Freedom to Change
Jason Clark’s Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship takes aim to expound on the relationship between Evangelicalism and Capitalism that Bebbington alludes to in his work Evangelicalism in Modern Britain. Clark’s main argument is that the doctrine of assurance arose to address inner anxieties but created new anxieties with the emergence of capitalism. The doctrine of providence was added to assuage these new anxieties.[1] Similar to Bebbington’s work, Clark seems to make clear that movements in Evangelicalism arose in response to social pressures and anxieties.[2] While many of these movements were meant to shield Christians from outside forces (like capitalism), they both benefitted from, were ingrained in, and held hostage by capitalism as well.[3] Through both works, what I found most interesting was the overarching theme that Evangelicalism, while it was constant through Bebbington’s quadrilateral, morphed with cultural and societal shifts. This was fascinating to me on two fronts. First on a macro level, understanding the shifts in Evangelicalism should open up evangelicals to the importance of contextualization of the gospel. Second, on a personal level, Evangelicalism’s relationship with Capitalism seems to mirror my own relationship with Evangelicalism.
Contextualization
It seems that Evangelicals often view their beliefs as unchanged, eternal truths, that are neutrally and objectively extracted from the scriptures. It stands to note that not only is the entire premise for Bebbington’s book that Evangelicalism has “altered enormously over time in response to the changing assumptions of Western civilization”[4], but that even the essence of modern fundamentalism, the Reformation, was in fact itself a product of the Enlightenment.[5] Far from being a tragedy, I found Bebbington’s work in tracing the changes in Evangelicalism to be freeing. As a Chinese-American Christian who grew up and worked in a Chinese heritage church context, the tension of culturally impacted Christianity permeated my work and identity. Often, it was in the form of my conservative evangelical seminary professors and classmates extending their opinion that the way Chinese heritage churches practiced religion was unbiblical. This perhaps took shape most commonly and memorably in the chastising of how honor/shame dynamics played out in Chinese heritage churches. Their opinions only held power because of their belief that Western expressions of faith and theology were unfettered from cultural and societal influences. As a result, they missed the importance of contextualizing the gospel. In his book One Gospel for All Nations, Jackson Wu contends that “although the word ‘contextualization is recent… its practice and reality have always been present as essential to the Christian faith.”[6] The gospel, even as Jesus or Paul presented it, was wrought with cultural references, spoke to societal norms, and used known relational dynamics. Knowing that, it makes a statement from Enoch Wan more palatable: “The message of the Gospel within the Chinese cultural context should be characterized by the emphasis on honor, relationship, and harmony, which are at the core of traditional Chinese cultural values. It should be different from [traditional Western theology’s overemphasis on the forensic nature of the Gospel, the legal dimension of Christ’s penal substitution and divine satisfaction.”[7] There is profit (kingdom profit) in contextualizing the gospel, not to necessarily capitulate to cultural norms, but to elevate kingdom truths in them.
Personal Reflection
Reading Jason Clark’s work on the relationship between Evangelicalism and Capitalism was at first (and to a degree still) confusing. The relationship seems characterized by a certain level of chaotic subtlety that borders on what “frenemies” might feel like. There is some level of disdain, mutual benefit, and incorporation between the two. Perhaps most telling were Clark’s string of observations that “new forms of emerging church ecclesiology and post-ecclesial moments as an attempt to help Christians hold onto identity amidst new pressures of social dissolution, whilst at the same time being captive to the logic of the market opportunities and resources used by those forms.”[8]. Even in its attempt to separate from capitalism, evangelicalism was not only benefitting from, but used capitalistic ideas and logic. I find similarities in my own relationship to Evangelicalism. I have benefitted from and much of my identity is and life position has been tied to evangelical ideals and institutions. And yet, Evangelicalism has brought on tensions and anxieties that have led me to criticize it and distance myself from it. In the words of Soong Chan Rah, “I have increased in my sense of frustration with the cultural [Western and white] captivity of the church… I long to see what immeasurably more God is able to do in the North American evangelical church.”[9] The only way to see that, is to read and understand works like Bebbington’s and Clark’s and know that Evangelicalism, Christianity and faith as we see and know it, has always been and will always be influenced by culture and society. The key to a better future for the church is accepting that and using it to further truth of the gospel rather than stagnate it.
[1] Jason Clark, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship” (Faculty Publications, Portland Seminary, 2018), 49
[2] David W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (Taylor and Francis, 2003), 19
[3] Clark, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism”, 78.
[4] Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain, 19.
[5] Ibid, 52
[6] Jackson Wu, One Gospel for All Nations : a Practical Approach to Biblical Contextualization (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 2015), 2.
[7] Jackson Wu and E. Randolph Richards, Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes : Honor and Shame in Paul’s Message and Mission (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2019), 11.
[8] Clark, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism”, 78.
[9] Soong-Chan Rah and Cindy Kiple, The Next Evangelicalism : Releasing the Church from Western Cultural Captivity (Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2009), 16.
About the Author
Caleb Lu
12 responses to “Freedom to Change”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hey Caleb,
Your post brought to mind much of what the late Native American theologian Richard Twiss wrote about in his book “Rescuing the Gospel from the Cowboys.” In this work he contents that instead of attempting to find a pure-theology, free from the entanglement of culture, often simply assumes a “western” view of theology. Instead, a more syncretistic approach to theology and culture is the way to go. I agree with Twiss, and with you about the need to not avoid contextualization, but rather embrace it and see that this is how the Gospel is advanced. After all, Evangelicalism is enculturated by capitalism. So Evangelicalism cannot claim to be a pure “straight from the Bible” tradition.
I’m fascinated by what you brought up in regards to “honor/shame” being a greater theme in hearing the Gospel for Chinese cultural values. Can you share more about how one communicates the Gospel in this way? So, if you were preaching a sermon or having coffee with a friend who is curious about the Gospel, what are a couple of lines you would say?
Richard Twiss’ book is really helpful, I might even say it was a “concept threshold” book for me. I figured I quoted from it enough in previous posts. Both Jackson Wu and Richard Twiss pull heavily from Scot McKnight as well.
I think one of the most simple ways the gospel relates to honor/shame is that the relationship dynamic of honor/shame captures a relational aspect that the Western frame of guilt/innocence doesn’t capture. Similarly then, there are communal implications of sin and salvation that don’t always come out in the more individualistic Western view.
Caleb,
It is definitely true that Christianity has always been and always will be influenced by culture and society. There is no getting around that. In some cases, I think it has done a disservice to the people it has tried to reach. I am thinking specifically of the Native Americans right now and the gospel message they have been presented with over the years. Being aware of that I think is essential in getting beyond it to overcoming it.
Tonette, thanks for the comment. I appreciate how you always bring to light the view of the community you live in. Like David mentioned, I have appreciated both Richard Twiss and George Fox’s own Randy Woodley in bringing to light the fraught history and relationship between evangelism/Christianity and Native American communities. I also appreciate how they have recognized them and as a result begun to move forward as you mention. If you don’t mind, would you expand on what the gospel being presented has been and why it has been a disservice in the eyes and experience of the community you live in?
Caleb,
Great question. I think the disparity lies in the prejudice of those carrying the gospel message, in the evangelists themselves. They profess on message but with their actions and their words they give another message to the Choctaws. The two messages don’t line up. That’s the problem.
That’s helpful Tonette, and heartbreaking. Thank you for sharing.
Awesome post, Caleb. Really well done and informative. “Even in its attempt to separate from capitalism, evangelicalism was not only benefitting from, but used capitalistic ideas and logic.” I can relate to this too. Capitalism appears to be necessary in our society but where is the line in which we are to be content – yet still live, provide, and push the kingdom forward? How do we discern and avoid tension? Maybe the line is a moving target?
Thank you.
Michael, thanks for your encouraging words and thoughtful questions! Man, I wish I knew the answers. I think what’s important is to keep asking them and in many ways learn from living in that tension. It’s definitely helpful for me to remember that we live in a world and life affected by sin. As we do our part in considering how to constantly live more aligned with Jesus, I’m confident that he continues to carry the burden of working in, around, and despite us.
Hi Caleb
Thank you for brining out and naming the sin of modern evangelicalism (fundamentalism?) regard their perspectives are the timeless truths gleaned unfiltered from the Bible. While this can be a persuasive position to hold, it does overlook the interesting complexity that a contextualized gospel brings to each culture that is working out the truth of Jesus for their moment and location. As you beautifully wrote, “The key to a better future for the church is accepting that and using it to further truth of the gospel rather than stagnate it.”
Caleb, Thank you so much for your thoughtful and thought-provoking post. I really appreciate your insights. I was struck by the way you framed contextualization of the gospel, saying, “There is profit (kingdom profit) in contextualizing the gospel, not to necessarily capitulate to cultural norms, but to elevate kingdom truths in them.” You create a positive challenge for us through this lens of understanding contextualization.
Also, thank you for sharing your personal experience with Evangelicalism. I was struck by your words, “Their opinions only held power because of their belief that Western expressions of faith and theology were unfettered from cultural and societal influences.” That is powerful and makes so much sense. I’m going to continue thinking on this, as I wonder how to communicate the realities and even the importance of contextualizing the gospel to those who don’t agree, and I also wonder where I am failing to see my own beliefs clearly.
Thank you, Caleb. I so appreciate your writing.
Wow! Caleb…..
If you have time to answer…. How do you believe that we can we use cultural and societal influences to further the truth of the gospel?
Wow! Caleb….. amazing post again!
How do you believe that we can we use cultural and societal influences to further the truth of the gospel? Whats the first step?