Tag / culture

by daviddawson462742281

The Need for Qualitative Missions Research

I was privileged to receive my foundational missionary and theological training in the U.S. in the 1990s. My initial training was in Youth With a Mission, and then I went to study at Life Pacific Bible College, although I didn’t complete my studies there. I also sat under the teaching ministry of several excellent churches of the denominations Foursquare, Assemblies of God, and Calvary Chapel. In these contexts, I received much invaluable head and heart knowledge, mostly of Biblical studies, Theology, and church / missions history. While thankful for this, looking back today I perceive a lack of social science training in the models of ministry education I received. 

The social sciences include fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, economics, and political science. As a missionary today, I feel that someone with this vocation could do very well to invest in these fields as a core aspect of cross-cultural Christian service. Interestingly, both the fields of anthropology and missiology have suffered in recent decades due to questions of the validity of outsider interference in indigenous cultures. Missionaries have consistently argued that such outsider interference in indigenous societies is inevitable. Whether religiously motivated or not, social science professionals can help the interaction of cultures to produce fruitful results versus harmful ones. 

When most people think of research, they likely conceptualize quantitative research, which is focused on measuring quantifiable data such as numbers, statistics, and trends. Much vital quantitative research has been done by missionaries to determine areas of need and opportunity in contexts varying from urban metropolises to remote villages. Less understood by most is qualitative research, which seeks to understand meaning through translation, description, and thematic analysis (Tisdell et al., 2025, p. 19). In quantitative research the primary instruments are non-human technological ones that do mathematical and statistical analysis. But in qualitative research the researcher is the primary instrument. The qualitative researcher’s focus is on participants of some social phenomena (Tisdell et al., p. 20-21). The goal is to discover and understand a human cultural phenomenon such as experiences and perspectives (Ellis & Hart, 2023, p. 1760). Qualitative research seeks to produce detailed descriptions of individuals’ experiences as they understand them, articulated in their own words (Chenail et al., 2011; Daniel 2019). 

In the 2010’s I began doing social science research in Brazil using data from local academic journals and scholarly publications. This was when I was doing my MA in Global Leadership at Fuller Seminary. But my approach to research at that time still focused entirely on texts rather than interactions with real people. During my doctoral studies which began three years ago, I have developed a passion for qualitative research. As a missionary, I have access to so many people with important experiences and perspectives that could benefit the church and missions efforts. People are often wary of sharing their experiences in fear of being exposed or misinterpreted in harmful ways. Most anthropologists extended field work consists of several months to a few years. But missionaries can develop rapport with communities through decades of engagement. In this way, missionaries can gain access to data unavailable to secular sociologists and anthropologists. 

Description is not the only way qualitative research can be used, it can also aim to prove theory or to give voice to marginalized communities. Qualitative research can be used to promote justice and denounce inequality. We live in a time where many missions organizations face a crisis of purpose due to pluralism and cultural relativism. Engaging in the social sciences is a way that Christian doing cross-cultural service can make significant contributions. Missionaries can raise awareness of the needs of underserved communities by investigating their experiences and perspectives. In a time where missions work is seen as a holdover from Western colonial exploitation, qualitative research is a way for Christians to demonstrate our love and respect for human cultures. Just as Jesus’ incarnation demonstrates God’s open attitude towards human culture, of all people missionaries should have the greatest intercultural curiosity. And just as Scripture commands us to love the Lord with all our minds, surely there are those who will be called to contribute significantly to social science research. If a missions culture emerges that values such endeavors, perhaps we will see a generation arise such as that of Daniel. I pray that servants of God will show themselves to increasingly be of exceptional excellence in intercultural research. Would that this be done to the glory of the Creator from whom all cultural creativity and value flows. 

References

Chenail, R. J., Duffy, M., St. George, S., & Wulff, D. (2011). Facilitating coherence across

qualitative research papers. The Qualitative Report, 16(1), 263. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2011.1052

Daniel, B. K. (2019). Using the TACT framework to learn the principles of rigour in qualitative

research. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 17(3), 118

Ellis, J. L., & Hart, D. L. (2023). Strengthening the Choice for a Generic Qualitative Research Design. The Qualitative Repor, 28(6), 1760

Tisdell, E.J., Merriam, S.B. & Stuckey-Peyrot, H.L. (2025). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (5th ed.). Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 978-1394266456.

by daviddawson462742281

Missiology for Plural Realities and Plural Christianties

In the 1980s, anthropology took a postmodern turn expressed in deconstruction and a “loss of certainty” in the social sciences and philosophy (Rynkiewich, 2011, p. 12). In the West, the individual was traditionally thought of as the “basic unit of society”. But neuroscience has increasingly cast doubt upon the objectivity of the individual’s perception of reality. It turns out that people do not perceive the world “as it is”, but in a highly fragmented and subjective way (p. 16-17). Thus “grand theories” of early anthropologists came to be seen as founded more upon their own Western philosophical tradition than observable human practice (p. 20). In my highly culturally diverse context of Western Europe, Christian witness that makes sweeping claims about the world are expected to come with the disclaimer, “in my opinion”. 

Since the emergence of anthropology as a discipline, a variety of successive attempts have been made to define culture. Some modern anthropologists believed that cultural differences could be explained by a universal evolutionary process. From a Western perspective, the peoples of the world could be conceived as moving from being savages, to barbarians, to civilized (Whiteman, 2020, p. 2). Another extrapolation from the notion of cultural evolution held that societies processed from “magic to religion to science” (p. 2). But the Darwinian theory was countered by historical particularism which argues that “historical, geographic and environmental factors” cause cultural development rather than a uniform evolutionary trajectory (Whiteman, 2020, p. 2). Later, missionaries found the interpretive definition of culture helpful, which defines culture as consisting of symbolic forms used to communicate and propagate knowledge and feelings about life (p. 3). These symbols may appear to have a straightforward meaning but have deeper meanings only discoverable through extensive field study (p. 4). In Portugal where I live, the religious symbols of Catholicism are present everywhere. As an Evangelical, it is easy for me to interpret Catholic architecture and liturgical art superficially versus seeking a thick understanding such as Geertz would recommend (Hua Cai, 2024). 

A common denominator in postmodern conceptions of culture is that it is a means people use to adapt to their environments (Rynkiewich, 2011, p. 20). “Entangled in language”, culture gives shape to the phenomena of our world, in a process that is learned and shared (p. 21,22). And culture is “peculiar” as a lens we acquire for seeing and interpreting the world while soon forgetting that culture is a “social construct” (p. 22). The linguistic turn of modern philosophy in the work of Wittgenstein and others ended up not offering a universal conception of language. I find this evident in my conversations with Europeans about spiritual matters as strident affirmations regarding the correct use of terms is perceived as arrogant. 

Postmodern anthropology critiques a modern ethnocentrism that seeks to understand non-Western cultures through its own unique perspective (Rynkiewich, 2011, p. 24). Cultural relativism, pioneered by anthropologist such as Franz Boas holds that each culture possesses knowledge which is original and constitutional, only to be understood within its own context (p. 25). I agree with the approach of methodological relativism which seeks to keep prejudices from distorting the interpretation of culture. Judgement is suspended initially while the anthropologist seeks to understand a culture. But aspects of a culture that undermine justice, for example, should be judged at the right stage of research, but not prematurely (p. 25). Even the most postmodern interlocutors I encounter in Portugal generally agree to the appropriateness of some degree of judging cultural phenomena. 

While modern anthropology tended to treat culture as something existing apart from human beings, the postmodern turn deconstructs culture by restoring agency to human beings (Rynkiewich, 2011, p. 30). This account reminds us that culture doesn’t do anything, people do. However, people’s actions are always contingent on their environments (p. 30). A constructivist view like this holds that while culture has powerful influence over people, it is also contingent on the materials and agency of people (p. 31). I find this perspective helpful in dialoguing with a population who values individual freedom and the subjectivity of human experience. As I witness to my experience of Christ to another human being – no matter what culture they represent – a constructivist account unites us in our shared experience of making sense of the world with the resources available. 

It has been argued that what unites postmodernism is: 

a commitment to a set of cultural projects that privilege heterogeneity, fragmentation, and difference and a widespread mood in literary theory, philosophy, and the social sciences that question the possibility of impartiality, objectivity, or authoritative knowledge (Whiteman, 2000, p. 5). 

It is easy to see why the postmodern turn in anthropology has received much criticism. Its attack on the objectivity of ethnography undermines the scientific legitimacy of anthropology as a field (p. 6). The obsession with polyvocality (multiple versions of reality or truth) and reflexivity threatens to make anthropologists overly anti-objectivist and introspective (p. 6,7). 

I believe that the concept of culture should still be used by missiologists as a heuristic descriptive device which acknowledges that culture is “contested, contingent, constructed, contextual, complex, changing, and creative” (Whiteman, 2000, p. 9). What is problematic is when missionaries use the concept of culture “prescriptively instead of descriptively”, such as in essentialist paradigms of people groups and honor/shame cultures (p. 9). We do a disservice to the field of missions studies when we try to reduce the complexity of the cultural phenomenon of our world in ways that “papers over complexity and camouflages important and critical differences in human beings” (p. 9). Polycentric missiology is a promising paradigm which recognizes the existence of “plural realities” and even plural Christianities (p. 9-10). If we hope to be able to combat racism and ethnocentrism, we must embrace the beneficial points of postmodernism such as cultural relativism without relinquishing critical thought (p. 10). 

References

Hua Cai. (2024). The predicament of social sciences in the 20th century: A dialogue with Clifford Geertz’s essay “Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture” (Part I). International Journal of Anthropology and Ethnology, 8(1), 1–20. Directory of Open Access Journals. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41257-023-00102-2

Rynkiewich, Michael A. (2011). Soul, Self, and Society: A Postmodern Anthropology for Mission in a Postcolonial World. Cascade Books  

Whiteman, D. (2020). The Concept of Culture in Missiology: To abandon or adapt considering the rise of postmodern anthropology. Biola University. 

by daviddawson462742281

Anthropology has Moved on, Should Missiology?

Claude Stipe’s (1980) analysis of anthropologists’ negative attitudes towards missionaries is based on two prevalent assumptions. These are that “primitive cultures are characterized by an organic unity and that religious beliefs are essentially meaningless” (p. 166). Based on functionalism, the organic-unity concept sees primitive cultures as possessing an internal equilibrium and integrity. Therefore, unless internally motivated, cultural change amounts to “upsetting a delicate machine” (Colson, 1976, p. 267). This anthropological perspective posits that options are bad for pristine ancient cultures. But inconsistently, options are good for the West to “free ourselves, and our peers, from constraining tradition” (Colson, 1976, p. 276). 

The religion as meaningless concept can be connected to the experience of most early anthropological writers on religion. Not surprisingly, this was negative, and probably led to their subsequent attitudes towards religion (Stipe, 1980, p. 167). By discrediting primitive religion as “outmoded superstition” of a prescientific age (Evans-Pritchard, 1972, p. 205), higher religions can also be dismissed (Stipe, 1980, p. 167). The religion as meaningless position holds that its study should focus “on the rites rather than the beliefs” (Radcliffe-Brown, 1952, p. 155). Since religion does not produce an integrating theory of the world, human experience of the divine can be dismissed as a manifestation of the “supreme archetypal social relationship” (Horton, 1971, p. 96). This would explain anthropologists dislike of missionaries, who take seriously the religious beliefs of the cultures they encounter which anthropologists have rejected (Stipe, 1980, p. 168). 

A more helpful attitude today on the part of both missionaries and anthropologists has been proposed. Since both hold positions regarding truth and a desire to protect the people they work among, missionaries and anthropologists can build relations based on these similarities (Salamone, 1977, p. 409). 

The concept of culture as “homogenous and patterned” and attempts to totalize culture “from one small community into a country and even a continent” has led missiologists to an exaggerated focus on understanding and changing worldview (Yip, 2014, p. 401). Globalization has led to a view of cultures as fragmented and non-discrete, overlapping each other resulting in a lack of clear-cut boundaries (Yip, 2014, p. 403). Postmodern missiologies are needed that focus on the multicultural and diasporic (Yip, 2014, p. 403). A helpful anthropology of religion is bricolage – that a person’s beliefs are a loose assortment of diverse sources (Vroom, 2003, p. 74). Based on postmodern concepts of instrumentalism and idealism, a missiology can be formed that recognizes the limitations to scientifically knowing the cultural “other” whether such a reality exists (Hiebert, 1999, p. 51,37,38). Yip’s (2014) polythetic and progressive contextualization helpfully recognizes the variations and exceptions present in any culture (p. 408). This approach recognizes the presence of diverse subgroups within a culture as well as its constant mutation (p. 409). 

Another helpful suggestion for missiology within a global community constantly in flux is that the field of study be placed within applied theology (Rynkiewich, 2020, p. 336). This subfield sees to “utilize anthropological knowledge and skill for practical human needs” (Luzbetak, 1988, p. 34). By observing applied anthropology in other fields such as medicine, missiologists can identify different critical phases (Rynkiewich, 2020, p. 341). Medical anthropology progressed from assuming that culture was the problem to the people are the problem. Finally, the conclusion was reached that we are the problem (Rynkiewich, 2020, p. 338). The first two phases can be seen in missiology up to present, but not the third critical phase, that we are the problem (Rynkievich, 2020, p. 340-1). Returning to Yip’s (2013) polythetic and progressive contextualization approach, postmodern missions training should focus on teaching research methods and data analysis (Rynkiewich, 2020, p. 343-4). Challenges to contextualization include migration, cultural hybridity, multilingualism, and multiculturalism (Rynkiewich, 2020, p. 345), all of which require a missiology focused on constant inquiry and adjustment of theory and praxis. 

References

Colson, Elizabeth (1976). Culture and progress. American Anthropologist, 78:261-71.

Evans-Pritchard, E.E. (1972). Religion and the anthropologists. Practical Anthropology, 19:193-206. (Originally published in Blackfriars 41[480]:104-18, April 1960.)

Hiebert, P.G. (1999) Missiological Implications of Epistemological Shifts. Trinity Press International.

Horton, Robin. 1971. African conversion. Africa 41.

Luzbetak, Louis J. (1988). The Church and Cultures: New Perspectives in Missiological Anthropology. Orbis Books

Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1952). “Religion and society,” in Structure and function in primitive society. Edited by A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, Free Press.

Rynkiewich, Michael A. (2020). The Challenge of Teaching Mission in an Increasingly Mobile and Complex World. International Bulletin of Mission Research, Vol. 44(4) 

Salamone, Frank A. (1977). Anthropologists and missionaries: Competition or reciprocity? Human Organization, 36.

Stipe, Claude E. (1980). Anthropologists versus Missionaries: The Influence of Presuppositions. Current Anthropology, Vol. 21, No. 2

Vroom, H.M. (2003). Bricolage and fullness: on multiple participation. In Daneel I, Engen C Van

and Vroom HM (eds) Fullness of Life for All: Challenges for Mission in Early 21st Century. Rodopi

Yip, George (2014). The contour of a post- postmodern missiology. Missiology: An International Review, Vol. 42(4)

by daviddawson462742281

Why Giving Causes Tension Among Friends?

Christians consider generosity to be a virtue, meaning something that is freely given and voluntary. But as someone who has served in ministry for the past 3 decades, I’ve seen how tensions between giver and receiver are common. Marcel Mauss’ (2000) The Gift explores cases of lack of gratitude as based on the error of thinking free gifts can exist. For example, a donor should not intend to be exempt from return gifts coming from the receiver. Refusing reciprocation places gift giving outside the possibility of mutual connection. In this text I comment briefly on how Mauss’ work can be applied to missionary service. 

Mauss’ (2000) anthropological research on gift giving in archaic societies and its relevance to contemporary economic systems has interesting applications to my work as a missionary. Specifically, I find Mauss’ work relevant to the challenge missionaries face today in light of postcolonialism. Willie Jennings (2010) descries the arrogant and egotistical approach to giving and receiving of Western missions during colonialism: 

Adaptability, fluidity, formation, and reformation of being were heavily weighted on the side of indigenes as their requirement for survival. As Christianity developed both in the old world of Europe and in the new worlds of the

Americas, Asia, and Africa, it was no longer able to feel this tragic imbalance. Indeed, it is as though Christianity, wherever it went in the modern colonies, inverted its sense of hospitality. It claimed to be the host, the owner of the spaces it entered, and demanded native peoples enter its cultural logics, its ways of being in the world, and its conceptualities. (p. 8)

The legacy of Western missions is ambiguous, the negative aspects of which I am unavoidably connected. In relation to Mauss’ work, one such liability lies in the church’s posture as host and owner even as it invaded the homelands of ancient peoples. I do not subscribe to a notion of a noble savage or pristine indigenous societies that were not connected to their own histories of ethnic competition, conquest, displacement, and genocide. However, I do believe part of missionaries’ task of addressing our colonial past is re-articulating a Christian vision of economic systems. In this endeavor, Mauss’ (2000) work is helpful. 

According to Greene (2024), gift giving is an essential aspect of social relations, involving three types of reciprocity: generalized (based on assumption that immediate return isn’t expected), balanced (explicit expectation of equivalent return near future), and negative (intentionally getting something for nothing such as gabling or cheating). 

Mauss (2000) describes some of the archaic economic systems he studied as existing prior to the emergence of societies where man was turned into a calculating, utilitarian machine (p. 98). In these ancient societies consisting of various groups, alliances were established and maintained through systems of exchange. Through transactions both parties accepted mutual obligation because of the inherent power resident in specific objects. According to Mauss, these primitive economies reflect a vision of society as an integral entity. In such a society, success depends on stabilizing relationships rather than each individual pursuing their own ends (p. 78,78, 98). However, Mauss’ may be critiqued for selecting societies to prove his theory and for portraying them in a naive, idyllic manner (Greene, 2024). 

Mauss (2000) envisions a return to ancient economic systems where both individual and group objectives are balanced and where accumulated wealth is redistributed (p. 106). I promote interfaith dialogue and partnership as a central aspect of postsupersessionist missions. Therefore, Mauss’ work on gift giving yields helpful principles related to intergroup partnership. Postsupersessionist missions involves identifying ourselves as pilgrims and witnesses rather than the exclusive people of God. This exclusivity was a central part of supersessionism’s Gentile appropriation of biblical promises and callings uniquely attributed to the Jews. It is not incorrect for the church to affirm its identity as the people of God. But Christianity’s association with Western imperialism and colonialism creates a need for language that repudiates the sordid legacy of these political and religious phenomena. I suggest the use of terms such as pilgrims, witnesses, and disciples to describe Christian groups. The concept of divine election should be treated as a mystery to be reflected upon within the church rather than a badge visible to outsiders. I believe the election of the Jewish people and the church of Christ is a biblical doctrine that should not be rejected. However, the concept of election is not meant to give groups ideas of superiority and inspire practices of exclusion. 

Mauss’ (2000) vision of society-wide education that fosters reciprocal respect and generosity can inform Christian endeavors to promote the role of interfaith dialogue in missions practice. Missiologists do well to study civics, which Mauss describes as a society’s “aesthetic, moral, religious, and economic motivations”, as well as “diverse material and demographic factors”. Surely such anthropological and sociological research can help the church become part of a shared project of societal development (Mauss, 2000, p. 107).  

References

Greene, Katrina (2024). Introductory Videos: Fall 2024: Social Anthropology ISAN751-01. (n.d.). Retrieved September 12, 2024, from https://biola.instructure.com/courses/58516/pages/introductory-videos?module_item_id=1167199

Jennings, W. J. (2010). The Christian imagination: Theology and the origins of race. Yale University Press; 

Mauss, M. (2000). The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Routledge Classics.