Christ and culture

Culture is such a slippery word. It means something like ‘who are and what we do together’, which is about as broad a definition as you could hope for. A culture is more than a number of individuals—it refers to how those individuals interact with each other, and what those interactions produce. So, Australian culture is cricket, it’s opera, it’s Bondi beach, it’s Backyard Blitz. But it’s also Chinatown, it’s fine wine, it’s cynical humour, it’s Westfield Shoppingtown.

Some moments seem thoroughly Australian, because they tap into some common element of our experience together. The gold medal won by ice skater Steven Bradbury at this year’s Winter Olympics was one such moment. Somehow, the fact that our first ever gold medal in the winter games came because everyone else fell over just seemed culturally right. Similarly, the fact that Don Bradman’s batting average was 99.94, just short of the great figure seems, well, downright Australian. And the fact that Mark Taylor declared when he matched Bradman’s highest score of 334—that was Australian, too.

But none of these examples really grasps the meaning of Australian culture. Perhaps they all add up to something which all Aussies can claim is ‘us’.

The word culture may be nebulous, but we all have some feeling for what it means to say something is ‘part of our culture’. “The culture is the incarnation of the religion of a people”, wrote poet T.S. Eliot. And it’s true; our beliefs are on display in our cultural expressions.

Of course, culture is always changing. Twenty years ago, no Australian would have imagined that wine sales would outstrip beer, or that the cappuccino would be our favourite drink. Culture seems at once to be very important to our self-understanding, but also changing rapidly and hard to pin down. It’s who we are, and yet we keep changing who we are.

So how does being a Christian connect with being part of a culture?

First, there is no escaping culture. Even if you live in a mountaintop monastery, you have made a decision about how you will relate to the culture. You are relating to your culture every time you step out your front door. In fact, you are relating to it inside your front door, too, if you watch television, talk on the phone, live with other people, or read the newspaper.

It seems important, then, to look at the different ways a Christian can relate to his or her culture. It is really the question of how we relate to ‘the world’. This is the more common word in the Scriptures (the dictionaries used to define ‘culture’ as ‘the cultivation of soil’). There are two strands to the biblical teaching on ‘the world’. The first is that the world is good—it is created by God and loved by God. Genesis declares the goodness of creation, and the reason God sent Jesus is that he “so loved the world” (John 3:16). However, the constant motif of Scripture is that the good world is corrupted by sin and disobedience. The world is a wasteland, despised by God, according to Isaiah 24. John’s Gospel famously opposes the world and the Word: “He was in the world, but the world did not recognize him …”. And Jesus’ prayer for his disciples in John 14-17 pits them against the world, and the world against them.

In the letters, ‘the world‘ seems also to be anathema to God. 1 John 2:15 teaches that if you love the world, you do not have the love of the Father in you. In Titus 2:12, “worldly passions” refers to ungodliness. Yet, in 2 Corinthians 5:19, Paul tells us that Christ was “reconciling the world to himself”, and now is the day of God’s favour. The principles of this world are evil, according to Colossians 2:8; but according to 1 Timothy 4:4, “everything God created is good and is to be received with thanksgiving”.

To summarize, the world’s relationship to God is the same as a creature’s relationship to God: created, fallen, condemned, reconciled, awaiting restoration.

How about our relationship to the world/culture then? Do we shun it? Do we embrace it? How do we relate to it at every level?

Four views of Christ/culture

In the 1950s, the American theologian H. Richard Niebuhr wrote a very influential short book called Christ and Culture. In it, he posits a series of views of how Christ might relate to the world we find ourselves in. Although influenced strongly by existentialism and Barthian theology, there is great value in his distinctions. I have modified them a little to come up with four views of how Christ and culture relate.

1. Christ against culture

In this view, the church and the world are radically opposed. It was the commonly held view of the first five centuries of church history. “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”, asked one Church Father, as if to say “How can the world’s wisdom speak to the church?”. Out of this view arose the monasteries and the withdrawal of Christians into separate communities. Many Christians adopt a ‘soft’ version of this view today, as witnessed by such phenomena as the Christian schools movement and Christian business networks.

2. The Christ of culture

A very different approach claims that the church and the world intermingle such that Christian belief and lifestyle will legitimately differ in different ages and places. This view emerged with Constantine, and with the combination of church and state, where each accommodates the other and modifies itself accordingly. This approach also underscores liberalism, where the sources of authority have shifted to the commonalities of church and world—reason and tradition. Friedrich Schleiermacher, one of the sources of modern theological liberalism, thought we needed to rewrite the gospel in a way that makes sense to our culture, in order to win over the ‘cultured despisers‘ of Christianity. In the 19th century, the spiritual and the cultural blended together, and God was found to be the highest expression of our beings. And it is not surprising that this view has become popular within postmodern thinking, often springing from a good desire to ‘connect’ the seemingly irrelevant church with the culture.

3. Christ above culture

This is the most popular view of the relationship in evangelical circles. The church stands ‘over’ the world, awkwardly and uneasily, and relates to the world through its efforts to redeem it. The church evangelizes the world. Culture is viewed as tangential to reality; real life is kept in heaven with God (Col 4).

This view is strong on dogmatics, but struggles with ethics—it’s hard to work out the right thing to do ‘down below’ when real life is ‘up above’. Should we work at making the world ‘better’, or should we just try to rescue from it those who are destined for eternity, and sit loosely to the here and now?

This view recognizes that the physical world isn’t evil (it is not Gnosticism), but isn’t sure how good it can be either. Luther is here, struggling away. He sees worldly institutions as necessary—someone must pursue justice—but flawed and doomed.

4. Christ transforming culture

Some church traditions (evangelicals among them) have come to the view that the transformative power of the gospel will be enacted in history. The gospel will renovate this world, since the regenerated lives of the saved will lead to increasing godliness. Thus, culture becomes a mode of praise and worship. Here’s Niebuhr:

There is room within Augustinian theory for the thought that mathematics, logic, and natural science, the fine arts and technology, may all become both beneficiaries of the conversion of man’s love and the instruments of that new love of God that rejoices in His whole creation and serves all His creatures (p. 215)

Niebuhr admits that Augustine did not go this far, but many today do, to claim that we are called as Christians to transform the world’s culture. One theologian calls God ‘the civiliser’. As we live out the gospel, we ‘get life right’. As conversions increase, so the culture gets transformed.

Hanging over this view is the problem of judgement, as Augustine knew. This must come before the renewal. How much of this world will survive to the new? We really don’t know.

Conclusion

Which view is the best expression of the Bible’s teaching on Christ’s (and his body’s) relationship to the world?

The first point to make is that none of these views stands alone. They don’t, in fact, contradict each other. Rather, they express different aspects of the person and work of Jesus. The view that Christ is against culture focuses on Christ’s role as judge of the world. In this capacity, he does stand over the world and condemn it.

The view that Christ is of culture focuses on the incarnation. Christ became man and was pleased to dwell among us. He is willing to associate with the culture, willing to be involved.

The view that Christ is above culture emphasizes Christ’s lordship. He rules over all, all must obey him, and every knee will bow before him.

And the view that Christ transforms culture focuses on his role as the creator and re-creator (or redeemer) of the world. The world is his: it was made through him and for him (Col 1:15). And the world awaits redemption through him, now that he has risen to conquer death and decay. The new heavens and new earth are before him (Rev 22). To what degree this world-redemption is occurring now is not resolved.

Where does this analysis leave Christians? How are we to relate to culture? It gives us a grid by which to think about it. Like Christ it means that we will play the following roles, wisely discerning when to emphasize which one:

  • Critics: We will judge our culture, weighing it against the word of God and calling it away from disobedience. We are also able to affirm it where we see that it makes the truth attractive, is wise rather than foolish, and draws our attention to the God who created it and called it good.
  • Participants: As members of the culture, we will be involved in the world/culture as Jesus was—avoiding temptation but freely and enjoyably participating. The freedom we have in the gospel allows us confidence in approaching culture. We don’t have to define ourselves according to it. Instead, we are free to be a part of it, as a secondary commitment.
  • Lords: Being ‘lords of culture’ sounds bizarre, but it means recognizing the limitations of culture and not aggrandizing it. This is particularly challenging for those who are enthusiasts about particular cultural activities (gardening, movies, football, music). We are to remain aloof from them, not swept into an idolatry or obsessed.
  • Transformers: We are to play our part in demonstrating the ‘goodness’ of the Christian life, and the difference being a Christian makes. By our examples of loving relationships with the culture (e.g. caring for our possessions, working diligently, keeping our promises in business), we may usher in at least some glimpses of what the new creation might look like (bearing in mind how little we know of it).

The program some Christians develop by which the world will be prepared by us for its heavenly destiny seems to me to overdevelop the teaching of Scripture on the continuity of this world with the next. The transformations we bring about are still prior to the transformation that Jesus’ return will bring, before he hands the kingdom over to his Father (as 1 Corinthians 15:28 reveals).

Reading suggestions on Christ and culture

D.A. Carson & J. Woodbridge, God and Culture, Eerdmans, 1993. A fine collection of essays from evangelical scholars working in different areas of culture, such as economics, psychology, literature and art.

C.S.Lewis, ‘Christianity and Culture’ in Christian Reflections, Collins, 1981. A classic essay.

R. Banks & R. Paul Stevens, The Complete Book of Everyday Christianity, IVP, 1997. A bold attempt to write an encyclopaedia of Christian living in today’s world. It demonstrates the ongoing struggle Christians have with relating Christ and culture.

On Australian culture in general, books by Hugh Mackay and Craig McGregor make thoughtful reading.

Comments are closed.