THEOLOGY AND CULTURE: A RENEWAL PERSPECTIVE

Brandon Kertson Renewal, Theology, and Culture November 30, 2012 Dr. Nstor Medina

Theology and culture has been a topic underlying theological inquiry throughout history. Israels Deuteronomic Historian talked about surrounding cultural kingdoms and the influence of their gods on Israelite culture and religion. Paul spoke about circumcision and about being all things to all people. Augustines City of God discussed Christianity in relation to competing religions, philosophies and particularly the Roman Empire. Anselms theory of atonement built its notion of satisfaction on medieval cultural ideas of honor. Theologians of each generation have been forced to deal with questions of how to interpret their understandings of God within their own culture as well as how to interact with other cultures in light of their own theology. It is not just a matter of relevance that necessitates theologys continual reimagining, but a matter of the very nature of theology as a cultural construct. In recent generations, issues of theology and culture have become increasingly pertinent leading to more explicit theological reflection and its formation as a discipline.1 This is largely because of the globalized nature of our current world, which has led to increased interaction among cultures and religions. Such contact forces self-reflection on ones culture as well as the culture of the other. In light of this tradition and the ongoing necessity for continuing selfcritique, I hope to outline the beginning of my own thoughts on the issue of theology and culture from my own theological and cultural loci. While identifying ones location can be complex, I am primarily speaking as a North American, white, renewal theologian. I believe this renewal context has something to offer the larger discussion of theology and culture, but only within its wider context of a diverse and global movement, which emphasizes the power of the Spirit at work in all creation. Such a contribution can only be achieved in recognizing the richness of this
Authors like H. Richard Niebuhr, Paul Tillich and perhaps on the more popular level, Francis Schaeffer began explicitly writing on the topic of theology and culture garnering a number of responses and helping to solidify the field of theology and culture as a discipline. 2
1

diversity, learning from it and contributing to it through intercultural dialogue. In order to demonstrate this contribution, I will first outline the meaning of three terms: theology, culture, and renewal. The three cannot be completely separated of course, so there will be some necessary overlap in each section. I will then bring these elements together to propose a renewal theology of culture based on interculturality for our world today. . Theology First, we must begin by unpacking what we mean by theology. I stress again the initial nature of these reflections in light of the amount written concerning the topic, but also in light of our gearing the discussion toward the specific goal of a theology of culture. At its most basic level, we can describe theology as speaking about God. Still, we must ask, how do we speak about God? First, we can only talk about God confessionally. This does not deny the need for seeking some kind of objectivity or dialogue outside of ones own confessional point of view. At the same time, we all naturally do theology from a particular faith stance through which we view God. Even if one is doing it from outside of a belief in God, this stance still composes ones confessional standpoint. Anselm of Canterbury described theology as faith seeking understanding. He begins confessionally with a belief in God saying it is from this point that we seek to understand and talk about God. Anselm postulates this from a medieval context in which human reason dominated all aspects of faith. Agbonkhianmeghe E. Orobator, speaking from an African context, expands Anselms intellectual definition of theology to include faith seeking

understanding, love and hope.2 Theology cannot remain only a mental exercise but must be based on the lived experience of the people of God in the world and the promises of God to transform that world towards Gods purposes as seen in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and continued by the power of the Spirit. We might put this as doing theology in terms of the Wesleyan quadrilateral. First, our theology should be based on the Scriptures; the revelation of Gods self in history, primarily through the person of Jesus Christ. Second, it should be based on tradition; the way the people of God throughout history have interpreted this activity as well as the activity of God in its own midst. Third, we do theology based on our experience of God within our community, its experience and its reading of the Scriptures. Theology is done primarily in community, both within the context that God has placed us and in dialogue with the larger community of God. Finally, we also do theology through reason, though largely based on the experiences of the first three, not disconnected from them. This leads to a second point, we can only speak about God in light of his activity in the world. As Clark Pinnock points out in Flame of Love, Speaking of God is meaningful only if there is an encounter with God back of it.3 We can, and we must, make theological statements about the character of God. However, we can only know the transcendent God through our experience of the economic God. Gods character is revealed to humanity through the saving activity of God, particularly as seen in the historical person of Jesus. This means that we do

A. E. Orobator, Theology Brewed in an African Pot: an introduction to Christian doctrine from an African perspective (Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa, 2008), 5.
3

Clark H. Pinnock, Flame of Love: a theology of the Holy Spirit (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,

1996), 18. 4

theology within a specific cultural context and that our theology should speak to every aspect of culture. Theology is done within a specific cultural context because Gods self-revelation to humanity has always occurred within culture whether the ancient near-eastern culture of Israel, the Greco-Roman culture of Jesus time, or our present culture. The incarnation is central to understanding the work of God in culture. God chose to be embodied within a particular culture at a particular time. In the same way, the job of theology is to reimagine or re-embody Christ in each culture. We do not devoid Jesus of his own historical context and its import for his message. Rather, we recognize that God, in Christ, continues to be revealed through the various cultures of the people of God through the Holy Spirit at work in each culture. Theology helps to reinterpret this unique revelation within the culture as well as in light of the scriptural witness to Christ. As we will see later, this interpretation does not occur in one culture but all cultures. When we do theology then, it is not from some transcendent state above culture, but from within it. To paraphrase Orobator, Christ does not transcend culture he subsumes it.4 Having in view Gods activity in the world also means that the theological task does not just involve speaking about God in some transcendent way disconnected from our lives in this world. Rather we reflect on God through our experiences of God. This means that our theological inquiry is not just about Gods character, but also about Gods activity. It also means that theology involves talking about all of human experience in which we find Gods presence or
Orobator, Theology Brewed in an African Pot: an introduction to Christian doctrine from an African perspective, 72. This is in response to the typology of H. Richard Niebuhr who fails to recognize that all our understandings of Christ are situated in culture so that the two cannot be so easily dichotomized. See H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture, 1st ed. (New York: Harper, 1951), 5-7. Even many responses to Niebuhr have failed to recognize this such as Craig A. Carter, Rethinking Christ and Culture: a post-Christendom perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2006). Or D. A. Carson, Christ and Culture Revisited (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2008). 5
4

even the absence of Gods presence. There is nothing outside of the realm of theology then, especially when we recognize how all-encompassing culture is and how far reaching Gods presence is.

Culture In speaking of culture, it is important to recognize its pervasiveness. Renowned anthropologist, Clifford Geertz challenges us to recognize that culture is not just some additive or appendage attached to humanity; rather it is its central ingredient.5 Putting it more bluntly, he states, There is no human nature outside of culture.6 Culture then is at the core of what it means to be human and at the core of every human experience. Human beings also have within themselves the ability to relate to each other and this relation always occurs within the confines of culture. Culture then encompasses the complex network of ordered systems of meaning in which all activity takes place. It forms the fabric of meaning in which human beings interpret these experiences and which guides their actions.7 Culture then includes aspects of food, working tools, clothing attire, fashion, art, music, and technology. It even includes the ways in which we collectively develop and acquire knowledge as well as all ethical, moral and religious elements. Even if humans might have some experience that could be considered outside of culture, we still interpret it within the fabrics of meaning that constitute our own culture and so it instantly becomes bound to culture making such a situation speculative.

Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures: selected essays (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 47. Ibid., 49. Ibid., 144, 312. 6

Perhaps the most important element for our discussion of theology and culture is the statement that culture includes all religion. Religion is not supra culture or untouched by it. Walter Hollenweger in his article, Intercultural Theology, applies this to theology in saying, All theologies are contextually conditioned, and adds that there is nothing wrong with this.8 Religious ideas are often thought to be above culture and therefore transferable to or binding on every culture. For instance, let us assume that at the center of the gospel is the idea of the innate value of every human being. While there may be truth to this statement, it fails to recognize that while all cultures might agree with such a statement and its centrality to the gospel, it will still be understood through the various fabrics of meaning imposed on it by the receiving culture. For instance, two cultures might have varying definitions of what it means to be human, who is human and what constitutes humanitys value. R.S. Sugirtharajah, in his book The Bible and the Third World, shows how various cultures separated by time and space received the Bible and its message differently.9 Each belief we have, even if it appears to be universal, is nuanced by our cultural context. Nstor Medina shows that it is more than this however, as culture actually provides the specific conceptual framework for understanding, interpreting and appreciating the gospel message and the reality of the divine.10 Since God uses culture in this way, one cultural mode of thinking or practice does not have a monopoly over others. Rather, we must recognize the diversity and validity of other cultural perspectives beyond our own. This also requires a self-critical stance that recognizes the

Walter J. Hollenweger, Intercultural Theology, Theology Today 43, no. 1 (1986): 29.

R. S. Sugirtharajah, The Bible and the Third World: precolonial, colonial, and postcolonial encounters (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 3. Nstor Medina, Jrgen Moltmann and Pentecostalism(s): toward a cultural theology of the Spirit, in Love and Freedom (Toronto: Toronto School of Theology, 2008), 110. 7
10

possibility of ones own beliefs and cultural framework needing adjustment in light of another cultural understanding, especially if we recognize that all culture, including our own, is everchanging. Merging theology and culture then necessitates intercultural dialogue. As Paul Lewis holds, Christianity should be committed to acknowledging and preserving differences because it is in difference that we see some of the richness of Gods finely-textured creation.11 Paul Tillich in his Theology of Culture makes a similar move saying that even though God interacts within culture, he does so with every culture and is not bound to one single culture.12 In the past, it has been believed there was one dominant form of Christianity to which every culture should adopt and conform. Authors like Joerg Rieger have shown, however, that this dominant view has been co-opted throughout Christian history by what he calls empire or, the everchanging conglomerates of power that are aimed at controlling all aspects of our lives.13 This dominant version then oppresses minority voices and cultures whose worldview has light to shed on religion and the gospel. We must question with Geertz why one would want a lowest common denominator view of culture or religion that neglects these differences any way.14 Rather than only seeking a common denominator, we should celebrate the multiple perspectives contributed by a multiplicity of cultures.

11

Paul Lewis, Can Christianity Be Multicultural, Christian Scholar's Review 25, no. 4 (1996): 458. Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1959), 36.

12

Joerg Rieger, Christ & Empire: from Paul to postcolonial times (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), vii. Kathryn Tanner also shows how religion is always related to the larger culture, particularly the dominant culture in some way showing again the need for other voices in the conversation. See Kathryn Tanner, Theories of Culture: a new agenda for theology, Guides to theological inquiry (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997), 51.
14

13

Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures: selected essays, 43. 8

I then propose an approach to culture that calls for intercultural dialogue and seeks to refine one anothers perspective through mutually respective conversation. In doing so, light is shed on our own inadequate views as well as what our culture or religion does well. The same occurs for the dialogue partner. We will unpack what this looks like more in our final section, but first we turn to the final element of our proposal, renewal.

Renewal I include this section on renewal not because I believe it is the right or best context through which to do theology. I hope the preceding discussion has shown the fault in such an arrogant position. It is included, rather, because it is my own context and if one is to do intercultural theology, where else can one start but their own context? In addition, I believe that renewal does have something unique to offer to the conversation as each context does. First, we will discuss what renewal is, and then we look at what this contribution might be. By renewal, we are primarily talking about what has been termed the global Pentecostal/Charismatic movement traditionally held to have begun with a series of revivals around the world in the early twentieth century the apex of which is often considered the Azusa Street revival. Often identified within this series of movements is classical Pentecostalism, which includes the denominations that arose out of the Azusa street revival, the charismatic movement, which began in the 1960-70s within existing denominations, and the neo-Pentecostal movement, which includes new movements independent of existing denominations.15 Though many of these new movements grew in response to Pentecostal and charismatic movements, many stem from

Walter J. Hollenweger, Pentecostalism: origins and developments worldwide (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997), 1. 9

15

other global revivals concurrent with, or even predating Azusa, and have little connection to North Atlantic denominations or movements. The diversity of renewal movements clearly mirrors the diversity we have already discussed in regards to culture in general. While there is no single renewal movement, only a series of movements, we might identify a number of characteristics that apply to many. These identifiers are by no means comprehensive, but rather serve to introduce the renewal movement and the contribution its theology can make to a theology of culture. The primary feature is an emphasis on the Holy Spirit.16 One example is the doctrine and practice of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is believed to empower the believer for evangelism. The Spirit is also emphasized through a heightened use of the Pauline spiritual gifts including miracles, prophecy, and glossolalia. This distinctive of the Spirit can serve to move Pentecostals beyond concern for the church to the world. Latino Pentecostal scholar Nstor Medina, for instance, draws on Moltmanns idea of the Spirit permeating all of human reality and created life.17 The Spirit is also seen as the illuminator of Scripture and one that brings further revelation about God as revealed in Jesus. Since the Spirit permeates all of human reality, it can be seen as at work in all of the different cultures helping to refine their view of God and salvation and moving them toward fullness of life in Christ. Medina goes on to suggest a pneumatological cultural kenosis which holds that cultural space should be conceived as the place of the Spirits activity and as part of the Spirits self-emptying upon the person of Jesus and through Jesus to the rest of humanity.18 Culture is
This is not to the exclusion of Christ as many renewalists have a strong Christology to accompany their pneumatology based on the five-fold gospel. This includes Jesus as savior, sanctifier baptizer, healer, and coming king. See Donald W. Dayton, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism (Grand Rapids, MI: Francis Asbury, 1987), 1721.
17 16

Medina, Jrgen Moltmann and Pentecostalism(s): toward a cultural theology of the Spirit, 114-15. Ibid., 110. 10

18

not just one place, it is the very place where the Spirit works to illuminate Jesus and this occurs in every culture. Amos Yong develops this idea by showing that the many tongues experienced at the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost signifies the diversities that occur within the church by the power of the Spirit.19 The diversity of the Spirits work in all cultures serves as a theological foundation for our earlier discussion of diversity among cultures. Not only does renewal support this diversity theologically, but it also supports it practically as one looks at the global nature and diversity within the movement. Finally, renewal is always a disruption of the dominant culture. It is always seeking to change things as they are during a given period of time and in a given cultural context. For instance, when doing intercultural theology from a renewal perspective, Mark Cartledge holds that affective and experiential elements need to be included.20 He also maintains that theology from a renewal perspective leads to more narrative theology.21 In this way, renewal has offered a dissenting voice against the rationalistic Christianity of the enlightenment and modern liberalism, which have focused on doing theology beginning with philosophical and logical statements about God rather than the experience of God in the world. Renewal not only supports diversity then, but also our earlier statement that theology should be done from the ground up based on the experience of the community of God through the Scriptures and the activity of the Spirit in todays world. It is in their emphasis on the Holy Spirit, as well as the experience of the activity

Amos Yong, The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the possibility of global theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005). Mark J. Cartledge, Pentecostal Theological Method and Intercultural Theology, Transformation 25, no. 2-3 (2008): 95.
21 20

19

Ibid., 98. 11

of the Spirit affectively and in the life of the community, that renewal movements have the most to offer a theology of culture.

Theology, Culture and Renewal In this concluding section, our goal is to bring together the ideas of the previous sections in a constructive summary of how one should approach culture and how renewal theology can be a resource for this approach. We have already laid out the interconnected nature of theology and culture. Not only must theology be done from a cultural context, but culture is the very sphere in which God has chosen to be revealed. Also, because there are many cultures and God has chosen to work through the Spirit in not just one culture but all cultures, every cultural perspective is needed to gain a fuller view of God. The way toward this is interculturality. Niebuhrs classical typology of Christ and culture fails to recognize the interconnectedness of the gospel to culture and proposes a false dichotomy between the two. It does however, point to the fact that there are both positives and negatives in every culture, things that are in line with the gospel message and things that deviate from it. There is therefore a need for both validating and critiquing each culture, including ones own. How are we supposed to analyze our culture when we are so enmeshed in it, using the same intellectual structures of thought that perpetuate its problems? This is why we need interculturality. There is a need for voices of dissent that will unmask our cultures own prejudices and misunderstanding about God and the world. We need minority voices that will expose the dominant culture that has said every other culture must align with it to be valid by voicing equally valid understandings of Gods activity in the world. Each one of these voices then will not be a contextualized version of the

12

dominant theology, but will take their own context as the very point of departure in the theological task. There are of course some parameters of how this must work. Primarily, these various cultures must dialogue based on an understanding of mutual respect and equality recognizing what Tillich has said concerning each culture and religions cosmic vision of reality that focuses on ultimate concern.22 As soon as there becomes any form of hierarchy or cultural standard by which others are judged, a new dominant culture is established and minority voices are oppressed again diluting the fuller understanding of the God we seek. In order to avoid this hierarchy, nothing can be taken for granted but every theological understanding must be open to dialogue and as Hollenweger demands in his article on intercultural theology, we have to be okay with tension and with theologies being at odds when we take such an approach.23 We must recognize that being at odds is actually what causes growth helping us to see our own cultures inadequacies as well as its strengths. What standard are we to judge by then? How do we know which culture makes most sense of the centrality or various aspects of the gospel message and of what God is doing in the world? We must recognize that there might not be consensus and that is okay. It is equally possible that the Spirit is doing different things in different cultures. Consensus is not always necessary. However, when there is something in our culture that has gone astray from the heart of the gospel, we judge by those four tools mentioned above, Scripture, tradition, experience and reason. We judge not just by our own readings of Scripture and tradition or our own experiences, but by those of the global community of God with which we have placed ourselves in dialogue.
22

Tillich, Theology of Culture, 7-8. Hollenweger, Intercultural Theology, 34. 13

23

Finally, this is where the renewal element again comes in. The Spirit speaks most effectively through the community of God and this same Spirit will bring to attention those theological points that are most central to gospel, where we are in line with these, and where we have gone astray. This is primarily through the reflective lens of intercultural dialogue.

Thanks Brandon,

This is a well thought-out paper. It displays your own maturity when discussing these issues, and opens the door for genuine conversation between ethnocultural traditions. I find the paper quite mature, insightful; it shows great sensibilities necessary for these kinds of intercultural discussions you propose. With very few grammatical problems your paper is well written and well organized, and it weaves multiple contributing voices from various contexts. I am really impressed! I also appreciate the way you locate your paper in terms of your context and partly social location. It would have been even better if you tried to make your ideas connect with more specific concrete examples. Also, I would have liked you to at least mention what radical shift you are making from traditional approaches to culture in terms of methodology, epistemology, and criteria. All in all a great paper. I think if you refine it, it makes for a publishable piece.

98

14

Bibliography
Carson, D. A. Christ and Culture Revisited. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2008. Carter, Craig A. Rethinking Christ and Culture: A Post-Christendom Perspective. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2006. Cartledge, Mark J. Pentecostal Theological Method and Intercultural Theology. Transformation 25, no. 2-3 (2008): 92-102. Dayton, Donald W. Theological Roots of Pentecostalism. Grand Rapids, MI: Francis Asbury, 1987. Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books, 1973. Hollenweger, Walter J. Intercultural Theology. Theology Today 43, no. 1 (1986): 28-35. . Pentecostalism: Origins and Developments Worldwide. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997. Lewis, Paul. Can Christianity Be Multicultural. Christian Scholar's Review 25, no. 4 (1996): 449-58. Medina, Nstor. Jrgen Moltmann and Pentecostalism(S): Toward a Cultural Theology of the Spirit. In Love and Freedom. 101-13. Toronto: Toronto School of Theology, 2008. Niebuhr, H. Richard. Christ and Culture. 1st ed. New York: Harper, 1951. Orobator, A. E. Theology Brewed in an African Pot: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine from an African Perspective. Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa, 2008. Pinnock, Clark H. Flame of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996. Rieger, Joerg. Christ & Empire: From Paul to Postcolonial Times. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007. Sugirtharajah, R. S. The Bible and the Third World: Precolonial, Colonial, and Postcolonial Encounters. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Tanner, Kathryn. Theories of Culture: A New Agenda for Theology. Guides to Theological Inquiry. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. Tillich, Paul. Theology of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1959. Yong, Amos. The Spirit Poured out on All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the Possibility of Global Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005.

15