This book seems to leave us to choose and that in itself is both puzzling yet refreshing. It leaves us to choose what to DO with the truth we possess. But it also shouldn’t lead us to believe we must choose one of the five typologies Niebuhr gives. There may be another answer and I believe there is. Niebuhr also leads his readers into desiring to choose the (his?) fifth type even though he makes it seem like any of them would be okay to choose. There is also the choosing of being more biblical in our own response to culture rather than just following the philosophy of those who have gone before.
The problem we all live in is: How do we relate to the culture around us and to those within that culture. There must be a hammered out way of doing this by now with so much church history behind us! And I would agree—the way we live our life reveals our loyalties and the objects of our devotion—it is either “Christ or cultural society”.
I began to ask myself the question, “If the school I teach in has a culture—and Christ may seem as a foe to the culture within a school, how can I bridge any gaps in the school culture to Jesus?” I could take any number of approaches to answer this question and each are related in some way to the five typologies but I was plagued by there not being an even better approach than what was given. I could abandon the question (and the students) and keep myself and my ‘Christian life’ separated; I could see the best in my students and highlight the good; I could live above them (in snobbery) declaring if they want what I have they will have to join me; I could simply state how my faith sees things will be better one day; or I could be faithfully trusting in God in every moment with insights through the Holy Spirit on how to bring changes to the perversions I see and be an ambassador of healing, a guide to direct them in life, a voice that speaks to the conscience and pointing to the redemptive power of Jesus Christ.
I previously believed that only one of the positions was correct and all others were completely wrong. I see that each of them has good points and that at certain times in Church history the men of God listed were used by God to help the Church to perhaps stay “on course”. But is transformational the complete right choice? I also think this book is outdated and should be rewritten with the types being restated for today’s culture with applicable motifs and applications. The thoughts needed to be laid out better as to what is good and right and what isn’t.
I see so much of the things Niebuhr stated were wrong in the views as residing within myself. At one point I rather loathed myself as Niebuhr’s words struck my heart in conviction. I saw that I had been too much of the ‘Christ of culture’ in my youth ministry.
I also thought of Jesus’ words spoke to the churches in the 2nd and 3rd chapters of John’s Revelation that he wanted them to do and not do. Certainly the church had to abstain from, engage in, and at other times strictly oppose when it came to its duties within the culture. But is transforming the culture my goal or a byproduct of my faithfulness to God in Jesus Christ? Does God do the transforming while I am his witnessing agent? Does dying to myself and being faithful to God bring about a more suitable sower or waterer so God can being forth the increase?
When Niebuhr spoke about Jonathan Edwards and his impact on culture being given to emotionalism, I had to disagree. I also wondered about his reactions towards several other men he cited and thought if he was giving an honest and more complete account or just a slanted, generalized or minimized one.
One may misread Niebuhr and think he is purely pluralistic or doesn’t have a real answer to the issue of the Church in culture. It seemed at times he continued to battle the radical position through the others. Early in his book in the section, “Toward a Definition of Christ,” Niebuhr describes the faithful community of Christ living within their culture. This community: 1. Has Christ as their authority, 2. Has ongoing communication from Jesus, 3. Moves towards no other devotion but God and no other loyalty than Christ, 4. Values only what is of value and worth to God, 5. Loves one’s neighbor as God Himself is presently loving them, 6. Is manifesting the present rule of God, 7. Doesn’t look to DO obedient acts but rather to BE obedient, 8. Calls God “Father”, 9. Turns away from self-defense and seeks only the kingdom of God, 10. Is forever being challenged to “abandon all things for the sake of God; and is forever being sent back in the world to teach and practice all the things that have been commanded them” (pp11-29). Is this the essence of a Christian culture? Is there such a thing as a Christian culture? Should there be?