A reading for Cultural Anthropology
by Alan Tippett
(Original version appeared in Introduction to Missiology. Used under the educational "Fair Use" provision of the 1976 U.S. Copyright Act)
Many otherwise conscientious Western Christians fail to distinguish between two different types of attitudes exhibted by expatriate missionaries toward culture. Both types are dealt with by Paul in the Pastoral Epistles.
- Leave the old behind! -- There is a wealth of Biblical instruction about the need for would-be Christians to discard behaviors of their old way of life: moral evils such as murder, lying, fornication, blaspheming, greed, false accusation, lust and so on. Bad behaviors of unregenerate human beings may be either individual or collective. When conversion to Christ occurs, says Paul, such old ways must be discarded.
- Pick and choose! -- In Paul's writings there are also references to behavior patterns which Christians are not expected to discard (although they are expected to transform them). These are the accepted behavior patterns of organized society -- what the anthropologist calls the social structure. It is important to distinguish between the bad customs which converts must discard and the social structure within which they have to operate.
Missionaries who set themselves against neutral social structures take upon themselves a grave responsibility for which they have no biblical precedent or injunction to do so. Of course, social structures are changing all the time and Christianity will certainly influence those changes; but Paul's attitude was rather "What is God's will for me in this situation? How can I win these people for Christ within their structures?"
In his Pastoral letters, Paul urges Christians to pray for "kings and rulers and those in authority" for the worthy motive that people may live in peace, which he considers "good and acceptable in the sight of God" (1 Timothy 2:2-3). Paul tells Titus that civil powers should be obeyed (Titus 3:1). On another social level we find references to the structured family, which Paul recognized when he gave rules for governing the home (1 Timothy 3:4-5, 12) and rules for husband/wife relationships (Titus 2:5). Paul recognizes the responsibilities of master and servant as a two-way process and a religious duty (1 Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:9-19).
In maintaining community peace, Paul recognized the useful function of law as a controlling force: "The law is good, if a man use it lawfully" (1 Timothy 1:8). He also recognized that societies tended to be stratified and that people from each stratum had responsibilities to maintain the balance of society. Those in the favored groups were especially expected to help the less fortunate. The very fact that an individual was rich rendered that person responsible for community service (1 Timothy 6:17-18). Paul's reasoning on the classification of widows due for hospitality in the church shows his awareness of social stratification and responsibility (1 Timothy 5).
In 2 Timothy, Paul uses a series of allegories grounded in the social groupings of his day. He recognizes the rules for the life and training of the soldier (2 Timothy 2:4), and the athlete (v. 5) and the patterns of cultivating and harvesting used by the farmer (v. 6). Such allusions make it clear that, for Paul, religion is clearly not isolated from life but operates within the world of human culture.
This piecture emerges from the Pastorals:
- Within the church -- One is to preach the word and when necessary to reprove and rebuke (2 Timothy 4:2).
- Outside the church -- One is to "do the work of an evangelist and make a full proof of his ministry" (2 Timothy 4:5), as Paul said of himself "that the Gentiles might hear" (4:17). To equip oneself for this role one is to form fixed habits of prayer (2 Timothy 2:1) and Scripture study (2 Timothy 3:14-15). While the Christians are not to embroil themselves in worldliness, they still have to live the Christian life "in this present world" (Titus 2:12).
What then is the will of God for missionaries within the structure of the society He sends them to evangelize? As Christ was sent "into the world," so He sends His servant "into the world" (John 17:16). The question then is: To what extent should the missionaries identify themselves and how should they identify themselves? Should they change the culture patterns or win those structures for Christ? Are they there primarily to establish Western denominational organizations or to help an indigenous Church to emerge within their own way of life?
If these are valid questions, then every missionary needs training in anthropology, especially those aspects of anthropology which involve family and other social structures and inter-personal relationships.
Louis Luzbetak speaks of cultural relevancy as "an important apostolic principle." A full understanding of the cultural context is necessary because -- wittingly or unwittingly -- the missionary is an agent of culture change. Anthropological understanding is necessary for the spiritual guidance and social action of the missionary. Luzbetak attacks the idea that anthropology is merely a side branch of missionary training. He insists that it is "an essential aspect of missionary formation." A missionary without a good knowledge of the cultural context, says Luzbetak, is a dangerous "expert."
The negative or corrective value of anthropology
Missionary work is always set within specific cultural contexts. Those contexts are different for each missionary. So, here's the basic question: What has anthropology to say to missionaries at work in cross-cultural situations?
Firstly, the study of cultural anthropology is corrective to bad policy. Sadly, missionaries -- despite spiritual enthusiasm and worthy purposes -- have at times made tragic mistakes. Sometimes, by winning one convert, they have turned the remainder of the whole village against them. Eugene Nida's classic book Customs and Cultures highlights this problem.
There are five ways in which poor missionary technique can hinder the work of the Holy Spirit ( putting out the Spirit's fire as Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:19). Each hindering mistake would be worth a whole chapter in itself. Put together, they would make a discouraging volume.
- 1. Mistakes of misunderstanding
- Mistakes of misunderstanding are caused through ignorance of customs and through treating people of another culture as if you are dealing with Westerners at home. Value patterns, courtesies and discourtesies, orientation to life, attitudes to work and personal relationships, felt needs and the meanings of our idioms vary so much from culture to culture that, until we really know each other, we are liable to make mistakes of misunderstanding.
There is a well-known story of 19th century British administrators in Ghana whose ignorance about and attitude toward a golden stool led to a series of wars. The ramifications of this historical event were applied to Christian mission by Methodist missionary Edwin Smith.
Smith believed that the form in which Christianity was expressed in any culture should be appropriate to that culture, and he opposed the belief that traditional customs were necessarily wrong. It distressed him that so many believed that one could not be both Christian and African. He was quite aware that foreign features could be accepted and adapted by Africans, but he was adamant that Africans should decide what to accept, adapt, or reject.
- 2. Mistakes of offense
- Mistakes of offense spring from different values placed on things and approaches by the missionaries and the people whom they seek to win. The most common mistakes grow out of clashes between missionary individualism and tribal or family collectivism. If an evangelical missionary wins only one convert out of a tribe and thereby builds a barrier of the whole tribe against him, so that no church can be planted and the lone convert remains as an isolate, the most likely thing is that when the tribe is eventually won to faith in Christ, it will turn to Roman Catholicism or some other denomination because this evangelical missionary gave offense. Thus, a denominational issue is introduced as a permanent schismatic effect. Another cause of offense is a blatant disregard for pagan taboos when people are still pagan.
- 3. Mistakes of causing opposition
- There are mistakes by missionaries which wind up creating active opposition. The pagans are thus not just indifferent to the Gospel but move to being actively hostile. A missionary can cause this by failing to observe the cultural paths of communication, by ignoring community officials -- chief, priest and elders -- or by approaches threatening the solidarity of the group or disregarding indigenous rules of protocol.
- 4. Mistakes of imposition
- A common missionary methodological mistake has been the unneeded imposition of foreign forms and practices, especially denominational patterns. This can include organizational machinery, leadership patterns, worship patterns, foreign ethical values, modes of dress, financial patterns and missionary supervision and controls. Such imposed patterns hinder the emergence of an indigenous church. Once they have been established, it can be well nigh impossible to change over from a dependent mission to a self-reliant church.
Frequently the missionary -- especially after three or four generations of Christian influence -- is blind to these impositions; but many enclosed foreign churches with congregations of 50 to 100 Christians after 100 years of missionary work show the same old story: "killed by foreign imposition."
- 5. Mistakes of void creation
- Finally, there are the mistakes which create voids (Eugene Nida calls them vacuums). This happens when social practices, cultural mechanisms and economic procedures of pre-Christian times are discarded and no functional substitutes have been provided in their place. The resulting unmet social needs -- which were originally met by pre-Christian cultural patterns -- can lead to discontent in the second generation. Many nativistic movements resulting in great loss to the Church have flourished because of such void creation.
I have mentioned five specific types of obstruction to church planting and church growth which can be caused by bad missionary method. The list is by no means exhaustive. Good anthropological training would help missionaries avoid these mistakes.
The positive or directive value of anthropology
Secondly, on the positive side, a knowledge of anthropology has value to the missionary who will make use of it. Let me mention a few:
- Anthropological training helps a person to understand the significance of pattern in a community, how the pattern is composed, what classes of people form the society and how people (individuals and groups) interact and interrelate. This helps one to know how things ought to be done or said in order to gain sympathetic hearing. It is a good thing to know the correct and courteous procedure. How do I give? How do I receive? How do I ask, act, respond, resist, complain, praise or interact without offense? To do and say things with the correct procedure is half the battle in gaining rapport.
If individuals enter into a missionary situation as foreigners, as a representatives of a Church from the West, and do things in the Western fashion, they are seen as agents of the West itself with all its unhappy attributes and all its questionable history. If, on the other hand, missionaries adapt to their target people and operate through their culture patterns, the form and procedure of the church they plant will likely be more indigenous than Western. To approach the people we seek to win for Christ within procedural patterns that are theirs and not ours is one of the positive things anthropology has to show us. The first step in identification is to accept as many indigenous forms and procedures as can legitimately be retained as Christian.
- What are the indigenous methods and mechanisms for the communication of ideas? What is the approved decision-making body? How is an issue for major decision presented to the tribe, group, family or whatever unit is the decision-making body? What characters have been institutionalized within the society for this role of communication? Are there traditional heralds, mediators, orators, or spokespersons through whom a case is presented, or may individuals speak for themselves? How is a new message traditionally presented? Does one go first to the chief of the tribe or the head of the household? Or does one call together the whole group for a public meeting? What kind of a council exists for decision-making? Who has the right to admit a person to the community so that he can communicate at all?
These are particularly important questions for new missionary ventures into tribal or hamlet societies, thousands of which are open for evangelization today. If you communicate through the normal channels, people know what is being done and can concentrate on the message or matter presented for decision. If you do not do this, you can become an obstruction as a person. You will be regarded with suspicion and public feeling will be weighted against the acceptance of your requests.
- Proficiency in the language
- Anthropology would also indicate the need for missionary proficiency in the language of the people for effective communication. This is necessary for:
- The communication of the Gospel to the individual in conversion
- The translation of Scripture
- The effective conduct of Christian worship
- The regular instruction of the new convert in the faith, for composition of hymns, catechisms or other aids.
In all these cases theological concepts have to be expressed with the possibility that the faith of future generations will be adversely influenced by the selection of unfortunate terms. Missionaries have to become so thoroughly proficient in the relation of custom and language that they do not wind up building up some heresy for their successors. The selection of the word for God or the term for the Three Persons of the Trinity can lead one into polytheism, or the terminology used for Holy Communion may have pagan overtones. It is not good enough to allow some other person to do one's translation. If a person is to be a missionary, he or she is obliged to see that the communication is effective. The matter of meaning is extremely complex when we start to investigate it.
Anthropology has explored both the areas of linguistics and the relation between language and culture (ethnolinguistics) and these resources are available for the missionary.
- In the study of innovation as the dynamics of culture change, anthropology has taught us much which has bearing on conversion. Why do people change their traditional religion? Do they accept the new religion with the same meanings as those intended by the advocates? What are the motivations for such decisions? What factors suggest that people are ready for large scale innovation change -- or in other words are "ripe for conversion"? This branch of theory and research has much to give the missionary. It is an area opened up by Barnett's researches on innovation which made use of some conversion data.
- Quite apart from these basic concepts which are relevant to missionaries and help them understand the processes being used by the Holy Spirit, there is a tremendous wealth of methodology which anthropology has made available in our day. These include: techniques for observing and recording data, resources for study (including many fine surveys), documented material on the meaning of change and behavior, classified knowledge of whole culture patterns, devices to aid the learning and exploration of foreign languages, and mechanical aids for communication, both individual and group.
The anthropologist and missionary are not the same. The former observes and records culture change; the latter tries to channel it in a specific direction. Anthropology is no substitute for the Christian mission, because it only asks why; it does not do (though it might suggest what to do). It does, however, offer tremendous resources, methods and information to consecrated missionaries in their church planting and building up of converts in the new faith.
Anthropology has a great reflex value for missionaries. It widens their outlook and knowledge. It opens new horizons of biblical understanding, and reveals Christ for who He is -- our Universal Contemporary, bigger than the Graeco-Roman world or Reformation theology, bigger than geography, time or language. Granted, individuals may discover this without anthropology, but anthropology will develop their capacity for it, and help them to recognize the warnings and opportunities of the cross-cultural situation where their missioning is performed.
Howard Culbertson, 5901 NW 81st, Oklahoma
City, OK 73132 | Phone: 405-740-4149 - Fax:
Copyright © 2002 - Last Updated: January 20, 2015 | URL: http://home.snu.edu/~hculbert/negative.htm
You have permission to reprint what you just read. Use it in your ezine, at your web site or in your newsletter. Please include the following footer:
Article by Howard Culbertson. For more original content like this, visit: http://home.snu.edu/~hculbert