My good friend the Dane thinks those who want to redeem the culture are missing the point. You gotta read this brilliant post to understand why and then read the comments. What he says is a little foreign to my way of thinking and he has a great take on the way that community, culture and ideology interact that I am chewing on. I won't tackle the whole thing here, I'll just reference a couple of comments that are especially relevant:
. . . culture isn't nearly so mysterious a topic as some would have you believe. It's not anything noble or grand. It's not something that moves and breathes. It's not anything like that. Essentially, culture is nothing greater than the natural byproduct of society, or community. When people gather together, the natural reflection of who they are and what they believe is that pile of stuff we call "culture."
And
culture is the environment produced when people in a community interact. So in effect, culture isn't anything tangible at all; it's more the gossamer evidence of who the people in a community are.
He's saying that culture is an effect not a cause. So, trying to "redeem" or change culture is the attempt to change an effect. If we change the community the culture will change, but you can't change a cause by focusing slowly on the effect. In other words wiping the blood away from a gaping wound won't stop the bleeding until you deal with the gaping wound. And, only the gospel can do this.
I think he's right and I don't think he is advocating merely a pietistic withdrawal from the world around us. But if he is right, then this changes alot of what we do in the "redeeming culture" dept.
Thoughts anyone?
Recent Comments