Celts and Post-Moderns

As  part of helping a friend with an assignment, I read this distinction between the Roman Model and the Celtic Model

Roman Model

• Nature of God--Emphasis on Transcendence
• Nature of Man--Total Depravity
• Power of God--Stability and order
• Organization--Preserving institutions and traditions
• Culture--Thought Roman culture superior
• Religion--Treated other religions as irrelevant or demonic
• Communication--Emphasized a "left-brained," rational, propositional, dialectic, doctrinal model
• Mission--Began churches when people believed

Celtic Model

• Nature of God--Emphasis on Immanence
• Nature of Man--Image of God in man blurred and twisted, but not beyond recognition
• Power of God--Dynamic activity
• Organization--Advancing a movement through community
• Culture--Worked contextually and indigenously
• Religion--Saw the religion of pagans as evidence of spiritual interest and preparation for the Gospel
• Communication--Emphasized a more "right-brained," imaginative approach
• Mission--Invited people to belong before they believed

While, like most either/or models, the differences are expressed too starkly, this is a good introduction to the work done by George G. Hunter* in alerting us to the methodological shifts that become necessary within culture shifts.  Rather than adopting a fortress mentality and railing against post-modernism, as many evangelicals do, we would do well to adopt a mission mindset and look for the signs of God already at work in our culture.

*Note: Dr. George G. Hunter III is the dean of the E. Stanley Jones School of World Mission and Evangelism at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. He is the author of numerous well-known books dealing with evangelism, mission, church growth, ministry and emerging ways of "doing church." His most recent writing project is The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach The West Again (Abingdon).   

If you enjoyed this article, or found it interesting, vote for it at PlugRug so others can read it as well.

Comments

[Paul]

My 'Calvanist' upbringing started me in my walk of faith somewhere very near to the first model. The world was the 'enemy' to be feared and avoided.

Over the years, thank God, I have moved toward the second model. I now see that most people are searching for God, or at least the things that a relationship with God through Jesus brings. Though they may not be consiously considering God in their lives, the things they desire most are only found in Him.

Knowing this has given me boldness to engage people about Jesus. I now realise that the childhood injunction to "stay away from the world', isolated me from the opportunity and joy of sharing the good news about Jesus.

I guess I never fully understood the distinction of "being in the world, but not of the world".

[beth]

I think many of us raised in christian families were enculturated in that way. And many of us like you Paul have 'enlarged our tent pegs' as Isaiah the prophet challenges us to do. Now that I am raising my own children, I find this very challenging, because while I don't want to raise my kids in an artificial christian bubble, some of the stuff of our consumerist, individualist, entertainment obsessed culture is just plain unhealthy - it's not really even a christian/not christian thing is some cases. Also I think the "in the world not of the world" paradigm can end up being reductionist, and squeezes God's domain into a tiny little 'christian' corner, and in our language and thinking (and maybe even our praying) God stops being the Lord of the heavens and the earth. A lot of our worship songs also are great at declaring the greatness of God in the stars and the universe and oceans, but not in our homes and highways and lanes and offices and laundries and pubs and parks. Maybe someone with a bit of musical talent should get onto that and do some writing.

[David Chatelier]

Yes Beth, maybe someone should!!!

[Anne]

I propose a third model that takes the best of both of these models & avoids the pitfalls of both. We need to stay firm about God's standards, yet be relative to people of the world. I am a little concerned about "Invited people to belong before they believed". Maybe David could explain what that entails?