Cross-Cultural Critique and the Cult of Celebrity

Missions historian, Andrew Walls, argued that two principles define the relationship of the church to the world: the indigenising principle, by which we make our home in the cultures of the world, and the pilgrim principle, by which we recognise our transitory place in the world. The task of the contextualisation of theology is marked by the tension created by those two principles. So, though we seek to demonstrate that the gospel can find a home in any culture, we are also under obligation to show how the gospel also subverts and transforms that culture. While the gospel does indeed have a wonderfully positive influence in any culture in which it is introduced, the follower of Christ can never feel completely at home because no culture has ever been completely transformed.

So part of the responsibility of every believer is to critique the cultures of the world. For many of us that comes easily enough: we have a ready reason why the people in said culture act the way they do - it is because of Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Communism, or whatever. But that is a superficial critique that does not deal with persons as agents, or take into account the many and varied forces and wider influences that shape the culture.

I have had to repent of my own often trite and superficial judgments when confronted by customs that I don't like. It is simply too easy to give in to prejudice.

The Fourth Lausanne Congress brought together a wide array of the global evangelical movement. Such diversity of denominations, vocations, languages, and cultures. All one in Christ and agreed on the great central facts of the death and resurrection of Christ, and their unique and powerful answer to the spiritual, social, and environmental problems of the world.

That unity, in Seoul, was in the midst of a diversity that one rarely encounters. So it requires the help of the Spirit to overcome one's sinful prejudices towards others. 

But, as I have already indicated in this blog series, there were controversies. On one level, that is not such a bad thing: there should be a place for robust debate and argument. On another, though, it is so easy for such debate to lack grace. Rather than throwing light on actions or words that could be revised, such criticism rather exposes the critic as lacking in love and humility. Anti-social media, of course, just supercharges that.

So it would be understandable if we all retreated into ourselves, afraid to ever exhort another brother. 

But that would be an over-reaction.

So allow me to tentatively share a concern I have with Lausanne, along with so much of 'Big Eva': the cult of celebrity. I do not think there was much grandstanding on the stage in Seoul. But I did witness some behaviour that bothered me. And even the information on speakers verged on the pompous. 

The cult of celebrity is an insidious intruder: like carbon monoxide it can enter the evangelical bloodstream and slowly but unconsciously poison us to death. At the very least we might find our spirituality seriously compromised. 

If I am wrong, as I hope I am, please correct me. If I am right, we have work to do to put our house in order.

Thinking Mission Symposium

I had the privilege to be at this gathering in London on Tuesday. It had been arranged by Global Connections to discuss Mike Stroope's important book, Transcending Mission, which I reviewed last year. In God's providence the author was already planning to be in the UK so Mike was able to attend. (In what follows I beg forgiveness if I misrepresent any of the contributors and will revise it if an error is pointed out.)

Mike gave an introductory paper, telling us a little of his ministry story as well as informing us of the thesis of the book and of the reactions it has received. I was fascinated to hear that he had had a significant part to play in the SBC International Missions Board's leadership in the 1990s, a story told by Keith Eitel in Paradigm Wars. I had been in Nepal at that time and had seen some of the fruit of the machinations in the organization that Eitel documents. (I asked Mike about it at the end of the day but didn't have enough time to really interact. Suffice it to say that those events had a significant impact on the development of my missiology so I do hope I can interact further before long.)

Mike spoke graciously and humbly, admitting that he had had some pretty strong negative reactions to his argument. That is to be understood as the book really calls much of the modern missions movement into question.

David Smith's Mission after Christendom was a tremendous help to me when I arrived back in the UK after 20 years in Asia. David was asked to prepare a response to Mike, which he did ably and winsomely. Sometimes there can be a hard spirit in such gatherings, where egos seem to count more than truth and the good of the church and the glory of Christ. Not so here. David expressed his admiration for the book, situating it in a line of very significant works such as Cragg's The Secular Experience of Christ, Bosch's Transforming Mission, and the work of Andrew Walls (David's mentor), and suggesting that Stroope's book extends the long-running disputes of those authors.

He then highlighted three issues that the book throws up:

1. The relationship between mission and colonialism

The modern missions movement had an ambivalent relationship with the colonial project. There was significant overlap without a doubt, though this is often overplayed. David then argued that Mike's book misses out on the very important role that missions had in the emergence of World Christianity and even of the revitalisation of cultures in places such as Africa.

Furthermore, Protestant mission movements were not monolithic. Many early pioneers, such as William Carey (1761-1834), were dissenting Baptists. Far from being at the centre of power, they were at the margins. Carey's approach towards Hinduism was respectful: hardly a colonialist attitude and very different from the high period of colonialism of a later generation.

2. The relationship of terminology and concepts of mission and the Bible

Stroope argues that mission, missions, missional, etc have become sacred rhetoric with no biblical foundation. Smith challenges this main assertion of the book in two ways:

a) How, if we cannot employ such a concept as mission, can we explain what Paul had in mind when he instructed the Roman church to support him in his vision to go to Spain, a challenge that would have necessitated a two-step process of translation to Latin and Iberian languages (Rom 15:23-24)? Paul was a model for what might be done by other disciples of Christ. How do we talk about that? What language should we use? Furthermore, Paul, as has been pointed out before, was reaching out from one marginal position to another, not from a position of power.

b) Is the 'pilgrim witness' language that Stroope argues for, the most appropriate? And what do we mean precisely by the 'kingdom of God'? [My notes are a bit incoherent here!] David questioned whether the missions movement was really subverting the kingdom of God, as seems to be suggested. There are clearly examples of unrighteous acts done by some missionaries (and here Smith mentioned the missionaries of one particular country, who are the subject of a PhD dissertation which he recently examined). But there are very many examples of good work going on too. Moreover, we need to note the emphasis on human agency that Carey asserted in his Enquiry, in the face of a hyper-Calvinistic challenge. 

3. The use of 'transcendence' - what might it look like?

Are we now moving beyond Bosch's liminal stage? Smith here mentioned Walls' recent Crossing Cultural Frontiers and his discussion of migration. Surely both persuasion and demonstration are important in the work of witnesses. Here David also referred to an article on 'Theological Method' in the Global Dictionary of Theology and Terry Eagleton's Culture and the Death of God.

Further interaction

Two shorter presentations were also given - by Rosalee Veloso Ewell, giving a female and global South perspective, and by a Redcliffe College student, Aaron, giving a Millenial perspective. Short opportunities for interaction were given after each presentation.

Mike Stroope gave a final reaction to the day in which he informed us he was working on a follow-up book expanding on the epilogue of Transcending Mission. 

My reaction

The audience gave a sympathetic and respectful hearing to the argument and responses. I found the day very stimulating indeed. I was heartened at the spirit of interaction, especially by the two main speakers. I think the concerns with the book that I expressed in my review were shared by others. Although I think Mike's thesis is basically correct, I continue to believe he overstates his case. I find it difficult to see how vast chunks of humanity will be exposed to the glorious person of the Lord Jesus without a more intentional approach.

One concept that seemed to have achieved virtual consensus in the papers and discussion is that of World Christianity. I whole-heartedly agree that we need to be learning from each other across the cultural and continental divides. However, there seems to be little or no awareness of the fact that there is a growing body of followers of Christ who do not identify themselves as belonging to World Christianity. We may listen to Christians in their countries and still be way off really understanding our other brothers and sisters. And we will remain just as handicapped in our efforts to reach out to the vast numbers who, while open to considering the person of Christ would find World Christianity far too alien.

On a personal level this book challenges me to reflect on my words, my actions, and my character, as I continue to seek to work out how the Lord would have me continue to use my gifts, experience, and energies for his glory.