I will be writing a paper based on H. Richard Niebuhr's Christ & Culture this quarter. Niebuhr present five categories for the ways in which Christians choose to interact with culture. Chapter one has some interesting thoughts about the definition of both "Christ" and "culture."
Niebuhr's basic thesis is that Christ is understood best in his relationship to God. Many focus on one of Jesus' virtues at the expense of others. The prime examples that Niebuhr discusses are love, hope, obedience, faith, and humility. Niebuhr insists that although all of these virtues help us to understand Jesus, "each is intelligible in its apparent radicalism only as a relation to God." (p.27) Jesus may be known for his great love, for example, but what is the focus of that love? Above all else, it is focused on God. It is only from that relationship that his love extends out to humankind (not to mention the rest of creation).
Niebuhr's characterization of culture is something I'll have to think over some more. Basically, he says that culture is:
- always social (individuals cannot be a culture unto themselves)
- a human achievement (it's not a natural phenomenon, it's something we create)
- concerned with values that are chiefly intended to enhance our own well-being
- focused on the "temporal and material realization of values." (p.36)
- "concerned with the conservation of values" (p.37)
- pluralistic (in any setting there will be a variety of individuals with their own unique set of values)
Any thoughts?
Humans are created as social beings. We crave group contact with others like us. I believe that culture is a result of those social groupings. As we are created in God's image, our original desire for social groupings and culture is God given. Because of the fall, everything people are involved in is tainted by our sin. Culture is not inherently sinful, but as a reflection of ourselves, it can be. The early church in Acts is an example of a culture that was not focused on their own well-being, and I belive, directed by God.
Posted by: Deborah | October 09, 2005 at 10:01 AM
#3 isn't necessarily talking about the well-being of the individual. As the early church took up the practice of sharing everything, they did so for the well-being of their community, right?
I agree that culture is a God-given thing. Here's a quote from Niebuhr:
"...culture is itself a divine requirement. As created and ordered by God, man must achieve what has not been given him; in obedience to God he must seek many values." (p.118)
Posted by: Bill | October 11, 2005 at 03:39 AM
Neibuhr set up a false dichotomy...
Posted by: tony | October 11, 2005 at 08:57 AM
Care to elaborate? Do you mean that we can't talk about an interaction between Christ (or Christianity) and culture at all? Are you saying that Niebuhr's typology is completely useless?
Posted by: Bill | October 11, 2005 at 01:00 PM
Bill, Mark Lau Branson said in class yesterday "Christ is ahead of Culture, we just have to discover what is going on" I like that.
Posted by: Kyle | October 11, 2005 at 03:39 PM