SUMMARY: This post introduces some key elements of “culture.” It also overviews some difficulties people in general have when it comes to talking about culture, and a few additional reasons why this is especially a problem for Christians.
Core Aspects in Talking About “Culture”
People generally have a lot of problems when it comes to talking together about cultures and what makes them tick. Some equate cultural analysis with surface things like artifacts (for example, concrete items such as CDs, movies, books, clothing styles), places (church buildings, clubs, schools), behaviors (wildness trips, “hanging out” at malls, going to an alternative worship service), and/or organizations (political organizations, educational institutions, business enterprises). Some would focus on formal statements of vision and/or values, or perhaps the underlying philosophy, theology, or spirituality of a people or culture.
These are all important layers of what cultural systems are about, as is reflected in the core definition of culture I gave in Cultures and Kingdom 01, in the section on “What Culture Is and What Culture Is Not.”
Culture is the broadest perspective for thinking about being human. Culture is our most complex creation as beings made to reflect the image of a Creator God. Cultures are complex systems that include both everything that we create to be seen, along with the unseen ways of processing information, values, and beliefs that lead to what is made manifest.
However, those elements are more the “what” aspects of culture. What about the “who”? Some people expect they can substantially understand someone’s culture based solely on that person’s gender, age/generation (Builders, Boomers, Busters, Blasters, Bridgers, Beyonders … or whatever system of titles and attributes you use), level of abilities, race, social/economic class, country, or even religion. If we look at all the people factors, is that enough to understand culture?
While those may be important factors, not one of these has a fully isolated culture that belongs only to them, with no influences drawn from elsewhere. For instance, not all “Millennials” are techy-geeks, not all Boomers are narcissistic, and there is no women-only culture that has no carryover from elsewhere or to elsewhere. Again, going back to the core definition from Cultures and Kingdom 01:
Everyone creates/influences culture, and culture influences everyone. All people contribute to the creation and expressions of some kind of culture, regardless of their stance toward the mainstream culture. [...] This means engagement with cultures is not neutral - we either resist it, relate with it, isolate from it, assert control over it - and whatever other potential stances toward the collective creation we can imagine. All forms of engagement and disengagement with a culture influence it to some degree. No one escapes being affected by culture, or even the drive to create culture. [...] Also, when someone chooses to disengage from society, we can interpret that as their choices being influenced by culture and their actions as creating a culture - even if it is an alternative culture or subculture.
General Problems Christians have with “Culture”
As Christians, we compound our problems with talking about cultures if we have been steeped in a typical “church culture.” Many of us have become unfamiliar with “the world out there.” But I would suggest that missional discipleship is about living like Jesus would in the midst of cultures, relating to its people, and challenging its ways that go against God’s design and therefore are harmful. And yet, rarely is systematic material about culture presented to the average person in the average church. However, when it comes to specific cultures or cultural activities, there are often enough sermons about them, or celebrations of them, or diatribes against them. At least, that’s been my experience.
But how deep is the understanding about “culture” in these cases? Are they really about the complex interconnections of values, ideals, perceptions, behaviors, etc.? Or just about some single issue that is relatively easy to pick out and pick up or pick on?
From what I’ve gathered, even seminaries do not seem to educate students well in the systems and substance of doing cultural analysis. This includes training both professional ministry practitioners and missionaries. They may learn how to strategize ministry for this or that people group, but not necessarily how to conduct cultural research for matching ministry with relevant aspects of culture while avoiding the anti-biblical aspects of culture that should be resisted. I’ve even watched as men and women who are training for international cross-cultural missions seem to be in love with the idea of culture, and yet avoid connecting with others in their dormitories who hail from another language, race, and/or culture.
For these and whatever other reasons, we simply do not have a common vocabulary to use in discussing culture. That means we have a hard time talking about frameworks for essential issues in expanding the Kingdom in healthy, transformative ways. Hopefully this series can offer something constructive on that line!
Two Key Difficulties Christians have in Talking About “Culture”
Meanwhile, I have a few other thoughts on difficulties. So - if all people in general seem to have trouble focusing in on a shared vocabulary for meaningful dialog about culture, what else that makes it perhaps even more difficult for Christians? Let me suggest at least two things.
First, culture is far more concrete than we are used to, because we Western Christians have focused on studying, improving, and teaching abstract philosophical-theological principles. Philosophical debate has been the premiere intellectual discipline of the West for many centuries. However, I suspect that culturology will become a more dominant field of study in the future.
If you want to explore some in-depth material on why these two approaches clash, check out this post on my futuristguy blog: Culturologists versus Philosophists? Culturology versus Philosophy? There I state that “a culturologist perspective is that cultural change drives the production of new philosophies,” while “a philosophist perspective is that philosophical changes drive the production of new cultures or cultural changes.” The world seems to be moving from the old abstractions of philosophy to the new concretizations of culture. So, if we are oriented primarily to theology and cognitive worldviews and statements of belief, we find ourselves out of our element in a world that is increasingly interested in spiritual practices and creative imagination and practical expressions of social justice. Which leads directly to my other main issue with why we Christians have trouble talking about culture.
Second - and as shocking as some may find this - when it comes to culture, we have been just plain lazy. Well, let me rephrase more nicely to say that “We invest our energies into things that are generally easier to understand and deal with, and that don’t drain our energy.” I think this complacency stems from our historic roles of cultural dominance in the West. We have not had to think hard about other cultures, because some type of Christendom culture has been our mainstream, our norm. People from other perspectives needed to understand us, not vice versa.
No longer. We now live in the midst of multiple other competing cultures. If we wish to disciple others, we need cross-cultural skills - even to connect well with people who may share our same language but speak a different “lingo.” However, exposure to cultures drains our energy - that’s what culture shock is about.
Even now, we Christians seem notorious for labeling and stereotyping people according to this or that inherent personal or social feature. I suppose we do this in part to reduce the work of dealing with cultural differences (i.e., reduce our own level of culture shock). Do we think this will make cross-cultural communication easier, even if it comes from a sincere desire to relate the gospel with others?
Why do we think this is supposed to be easy? If we go back to one key turning point in the formation and migration of cultures - the Tower of Babel - we see that God set differences in language in motion precisely because it would NOT then be so easy to unify everyone in our attempts to “be like God.” Culture is not the enemy; it can be a protection designed by God so our own enemy of the broken will to power does not consume all humanity.
There is hope, though. I didn’t believe that a better understanding of the dynamics of cultures would help in discipleship, I wouldn’t be writing this. We can learn how to function cross-culturally. And if it does not lessen the level of culture shock, at least it can make our cross-cultural functioning more incarnational, more humane, more productive.
The next post forges ahead with thoughts on “cultural capital” that is developed within a culture over its history and is passed on to next generations.
Brad Sargent