines, Inc. (CAMACOP). He previously served as a theology instructor at Ebenezer Bible College and Seminary, Inc., in Zamboanga City, Philippines before moving to full-time pastoral ministry. He is currently a student in the PhD in Theological Studies program at AGST. When not teaching or fulfilling his ministerial duties, he enjoys having a cup of coffee with his wife, Weggie.