The Cyclical Pattern of Faith intersecting Culture

(or - Why now do I blog?)

"...they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world..." - Jesus (Jn.17:14b-15a)

For the last few thousands of years we have been trying to figure out the relationship between faith and culture. If there are two basic wet and dry positions, they would be 1) our culture blended well with our faith, or 2) our faith is separated from our culture. And if I have to pick between the wet and the dry, I would pick the dry position.

Fortunately, life is not just wet and dry. In the classic book "Christ and Culture", Richard Niebuhr stated the five basic positions: "Christ AGAINST Culture", "Christ OF Culture", "Christ ABOVE Culture", "Christ and Culture in PARADOX", and "Christ the TRANSFORMER of Culture". (Go here for an abbreviate overview of each position). The first two positions were the two basic wet and dry ends of the spectrum. The last three were variations of the mix.

And so, faith and culture is not just wet and dry. Jesus started the confusion two thousands years ago when He desired for his followers to "not be out of the world" but "not to be of the world" either (Jn.17). The question is "How?" How that relationship between faith and culture would look like? If you haven't read the link about on the overview of Niebuhr's book, now is the perfect time to hit it before we move on...

Leonard Sweet in "Soul Tsunami" had this excellent illustration about the relationship between faith and culture as a boat and water. The boat should "not be out of water, and not be 'of' (immersed-in) water" either. Is the boat wet or dry? Hhhm.. (Now you see why I started out with wet and dry positions and not black and white ).

And as the two dimensional water surface intersects the three dimensional boat, there will be misrepresentation and misunderstanding; culture won't really "get" the faith; readers will mistaken the persona for the person; miscommunication was a built-in cost of communication. After all, aren't we the humankind always the expert in miscommunication? Even after thousands of years we still haven't grasped the communication from God, even as it was directly delivered to our world - in a Person! And since there exists that mixture of intersection between faith and culture, between a persona and the person, which is unavoidable in communication; I am willing to risk mis-communicate in order to communicate through this blogging medium.

But there are more. Back to the question of, "How the relationship between faith and culture would look like?" Niebuhr's book presented five options; all five could be supported by Scripture, and all five could be appropriate. How could this be? Phillip Yancey wrote, "I remember that Niebuhr's book left me feeling enlightened, but as confused as ever. All the approaches seemed to have something to contribute, and in fact, I could point to biblical examples of each one..."

Aaahh, welcome to the age of pomo, where people could hold seemingly contradictory views in contiguous space of their minds.

The problem is that we often have a "static" view of a position, rather than seeing everything as a "dynamic" view of the overall positional pattern. I am speaking non-sense here, so let me explain.

If you ask, "Are we called to be out of the world or in the world?" The answer will be "Both; it's all depends." It's all depends on where you are in the pattern, and then you take up the appropriate position. It's similar to beginner's volleyball: if you are in the back row, you dig; front row, you hit; and center, you set.

The idea came to me while I was in a Bible Study on an obscure text of Genesis 45-47 on Joseph preparing his family to migrate to Egypt. {Thanks, Yen - for your exceptionally keen observation.} At the time, Pharaoh offered generously, "I will give you the best of the land, here load your household on these cars, never mind about your stuffs, because I will give you the best here..." In contrast, Joseph carefully coached his brothers, "I will settle you in Goshen, bring everything, including your herds. When Pharaoh asks, tell him your occupation as shepherd, it's detestable to them and you can settle there at Goshen."

Joseph was a successful bi-cultured man, why would he want his family to be secluded from the Egyptian culture? Wouldn't he want them to also be successful too?

What happened here is the illustration for Joseph's grasp of faith and culture. He understood that the ultimate end is not about current culture, but about the fulfillment of faith in the Promised Land. While his steadfast faith remained vibrant as he was assimilating the Egyptian culture, climbing the Egyptian hierarchy, enjoying Egyptian food, marrying Egyptian wife and producing kids. He knew that his brothers would not last a chance in that culture. So he sheltered them up in a paralleling culture, build them strong, so that one day the Jewish culture would emerge, would struggle, and would overcome culture to receive the Promise Land.

We see God did the same thing to Moses, get them out of his people into the dessert for forty years, then sent him back in among his own people again. We see similar pattern in Jesus' ministry. He took the disciples out of the world to be with him, build them strong in Him, then sent them back in the world to make disciples and repeat the cycle. I see the similar pattern today in new believers too. Often they are cut-off from their old secular friends and influences so that they can solidify their faith, then as they are matured, they will attempt to re-enter the culture to live out their faith.

The frequent problems with this cyclical pattern is in its shape and its size. We often don't like changes and therefore we resist both the movements of God: 1) to call us out of the world as well as 2) to send us back into the world. The cycle could not complete here if we don't move. Just look around and see how many people would be willing to step out of their comfort zone today? The second problem is that some of us take way too long to complete the cycle, so by the time we re-enter the world, we no longer have any connection left to the culture. The cycle could not complete here either if the curvature of the cycle get too big. Just ask the "seasoned Christians" around and see how many friends they have left outside of church?

However, these problems are artificial problems created by our lack of responsiveness to God. Let's take the size problem for example, the cycle of faith intersect culture wasn't designed to take a long time to complete. In fact, it was designed as a series of small spirals. At least once a week, we were called out from the world into the faith community, where we are strengthen and built-up, so that we can re-engage the world again every Monday, living out the faith in the culture. Even every day, the spiritual discipline of "Quiet Time" is designed for us to be away from other distraction, to receive the nourishing strength from God so that we can re-engage the world for the rest of our day.

In Niebuhrian terms, I woke up with the "Christ against Culture", I rushed on the freeway for work and yielded for a passing car with the "Christ paradox Culture", I managed my staff with the "Christ above Culture" and I seeked business opportunities with the "Christ transform Culture" through out my day. Finally, I ended my workday hanging out in my small group with the "Christ of Culture". Does it make any sense to you at all?

With this circular pattern thinking, I decided to enroll my son into a private Christian elementary school (since I could, and therefore I should), with a clear view of the day he would have to be "salt and light" in some public high school. I told you, my thinking is so warped; now it's affecting my children!

Yes, this theory is so warped. No wonder my mentor disagreed with it. Perhaps I am brewing some interesting heresy here. What do you think?