The views expressed in this article are of the author only and do not necessarily represent those of the Center for Pastor Theologians.
The batter enters the box. The pitcher begins his movement. Synchronously, every player on the field begins to move. Only the pitcher has the baseball, but there is a felt anticipation. The infielder widens his stance, lowers his frame, lifts his hands, and fixes his eyes on the batter. The ball slaps into the catcher’s mitt. The infielder stands erect, moves hands to his hip, and turns to joke with his teammate. These postures couldn’t be more different from each other. One is a ready intensity, the other a jovial respite. And yet, they are each a part of the same game.
Christians adopt a similar range of postures. Some never lifting from the intense expectancy and engagement with the world. Others opting instead not to engage with it at all. H. Richard Niebuhr, in his 1951 classic Christ & Culture, offers a framework for understanding these postures.[1] A beautiful aspect of this framework is its timelessness. Niebuhr offers postures that respond to culture rather than depend on it. As such, his typology assesses Aquinas and Calvin, Edwards and Barth, and you and me. It is not dependent or deterred by political systems, ecclesial traditions, or technological progress. In fact, it can assess those as well.
Today the church can be more connected to culture than ever, in part because of emergent technologies. Services are streamed on social media. Sermon series are tied to the latest trend in TV and film. YouTube has become a trusted source for information and entertainment. You have a reaction to this. You may love it. You may hate it. You may be somewhere in between.
This essay is not a personality test, nor is it a rebuke of one response, or an apologetic for another. Instead, this essay will apply Niebuhr’s five types of Christian ethics to modern expressions of power and the influence of celebrity culture in the church.[2] In so doing, it is hoped that wherever you or your church fall along this spectrum, that you would honestly assess the ways you engage the world for Jesus.
Christ Against Culture. Niebuhr’s first category is that of the oppositionist. Here, Christ is the combatant of everything you hate. Maybe, you think, Christ hates YouTube. And you are positive that he hates TikTok. You are concerned with a holy otherness, and you have neither the time nor the desire to know the social media influencers. You may even suspect that those churches do not hold to the same faith you do. The truest adopters of this position may never read this as even the device projecting the pixels onto your screen could represent a sort of apostasy. The oppositionist withdraws from culture.
The Christ of Culture. At the other end of the spectrum is Niebuhr’s accommodationist. Here, Christ is behind every good thing and that must include categories of human advancement and technology. You know that whatever God creates is good, and anything can be a tool for positivity. If Christ is a universal truth, he can fit within any cultural norm. You think it is good that we contextualize the gospel to meet people where they are, that Christ has chosen to use culture for his purposes. Large platforms are a sign of blessing, and so the accommodationist leverages every algorithm and analytic to determine the Lord’s direction.
Christ Above Culture. Others operate in medians. The first of these in-betweens is what Niebuhr calls the architectonic type, or more simply, synthesis. You understand Christ and culture to simply operate on different plains. You may be nearer opposition than accommodation, but there is no real conflict or imposition. If something is beneficial, you use it. If not, you leave it. Simply put, not everything is spiritual to you. You can work with unbelievers or enjoy things in the world and separate those things from your faith. A quasi-YouTube culture is fine in the church as long as it does not displace the church. The architectonicist uses culture to their own ends, or more pointedly, Christ’s.
Christ and Culture in Paradox. The fourth, or oscillatory, type operates in the dualism of life between two kingdoms. This is the true middle between the extremes of opposition and accommodation. You feel the polarity and tension between Christ and the world. Even reading the above responses made you somewhat uncomfortable. You would instead seek endurance. Christ and his kingdom will overtake the present world and its devices. In the meantime, doing the best you can would require obedience to contrarian institutions and a hope which lies beyond time.
Christ the Transformer of Culture. Finally, there stands the conversionist. Like those against and in paradox with culture, the conversionist sees the fallenness around them as a significant factor. You would not abandon culture, be bent by it, or simply endure through it. You would see it transformed—converted and transposed into obedience to Christ. You meet culture where it is, but not to be shaped by it. You bring and evangelistic bent of Christ’s kingdom come into all things. Here, Christ redeems more than just people. Christ redeems culture itself.
So, which is the right and biblical posture? That would depend on who you ask. Tertullian would tell you that Christ stands against culture. Barth would be adamant to accommodate each and Clement would argue instead that Christ stands above. Luther would say they are in paradox while Calvin would argue for transformation. My concern is less of where you would land and more that you would actually land.
Understanding these postures is key for any Christian or church to consider the ways they engage culture. The problem is that so often without such consideration, culture is the one that engages us. The church today, and particularly the evangelical church, can be held captive by the world as it emulates a quasi-YouTube culture. Influencers and corporations are replaced by celebrity pastors and loosely parachurch ministries. Moral deficiencies lead to abuse, and the platforms which allowed them become bulwarks of deception and cover-ups or crumble once exposed. The need is not an audit of the power of Christ, but of the power of culture and of sin.
There is power in the church. Christ himself gave her that power and ensured it by the Spirit. He dispenses it for his own purposes through vessels of clay and wood, gold and silver. Celebrity is not the enemy, nor is technology. But the true enemy can and does use each to sow discord and depravity. The church would do well to evaluate its posture towards culture, to fix its eyes on Christ, and imitate him in grace and truth.
Perhaps the simplest place to start is to ask, “Are my practices in step with my posture?” If they are not, what steps can you take to ensure that they reflect Christ in the culture he has placed you?
This resource is part of the series Not So With You: Reflections on Power, the Pastorate, and Life in the Church. Click here to explore more resources from this series.
Paul Morrison serves as the Theologian in Residence at the City Church in Cleveland, OH. He is also a co-founder and director of the Ohio Theological Institute. Paul holds a Ph.D. in Christian Ethics from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and is a member of the St. Peter Fellowship of the Center for Pastor Theologians.
