Westernization vs. Contextualization:
What's your picture of a Christianized people?
by Justin D. Long
Nonwhite indigenous Christians (1970): 60,118,000
Nonwhite indigenous Christians (1997): 197,022,000
Nonwhite indigenous Christians (2000): 212,405,000
Growth rates:
Anglican ......... 112%
Catholic ......... 199%
Marginal ......... 311%
Nonwhite ......... 328%
Orthodox ......... 146%
Protestant ....... 159%
Roman Catholic ... 144%
Take a moment to think of a World A people group you're familiar with: perhaps a nomadic Muslim group in the desert sands of the Middle East, or a polytheistic people in the northern mountains of India, or an animistic group living in the caves of western China. Now, take a moment and picture what that group will be like when they have been evangelized and the majority have become Christians. Will they be different? How will they be different? Should they be different?
Nonwhite indigenous churches--including Asian house churches, African independent churches, and others--are the fastest growing segment of Christianity. From 1970 to 1997 they have more than tripled their total population, while other segments have barely doubled. Only "marginal" Christians were close to the same growth rate, and they didn't have near the same numbers. As we witness this phenomenal growth, it behooves us to stop a moment and consider the kind of aid and help we are offering to these churches. Are we attempting to help them become what they can be, or are we trying to make them over into images of ourselves?
This touches on the thorny and complex issue of Westernization vs. Contextualization. If, when you pictured the group evangelized and Christianized, you pictured them something like yourself, then you are thinking of Westernization. If you pictured them pretty much the same, but with churches and Bibles and Bible studies, then you are thinking of contextualization.
When the Gospel has been contextualized:
1. IT WILL REDEEM THE CULTURE. When we think of "redemption" we often think of "social uplift": e.g. poverty will be reduced, literacy will be improved, health care will be provided, etc. Looking at it objectively, these things aren't "redemptions" -- they are "improvements." They are, essentially, side effects of righteous living, of righteous principles applied. The immediate goal of the Gospel, however, has to do with righteousness itself: spiritual salvation rather than physical improvement.
2. IT WILL HAVE A UNIQUE WITNESS. Each culture has its own way of presenting the Gospel: their own language, their own history, their own stories, their own illustrations, their own methods. No single system of presenting the gospel is the "only correct way." We should expect the presentation of the Gospel to be different in every culture: not that they will have a different God (because they won't), but they may have a different name for Him (because in all likelihood they will). Their churche buildings will look different (huts, open fields, tents, etc); the format of their services will be different; their customs will be different; their denominations and schools will be different; their systems of support for their pastors will be different. To demand they use our systems rather than encouraging them to seek their own systems with help and guidance from the missionary would be wrong.
3. IT WILL [EVENTUALLY] CAUSE A SOCIAL UPLIFT. The application of Christian principles--honesty, loyalty, etc.--will create a better quality of life. However, it may not be "better" as we define better. A "better quality of life" does not necessarily mean they will have homes, apartments, cars, buses, trains, air conditioning, toilets, Wal-mart, McDonalds, supersized grocery stores, computers, CD-players, etc. Having many things does not necessarily equate to a better quality of life. It _will_ typically lead to educational programs, vocational programs, health services, and other similar things which arise out of the Body of Christ caring for each other.
When the Gospel has been Westernized:
1. THE CHURCH WILL LIKELY FOCUS MORE ON MAKING THE PEOPLE WESTERN RATHER THAN MAKING THEM CHRISTIAN. It will focus more on immediate services and less on evangelism and discipleship. It will focus more on the immediate needs of the church rather than the immediate needs of the unsaved community. Don't misunderstand: these services are good--but evangelism should be paramount, and if these services are used initially they should be used as avenues of evangelism.
2. THE CHURCH'S GOSPEL WITNESS WILL REFLECT THE CULTURE OF THE MISSIONARY. As such, it won't appeal as much to the local community. When the Gospel is contextualized, it seeps into the local culture and is expressed through the members of the local culture, and is more acceptable since it comes from one of their own rather than an outsider.
3. THE APPLICATION OF THE WESTERN CULTURE WILL CAUSE MATERIALISM. The local churches and the local Christians will seek out a lifestyle that resembles that from which the missionary came: better homes, better goods, better jobs, etc. But the real goal of a culture should be to seek to improve its own unique "flavor" rather than mimicking another flavor. An analogy: if all the elm trees of the world transformed themselves into pine trees, we'd have plenty of wonderful pine scent--but we'd have lost the elm trees. Elm trees--and cultures--should focus on becoming the very best, very purest, very finest elm trees around, rather than becoming something they are not. Does this mean they can't have cars, or phones, or radios, or computers? Of course not: it does mean they should avoid becoming Americans, with all that Americans have. They should become Koreans, or Mandarins, or Pashayi, or Qashqa'i, or whatever they are, and seek out what the purest expression of their culture is.
A church in World A--or anywhere else in the world, for that matter--will very probably _not_ look like yours. There's no reason to pity them if they don't have toilets or hymnals. That doesn't make them "less than" your church: in fact, they may be better off!
Suggestions
1. Your first question should always be, "Does this group have the Bible and other Christian resources in their own language?" Some groups need it, some don't. Evaluating this must come first.
2. Don't ask yourself, "How do we help them build a Western church building," but rather, "Is the Gospel preached here? And is it going out from here to the rest of the world? And how can we help them reach more people, both here and abroad?"
3. Has the Gospel become contextualized among the people group you are targeting? Has it seeped in and taken on a form that is unique to the culture? Do they have their own worship songs? Their own Bible schools? Their own ways of passing their knowledge on and supporting each other in the faith? Helping them developing these expressions of their faith should be a priority.
4. Keep your focus on helping the culture present the Gospel to its own members, rather than attempting to present it to the entire culture on your own. It will be better accepted from members of the ethnic group than it will be from you.
