Theology of Culture in a Japanese Context

A Believers’ Church Perspective

Atsuyoshi Fujiwara

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN:
  9781606088630
  9781498254182
• eBook ISBN:
  9781630876470
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

The Christian faith has always stood in a place of tension between its transcendent nature and the surrounding culture. On the one hand, Christian faith claims to originate in the revelation of God, which transforms culture itself. On the other hand, all such revelation is inevitably received and interpreted by humans in concrete situations. It is no exaggeration to say that two millennia of church history have continually demonstrated the struggle between Christian faith and culture. In an effort to address this struggle, this book explores relevant issues pertinent to the relationship between faith and culture in the particular context of Japan. In this unique work, the context of Japan, well known as a desolate swamp for Christian missions, provides the setting for a re-exploration of issues pertaining to theology of culture. As such, Japan provides both a concrete and challenging context to work out a theology of culture. This book also helpfully illuminates for Western readers some key problems that may not have appeared fully in their contexts yet but will do so as the post-Christendom era continues.

1

H. Richard Niebuhr

The Transformational Approach

I. Introduction

From the earliest stages of his academic life, H. Richard Niebuhr concerned himself with the relation of Christian faith and culture in history. His doctoral thesis at Yale was on Ernst Troeltsch.1 Troeltsch, sometimes considered “the first 21st century theologian,”2 addressed the problem of Christianity’s claim to absolute truth—both in relation to other religions and philosophies in the world and in relation to the relativity of Christian churches throughout history.3 His history of religion approach eventually led Troeltsch into accepting religious pluralism.4 According to Troeltsch, all humans are historically conditioned and so are the various religions and churches.

Troeltsch exerted a significant influence on Niebuhr. While rejecting Troeltsch’s pluralistic approach, which gave up on the uniqueness of God revealed in Christ, Niebuhr valued Troeltsch’s critical historical studies and accepted the relativism of all human endeavor, concluding that no historical church can claim absoluteness. Niebuhr intended his fourth and most famous work, Christ and Culture (henceforth C&C), to be a supplement and correction of Troeltsch’s The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches from the viewpoint of “theological and theo-centric relativism.”5

In his first book, The Social Sources of Denominationalism (1929), Niebuhr had explored how religion and culture are related in American Christianity. He had employed socio-economic analysis to inquire into why American Christianity had divided into so many denominations and sects. He observed that the churches split more because of different economic, educational, ethnic, and class backgrounds than because of theological disagreements. He found a historical, sociological, and ethical approach more fruitful in revealing differences between Christian denominations and sects than a doctrinal approach.6

The emphasis of The Social Sources of Denominationalism had centered exclusively on how culture shaped Christianity, but it did nothing to throw light on how Christian faith, which is essential in Christianity, shaped culture.7 Niebuhr’s deep dissatisfaction with the limited scope of his own work led him to a further study, The Kingdom of God in America (1937). Here he analyzed leading forces molding the Christian movement in American culture. In this work we can already see his preference for transforming faith, which later would become a core concept in his Christ-and-culture inquiry. In The Meaning of Revelation (1941) Niebuhr tackled the problem of “the relations of the relative and the absolute in history.”8 While acknowledging the legitimacy of Troeltsch’s historical research and relativism, Niebuhr found it unavoidably destructive to Christian faith. Niebuhr sought to combine Troeltsch’s approach with the constructive work of Karl Barth. In both Kingdom and Meaning he suggests a “conversion” approach.9

Niebuhr’s Radical Monotheism and Western Culture (1960) was published after Christ and Culture (1951), which will be discussed below.10 Again, Niebuhr analyses Christianity from a historical and socio-religious perspective, comparing and contrasting polytheism, henotheism, and radical monotheism. Niebuhr values radical monotheism for its unrelenting potential to reform the church and the world. After his sudden death in 1962, his son Richard R. Niebuhr and James Gustafson published The Responsible Self (1963) in which Niebuhr is quoted as saying, “Responsibility affirms: ‘God is acting in all actions upon you. So respond to all actions upon you as to respond to his action.’”11 Gustafson tells us that responsibility was “the most memorable theme in his [Niebuhr’s] course of lectures on Christian ethics” for most of his students.12 God is acting in history, establishing His kingdom; we are to respond to what God is doing in history with all our being.

Thus, Niebuhr’s main concerns lay in the relationship between the Church and the world, the relationship of the relative and the absolute, and a responsible ethic of the whole person to God. All of these are always to be thought out and worked out historically. Christian response to the world should be personal response to what the sovereign God is doing in a particular situation. Although such human responses in history are relative, the absolute God revealed Himself in Jesus Christ and through Christian communities guided by the Holy Spirit. Niebuhr’s understanding of Christian faith in the world is most explicitly spelled out in C&C, on which we now focus.

II. Christ and Culture

The Church has wrestled with the relationship between faith and culture since its inception. Niebuhr calls this relationship an “enduring problem” and asserts that the essential problem is not Christianity and culture but Christ and culture. Christ is absolute, but Christianity is relative. Christianity can never be considered absolute because it constantly “moves between the poles of Christ and culture.”13 After defining both Christ and culture Niebuhr presents five types of Christian response to this problem. We will examine each type, and then discuss Niebuhr’s significant contributions with respect to theocentric relativism, culture, Christ, and transformation.

A. Two Extremes

1. Christ against Culture: The Exclusivist Approach

The first approach emphasizes the absolute authority of Christ and uncompromisingly rejects loyalty to culture because culture is fallen. The conflict between Christ and culture is conspicuous in this ‘either-or’ position. “Whatever does not belong to the commonwealth of Christ is under the rule of evil.”14

Niebuhr values this radical approach for three reasons: it is rightfully drawn from the Lordship of Christ; it is a typical early Christian attitude; and it provides a balancing function to the other four Christian approaches—just as Romans 13 (on submitting to earthly authorities) is balanced by 1 John (on the antithesis between Christ and “the world”).15 When one recognizes Christ’s radical authority, this exclusive answer is inevitable; without this perspective, Christianity loses its essential aspect.

Although Christ-against-culture is an inevitable Christian answer, Niebuhr asserts that it is also an inadequate response. First, the radical approach tends to withdraw from society so much that it amounts to a rejection of culture; as a result, it is not directly effective in changing culture.16 Although it prepares the way for reformation in the society and church, a full reformation of society along Kingdom of God lines cannot be achieved by this radical spirit alone. Rather, the transformation of society is carried out by other people who embrace a different conviction over the problem of Christ and culture.

Second, these radical Christians, while ostensibly rejecting culture, make use of and enjoy its benefits.17 The writer of 1 John and Tertullian condemned pagan phil...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• Chapter 1: H. Richard Niebuhr
• Chapter 2: John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas
• Chapter 3: Christianity in Japan 1
• Chapter 4: Christianity in Japan 2
• Chapter 5: Christianity in Japan 3
• Conclusions
• Bibliography