Tuesday, May 1, 2007

The Challenge of Independent Christianity

Posted for Sherry W:

At the end of 2005, I spent several weeks writing a 10,000 word article about the dramatic rise of a new kind of Christianity – sometimes called Independent Christianity – which already makes up 20% of all Christians in the world. I wrote the piece for Dom Bettinelli, who was then editor of the Catholic World Report but in the end, it didn’t get published.

I can’t really see another Catholic magazine publishing a unique 10,000 word piece like this but it incorporates one of a kind information made possible by my unusual background and it seems important that it be published in some venue. So I decided to post it (in several installments!) on ID for your web reading pleasure. Here’s installment number one.

Twenty years ago, as a young evangelical Protestant preparing to become a missionary, I spent some time on the West Bank. One of the things that forcibly strikes anyone who visits that part of the world is how incredibly difficult it is to sort out whose history, whose view of the situation, is real. You could listen to impassioned stories from Palestinians about Israeli atrocities and be utterly convinced that you understood what was happening. Then, all you had to do was hear Israeli horror stories about terrorism and all your certainties crumbled. How could such mutually exclusive understandings of the same recent history co-exist? I was stranded between alternate universes that were hermetically sealed off from one another by diametrically opposed communal narratives.

A few years after returning to the US, I entered the Church. Since then, the mission ad gentes – in both its evangelical and Catholic guises - have remained a kind of private passion and I’ve done my best to keep up with the global missions scene. My current work in lay formation hasn’t called upon my rapidly vanishing knowledge of Arabic but the lessons on negotiating profoundly different worldviews have proved invaluable. I think of myself a bi-cultural Christian. I “speak” both Catholic and evangelical Protestant fluently and spend a lot of time translating concepts and terms from one tradition to the other. Over the years, I have discovered that the biggest gap between these two forms of Christianity is not covered in the classic debates about the authority of Scripture or salvation by faith alone. The biggest gap, the one I still struggle with, is a chasm of imagination.

My missionary past and Catholic present collided when I came across Peter C. Phan’s article “Proclamation of the Reign of God as Mission of the Church: What for, to Whom, by Whom, with Whom, and How?” (www.sedos.org/english/phan.htm). Phan’s title intrigued me and I started to read eagerly, only to be stunned by the first few paragraphs:

But now things have changed, and changed utterly. The change from the enthusiasm and optimism of the World Missionary Conference that met in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1910—whose catchy slogan was "The evangelization of the world in this generation"—to the discouragement and even pessimism in today’s missionary circles, Catholic and Protestant alike, is visible and palpable. . . .To the consternation of Western missionaries, the shout "Missionary, go home" was raised in the 1960s, to be followed a decade later by the demand for a moratorium on Christian missions from the West.

In addition to the political factors, the collapse of mission as we knew it was also caused by the unexpected resurgence of the so-called non-Christian religions, in particular Hinduism and Islam. The missionaries’ rosy predictions of their early demise were vastly premature. Concomitant with this phenomenon is an intense awareness of religious pluralism which advocates several distinct, independent, and equally valid ways to reach the Divine and therefore makes conversion from one religion to another, which was considered as the goal of mission, unnecessary. [emphasis mine]

I was incredulous. I knew that the last word one could use of the Christian missionary enterprise at the beginning of the 21st century was “collapse”. Once more, I was standing on the edge of an unbridgeable chasm of experience that yawned between this prominent American theologian and the world I had known. I couldn’t help but wonder if Peter Phan inhabited the same planet as the evangelicals with whom I had lived and studied. Discouragement? Pessimism? Evangelical missionaries have faced the same historical and cultural realities as Catholics since 1960. But they believe that they have been privileged to be part of the greatest expansion of Christianity in history and are absolutely exuberant about the future of missions.

I was reminded of this again last week when my twin brother told me this story: Last summer he accompanied a team of volunteers from his evangelical church to build a house in an extremely poor Indian village in southern Baja. My brother is an experienced chiropractor who has pioneered new techniques and traveled around the world teaching them. Gary was treating local people when a frail woman was brought in who had suffered from a serious and very painful dislocation of the elbow for 3 years. Gary hesitated. There was no way to obtain an x-ray. Treating such a neglected injury in a woman who was already fragile without proper diagnostic tools is very tricky and he was afraid that he would hurt her. As he struggled to decide what to do, a local Protestant pastor suggested that he pray. Gary did so, asking that the bones align themselves properly.

My brother said that the woman’s arm started to quiver and then, with a loud pop that was heard all over the room, the elbow slipped into place by itself. The woman had full strength almost immediately. The visiting team asked the woman to share her healing with the teen-agers on the trip so that they would know that they could expect great things from God. My brother joyfully summed it up this way: “The whole experience was what church should be like.”

What do you think? Does my brother’s story sound too “out there”, too dramatic or perhaps too presumptuous? If so, I have some folks I’d like you to meet. My brother and the missionaries that I knew in my Protestant days are part of an explosive global movement that most Catholics, even missiologists like Peter Phan, apparently don’t yet know exists. This new kind of Christianity is growing like wildfire, expects signs and wonders to occur on a regular basis, and is “separated from, uninterested in, and independent of historic, denominationalist Christianity” (World Christian Encyclopedia, p. 28).

To be honest, I have both longed and hesitated to write this article. I longed to write it because Catholic ignorance of this emerging form of Christianity is distorting our pastoral and theological discussions. More immediately, millions of Catholics around the world are already part of the movement or are being significantly influenced by its beliefs and practices. I have hesitated because trying to explain this kind of Christianity to conservative Catholics is a bit like trying to describe life on Mars. It is exactly the sort of thing that gives many traditionally minded Catholics hives. All I can ask is what the average Cineplex blockbuster asks of you: the willing suspension of disbelief and the active engagement of your imagination.

Part two tomorrow!

Click here to jump to Part II.

11 Comments:

At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Blogger Fr. Mike, O.P. said...

Anonymous, please, please read the third chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. It is one of many examples from the New Testament of the preaching of the basic message of Christianity (repent of your sins and believe in Jesus Christ) that is occasioned by signs and wonders.

Christ's own preaching was also accompanied by signs and wonders.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Blogger Fr. Mike, O.P. said...

This is not to say that faith (by this, I presume you mean assent to doctrine) and reason (with which I am able to be moved by truth to give a free assent to doctrine) are not important. It's just that God, in His providential desire for our salvation, approaches us through a variety of means.

Nor do I believe that it is necessarily "much easier to align onself with a religion that is not demanding in terms of doctrine or reason, but only in terms of 'conversion,'" for several reasons:

1. Through the use of reason I can justify all kinds of horrific and sinful behavior.

2. I can give assent to doctrine, yet without a life conformed to charity as well, I do not have a faith that justifies (fides formata), but only an intellectual faith (fides informis), according to the Council of Trent. This would be the kind of faith of the Pharisees who opposed Jesus.

3. Conversion is called for by Christ (cf. Mk 1:15), and requires a change of mind, heart, priorities, actions, and attitudes. Conversion - real conversion to Christ - will include a hunger for and an assent to revealed truth, as well as a recognition of some of the limits of human reason when confronted with the Mystery of God.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Blogger Fr. Mike, O.P. said...

On the day of the chrism Mass in Seattle I attended a presentation by John Allen on ten global trends that the Church must be aware of and respond to. One of the trends was the divide between north and south in terms of the way in which we express our faith. He said in the southern part of the globe, Catholics are more likely to be charismatic, expect signs and wonders, and politically be suspicious of a laissez-faire market economy.

Some of the characteristics Sherry will be describing in this article will not be too far from what some of our brother and sister Catholics in the southern hemisphere may expect.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Anonymous Jordan, a 3rd order Dominican said...

Father Mike, I am not the Anonymous who posted above, but you two do not necessarily disagree. Anonymous said "It's not even faith, if one expects signs and wonders ONLY." I believe in miracles, signs and wonders, but a) not ONLY and b) keeping in mind that our Lord said it is a wicked generation who demands signs and wonders.

Also, it is indeed easier to align oneself to a religion that makes no reasonable demands. As a Dominican, you should know that your three points are completely true but do not negate what Anonymous said. He never argued for "Reason Alone" without conversion or without being conformed to charity.

What is to be hoped is that those who are drawn by signs and wonders stay long enough to learn the Splendor of the Truth, and to love the God of Consolations, not the Consolations (and signs and wonders) of God.

Finally, on another topic, it is good that Sherry is writing about this, but I don't really see it as anything new. Way back in the 60s and 70s I heard many, many nondenominational missionaries speaking on these very things. Maybe what is new will be in the rest of the installments, however.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's nothing particularly to "disbelieve" here. I think it's much easier to align onself with a religion that is not demanding in terms of doctrine or reason, but only in terms of "conversion." The sort of "Christianity" you are describing is actually so primitive it predates even Christ, because at the nexus of the canonical Scriptures is the meeting of fides and ratio, whereas here there is no such thing. In the Jewish canonical Scriptures and in its Wisdom literature, you find the meeting of faith and reason. Here there is none. There is only emotion. It's not even faith, if one expects signs and wonders only. It's a step back. It's disturbing, on a par with the Muslim lack of ratio.

But don't be quick to locate ratio, or a celebration of it, only in Europe or in the "West." Although its expression was not expressed in the same way as the Greeks had done, there are cognates in the Hebrew Scriptures (and previously in some of the Babylonian texts and the old Pharaonic texts, as well).

This appearance of a "Christianity" devoid of philosophical underpinnings or rational proclamation of a faith is one more manifestion of emerging syncretism. It's the last gasp, as it were, of the "pro me" theology of the sixteenth century, where one devised an approach that met one's own criteria, rather than receiving divinely-ordained concepts, commandments, liturgies, etc. Once, it was done within the confines of the Christian West; now it is done globally, by picking things here and there from many traditions.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Blogger Drusilla said...

Years ago, I mumbled my way through a confession that nearly sent my confessor to sleep but finally found myself blurting out: "But when I pray, things happen!" He sat up and asked, "Well what do you expect?" And then proceeded to counsel me to work on my pride.

Signs and wonders are perfectly consistent with the meeting of faith and reason as long as we accept that God can do as he pleases and just might please to do something visible and tangible through us. And too, we must not forget that most of us in the West disdain such things and that God, "in His providential desire for our salvation", usually refrains from insisting that we accept them.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:38:00 AM MDT , Blogger Sherry W said...

Hi Drusilla:

Have enjoyed reading your posts elsewhere!

"we must not forget that most of us in the West disdain such things"

Actually, no. Intellectual, high culture, conservative/traditionalist Catholics tend to distain such things but Americans as a whole? Not on your life!

Remember this from part 1:

"The five nations with the largest numbers of Independents in 2005 are China, the United States, India, Nigeria, and Brazil. According to Barrett, 52% of Asian Christians, 30% of North American Christians, 22% of African Christians, and 7.3% of Latin Christians are part of the Independent movement."

There is a reasons why the US is the western epicenter of Independent Christianity. There are *80 million* Independent Christians in the US - which is the largest block of all and considerably larger than our 69 million Catholics).

And remember, this doesn't include the 6 million Americans who are part of traditional Pentecostal denominations or the 21 million charismatic Christians who are part of main-stream communions.

All the evidence is that the majority of American Christians do not regard the obviously supernatural with distain. Far from it.

And that, as I will point out, in a later installments, is one of the huge implications of the existance of Independent Christianity.

Because the change in worldview from enlightenment-based distain to openness and eagerness for the more dramatic manifestations of the Holy Spirit happened in a single generation - in our lifetime.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:40:00 AM MDT , Anonymous <a href="http://www.xanga.com/buy_levitra">BuyLevitra</a> said...

Thanks for article!

 
At October 31, 2009 8:40:00 AM MDT , Anonymous <a href="http://phentermine1.eamped.com">Phentermine</a> said...

Thanks for interesting article.

 
At October 31, 2009 8:41:00 AM MDT , Anonymous <a href="http://search2.site.io/index.html">Viagra</a> said...

Glad to read articles like this. Thanks to author!

 
At October 31, 2009 8:41:00 AM MDT , Anonymous <a href="http://courses.cvcc.vccs.edu/ENG112_GROSS/_Chat_Room/000008fd.htm">Anonimous</a> said...

Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home