Editor’s note: While the writer specifically deals with the Seventh-day Adventist Church and its culture, other readers may find it challenging to ask themselves, How is my church shaping the culture in which we live?
Church and culture have always been in a complex relationship.1 The church of today is faced with the influence of the contemporary religious culture of openness to anything transcendent and even mythological.2 In every era, church and culture have had a specific relationship that determined the scope and intensity of the church’s strength and mission as well as its limits of contextualization.
Although there are many issues concerning this relationship, this article will deal with only two specific, basic questions: First, the question between the values of the church and the values of a specific culture arises out of the dilemma of the specific postures Christians adopt in a particular cultural setting. Therefore, in the first part, I will present types of relationships between church and culture. Second, the strategy of the possible shaping of culture in a general and specific sense will be offered. We may need to rediscover what this shaping includes and broaden our spiritual and missionary horizons.
Types of relationships between church and culture
Andy Crouch presents four types of Christian responses.3
1. Condemning culture. There are some issues in society and culture that are totally contrary to the spirit of the gospel, such as violence, pornography, discrimination, and pollution of the environment. The proper gesture towards these violations of the spirit of Christian faith would be total rejection or condemnation.
2. Critiquing culture. According to Crouch, an example of critiquing can be found concerning the fine arts. The arts are not evil in themselves, but films and the theater can present some values that have to be evaluated and critiqued from the Christian perspective.
3. Consuming culture. There are some cultural goods that we as Christians just consume, such as bakery products or clothes of a certain mode, without thinking about their specific value in the spiritual sense.
4. Copying culture. The architecture of Christian worship places or even music, borrowed from a particular culture, and, infused with Christian content, represent some examples of copying the specific culture in which Christians live and communicate.4 Throughout its long and difficult history, the church assumed one or more of these gestures toward culture; but it seems that, for the most part, it adopted some kind of combination of all four types of relationship relating. The church always struggles with the limits of its appropriation of specific cultural trends, namely contextualization.
Sociologist Christian Smith speaks about the relationship between involvement in culture and personal identity in evangelicalism in the United States, and affirms that “the evangelical subculture flourishes because it is both distinct from and engaged with wider society, without being genuinely countercultural.” The strongest sense of identity, concludes Smith, is found in those movements that present the particular group as “being persecuted, yet not so persecuted that they are completely removed from wider society. . . . [T]his distinction-with-engagement is the most effective way to maintain religious vitality.”5
In discussing these gestures of Christians toward specific cultures and this distinction with-engagement stance, the question of identifying the specific Adventist perspective on this issue becomes pertinent.
Specificity of the Adventist perspective
We might move towards a general Adventist perspective on culture from different viewpoints. My goal here, however, is to try to apply the previous discussion to the types of responses prevalent in the Adventist setting.
It seems to me that in its history, the church had a tendency to condemn, or at least criticize, various cultural issues that were situated in direct opposition to the spirit of the gospel as revealed by the totality of the Bible. For example, Adventists always condemned violence, war, liberal views of sexuality, liquor consumption, etc.6 They, perhaps, just criticized racial discrimination and slavery. I use criticize in a moderate sense rather than condemn because I am not sure that Adventists were always aware of the necessity of involvement in particular situations of, for example, the Civil War in the United States or the abolition movement or the Second World War in Europe and Asia.
Consuming was and is moderate in Adventist circles. We make use of this world but moderately and cautiously. All neutral cultural trends, like the media for example, are used, but there are still some limitations on their usefulness in the Adventist perspective and mission.
Copying is almost totally rejected as a viable posture towards culture by conservative and mainstream Adventism. Since the Bible is the rule of teachings for life, usually the Adventist faith does not make any compromise concerning non-biblical values or features present in society whether religious or not. Perhaps in some circles there is a tendency to copy the inclination towards the praise-and-worship movement, including the use of the rock genre.7 However, this is not the general tendency of the Adventist movement.
Concerning the distinction-with-engagement sociological model of evangelical response to a particular culture, if this engagement is not understood as typical compromise but rather as involvement, participation, and contribution in wider societal issues, we can notice that Adventists are not always very strong in this kind of sharing. An element of distinction is usually preserved but an active engagement in the culture in the evangelical sense of shaping the culture on both a personal and official level is very uncommon and infrequent. This calls for further clarification.
Preaching the gospel and/or shaping the culture
The Adventist Church, in its spiritual and theological background, was never involved in cultural or political policy making and copying the cultural setting or religious culture. The purpose of Adventist existence was always to preach Christ and His gospel of truth as revealed in the Scriptures with specific emphasis on the three angels’ messages. This was frontal and provocative.8
However, with its health message, promulgation of religious tolerance, involvement in humanitarian work, and occasional exposure of the injustices in society,9 Adventism contributed and still contributes to shaping culture through institutional means. Present engagement of this kind has unfortunately become more dilute as compared to the force evidenced by the pioneers of Adventism.10
Furthermore, speaking about involvement in today’s culture, I do not want to speak here about official institutional involvements such as those of the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), hospitals, or the work in the area of religious liberty. These branches of Adventist institutional presence are valuable tools for reaching both the unchurched and religious people.
My intention includes speaking about the participation and active promulgation of faith in a cultural sense through the personal involvement of every member and not just through direct preaching. It seems to me that there exists an unhealthy division between distinction on the personal level and moderate engagement on the official level. We need to speak up about personal engagement in shaping contemporary culture. Why is this necessary and how is this possible?
First, obviously the doors for direct preaching of the gospel are becoming increasingly closed due to outward cultural, and also ecumenical, pressure. Evangelism has many different models, of course, but generally speaking, this world slowly descends into spiritual and political chaos when no one will be able to spread the values of God’s kingdom in conventional ways. This calls for an urgency in preaching. However, due to this closure towards traditional preaching, we should think more and more about evangelism as shaping the culture in which we live. Shaping the culture is the goal obtained through many specific, practical methods.11 In the context of this article, I would like to emphasize one approach that may have been forgotten.
Any discussion referring to a model of active participation in shaping the surrounding culture does not require reinvention of the wheel. Some might argue that America has gradually changed from a predominantly secular to religious culture due to the active involvement of evangelicals and recent Catholic influences. In his recent book, Faith in the Halls of Power: How Evangelicals Joined the American Elite,12 D. Michael Lindsay points out several important areas of evangelical and/or Catholic influence, namely, education, news media, politics, and popular culture. The book includes personal interviews with very influential political leaders, writers, actors, or clergy who reveal their Christian identity and have a particular mission to spread Christian values by their vocation.
To me, it seems that Adventism today has, in some circles, struggled to recognize this particular approach or model. The model is simply based on personal active missionary work, not always on the direct preaching of the gospel, but rather the application of personal and official influence through specific vocations, talents, and gifts we have as Christians. This entails that we all have different vocations that have to be used, not merely for personal gain, but as a tool or means of spreading the good news and biblical values. Shaping culture would be, therefore, a conscious effort in the spreading of our values by specific profession or career.
For example, I know of an Adventist craftsman in Belgrade, Serbia, who was very effective in spreading the values of Christ’s kingdom. Whenever he was in contact with his customers, he proved to them that his service and work would be perfect—without delays, financial fraud, or irresponsible excuses. He had so many friends that he was not able to cope with their spiritual thirst. This man was simply undertaking his job faithfully and diligently while considering his vocation as a tool for spreading the values of Christ’s kingdom. The results were positive.
We need to advance in everything we perform to the point of perfection, not because we have specific career targets or financial gains in mind, but because we love the Lord and the people of the specific culture in which we live, despite the fact that we do not live according to their standards. This shapes culture through a personal, spiritual vocation based on a certain determination regarding our own specific vocations. And this path of distinction with engagement was always the most difficult course in Christian history.
This calls not only for the necessary contextualization of our faith in our institutional or personal evangelism. The emphasis is also on spreading the values of Christ’s kingdom through devoted, diligent, and faithful service within the framework of our relationships at our places of work. Joseph and Moses served at the court of Egypt, and Daniel at the court of Babylon as administrators or military experts; and by this faithful service, they gained significant influence even on the kings themselves.13 Such work allowed for the spreading of the values of Christ’s kingdom.
For this reason, we, as pastors, teachers, and administrators, first need to educate ourselves and our members, especially young people, not just to pursue their careers in order to achieve personal financial gain but to be actively involved in spreading the values of the kingdom of God. This method of shaping today’s culture will be much more effective than any based on the power assumed through the combination of religious tradition and human wisdom or philosophy. We not only need to be spiritual beings, but political or relational beings as well,14 actively involved in shaping the structure of society with talents and gifts that are colored by the traditional values we have as the Adventist Church.
If we are reluctant to participate and contribute to today’s culture by our vocations, we will be far behind those who advance in this spiritualistic and ecumenical age. The Lord calls us to go outside of our churches and comfort zones and use every gift we have received for His influence in the specific culture in which we live. May God open our eyes to see that our whole being, with our professions, needs to be put on His altar and to indeed follow Christ in His course of distinction with engagement.
1. Paul Tillich, “The Church and Contemporary Culture,” World
Christian Education (Second quarter 1956): 41–43. Tillich
speaks about the dangers of complete division on the one
side and complete blending on the other side between
church and culture.
2. See my article about post-postmodernism, “Understanding
and Relating to the New Worldview,” Ministry 80 (June
2008): 22–24..
3. Andy Crouch, “Creating Culture,” Christianity Today,
September 2008, 25–29. This article is an adaptation from
Crouch’s book Culture Making.
4. I bid., 26.
5. Christian Smith, quoted in D. Michael Lindsay, Faith in the
Halls of Power: How Evangelicals Joined the American Elite
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 122, 123.
6. Ellen G. White condemns liquor consumption, calling it
unrighteous, dishonest, and violent. “Drunkenness, rioting,
violence, crime, murder, come as the result of man selling
his reason,” she writes (Temperance [Mountain View, CA:
Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1949], 30).
7. Dr. Eurydice “Osterman sums up the 30 year (1972–2002)
[battle over a suitable worship style in Adventism] well by
informing us that: ‘As rock music became harder and forced
its way into the church, the problems that it engendered
escalated and got out of control, dividing the church into
groups that were for it and those that were against it. Some
pastors and other church leaders even began to support the
new music because it made them popular with the youth.’ ”
Eurydice Osterman, email to David Qualls, September 22,
2003, quoted in David Qualls, “Adventism’s Thirty-Years
Worship War: Will the New Church Guidelines on Music
Bring Harmony?” http://www.greatcontroversy.org/
reportandreview/qua-musicguidelines-an.php3 (accessed
January 14, 2010).
8. When I say “provocative” I mean scandalous in the positive
sense of provoking the false certainty of human existence.
9. For example, Ellen G. White speaks about the injustices of
the rich toward the poor. A broader context for her appeal
always includes Christ’s work of regeneration as the only
remedy for such injustices. She says, “Their work was to
persuade men to be reconciled to God. In this work lay their
power to bless humanity. The only remedy for the sins and
sorrows of men is Christ. The gospel of his grace alone can
cure the evils that curse society. The injustice of the rich
toward the poor, the hatred of the poor toward the rich, alike
have their root in selfishness, and this can be eradicated only
through submission to Christ. He alone, for the selfish heart
of sin gives the new heart of love. Let the servants of Christ
preach the gospel with the Spirit sent down from heaven,
and work as he did for the benefit of men. Then such results
will be manifest, in the blessing and uplifting of mankind,
as are wholly impossible of accomplishment by human
power” (“Gain That Is Loss,” The Watchman, September 15,
1908; emphasis added).
10. It is hard to find a concept of shaping the culture within
the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, but, as already
mentioned, this distinction-with-engagement model was
definitely manifested in Ellen White’s attitude toward the
culture of her times.
11. As already mentioned, except, perhaps, with evangelism,
shaping culture is based on humanitarian, educational,
medical, and community services through which we
influence the culture in which we live.
12. D. Michael Lindsay, Faith in the Halls of Power (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2007).
13. For an example, see the experience of Joseph (Genesis
39:23).
14. Aristotle spoke about zÃ…Âon politikon as a “political animal”
or being. Every human being, as long as he or she is
involved in society, is a political being in the positive sense
of contribution to the shaping of culture.
