Friday 25 March 2011

How can we be culturally relevant?

I have been thinking a lot about the expressions of Christianity that seek explicitly to be culturally relevant to the people around us, but I am uneasy about how some describe how they have adapted themselves to become culturally relevant, and here’s why.

We’re supposed to be different. 

  • Matthew 5 says we are salt and light. That means we shine light on situations and leave our saltiness wherever we go. 

We’re supposed to be loving, not selfish.

  • The culture I see around me relates more to what can I get, rather than what can I give.  If we emulate that, how are we different?

We’re supposed to stand for righteousness, not abandon it

  • If our contemporaries and neighbours are pursuing hedonistic activities, don’t we need to redeem them not join them?

We’re supposed to be instantly recognisable

  • I have some sympathy with the ‘dress like those you want to reach’  and ‘use lingo your hearer will understand’ argument, but no-one will look more ‘out of place’ than me wearing a pair of Nike’s and a hoodie and talking slang. I’m not afraid of doing odd things or feeling uncomfortable, but surely better to be ‘myself’, genuine, passionate, interested and loving than attempt to pass myself off as ‘one of them’?  Doesn’t it look too ‘try hard’ to attempt to emulate them?

 

My Wonderings:

All things to all men

  • So what on earth do I do with Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 9??
    • To reach the Jews he became like the Jew. – Does that mean to reach a muslim I need to be like them? live like they do, act like they do?
    • To reach those under the law, he became like one under the law – Do I need to keep ceremonial activities? be ‘religious’ to the point of bondage?
    • To those not having the law, he became like one not having he law – Did he become lawless other than Christ’s law?  Did he break the law of the land to uphold the higher law of Christ?
    • To the weak he became weak.  Did he starve his body? Did he not use his intellect? Did he speak differently?
  • I think this is more about going where they go, doing what they do (to an extent) to show openness to understanding their life.

 

Isn’t it about relationship?

My grandparents were culturally relevant to me, not because they dressed like me, drove like me, used technology or spoke like me (other than mother tongue) no, it was mainly because I was important to them and they were important to me. We were connected relationally. They loved me because they chose to, and I spent time with them because I loved them… I wonder then isn’t that how to be culturally relevant?  Finding things in people who are different to you that are similar enough that you can connect with them?   Isn’t that how we show them we love them?

When we need people, don’t they feel good?  We can love endlessly, but if we don’t actually care about the needs of the people we are loving, if we don’t need their love and care and interest in return, then it’s NOT a relationship, its a project or a work.  It always bugs me when I see people in caring professions talk intimately to their other colleagues over the person in their care.  It always makes me feel desperately sorry for the ignored PERSON that is right there.  I understand that it’s easier to talk to those you have relationships with, but that’s exactly my point… if we build relationships with people, not just ‘ministries’, aren’t we then able to meet that other side of wanting in us (and them) to be needed?  I wonder how much easier it is to minister to someone’s lack of self worth when they see that we need them?  How much more loved someone feels when we seek out their friendship to support us?  How much more part of the kingdom of God they feel when we include them in shaping our plans and dreams?

So what Culture is important?

I don’t yet know then whether the extremes of inexclusivity of some of the emergent folks or the ultra tolerance and inclusiveness of the Shane Clairbourne’s of this world demonstrate is something I can identify with, though there’s a massive way to go from where I am today towards their world/kingdom view that I’m somewhat embarrassed by the faltering steps I’ve taken so far… But I’m reasonably certain that our task is to bring the culture of heaven, the kingdom of heaven down to man.  I don’t think this means counting people who have not chosen Christ as ‘included in His book of life’, but it does mean expressing Christ’s love to them, loving them with my heart and actions, because their life depends on it.

If you have thoughts or comments about this, PLEASE COMMENT, because I’m thinking this through.  If you’re going to be at the everything conference tomorrow and you bump into me, say hi and tell me what you think BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW.

2 comments:

Jez Bayes said...

Even if we think that the Church and the Gospel need to simply emphasize timeless truth without worrying about cultural relevance at all, there's something about being culturally relevant that we know is true without even thinking about it.

The NT gives very little in the way of template for meetings, other than use of spiritual gifts.

Music style? Length of talk? Venue? All up to us to decide to do what is relevant to our internal church culture and surrounding culture.

Hence a 100% Biblical church in Tanzania will look completely different to a 100% Biblical church in Siberia or High Wycombe.

If this were not true, we would all dress like 1st century palestinians and meet in synagogues.

Rob Mason said...

'm inclined to agree that 100% biblical church (if such a thing could exist) would look different in each geographic location. However, the application of our faith to our community may be different in task, but shouldn't necessarily be different in substance or belief.

I don't really care much about making our meetings culturally relevant because I want people to see Jesus in me and us, rather than have to come to an odd place that they wouldn't normally go to, to hear a gospel they most likely won't understand. Our meetings then are not so much for the unsaved, but for the saved and with a primary purpose of collectively bringing our praise and worship to the One Triune God.

No, where it matters I think is to be relevant in the lives of ordinary people who need Jesus, and need to see that we live what we believe, that we do more than we talk and that we love more than we condemn. I think that's what cultural relevance is more about..