Accents and prejudice, thoughts thereof

"So when did you realize that I was smart?"

The question took me completely off guard. What? I don't usually assume people are idiots, although I have been informed I would be a lot happier with life if I did that.

"Was it when I told you I graduated Summa Cum Laude, or did you manage to figure it out before then?"
"Oh, I had figured it out right after I met you."
"Really?" My friend seemed genuinely surprised. "How'd you figure that?"
"Um," I had to snigger at that point, "I'm a psychologist's kid. I know what signs of intelligance to look for."
"Such as?"
The conversation continued but it struck me as odd that it was assumed that I would automatically label someone as having a low intelligence before discovering more about them.
The reason this person assumed this was because of the accent with which this person spoke. It was a decidedly Appalachian accent.

Now, I have traveled to a few different countries and met people from lots of different walks in life. And yet I have never ever encountered such a question from any of the various people groups I've interacted with. Now, granted, some were less expressive and verbose as others. I was warned by my Hungarian host brother to be CAREFUL when I spoke Romanian, as the Romanians would make fun of a person if the correct pronounciation wasn't used. I detected an undercurrent of bad experience in history in that statement, coupled with some other revealing reminiscences at other times. Transylvania has a rather chaotic history with the Romanians and Hungarians, who both claim rights to that tract of land, and Language is one way people hone in on differences.
I did experience something similar when I was talking with two African American classmates. They were comparing notes on inner-city missions, and I asked one if a question about a Halloween ministry. They had planned one, but had to cancel. My other friend spoke up and explained that his church had a ministry and what they were doing.
"oh! I thought you two went to the same church!" Now, the reason why I thought that was not because they were both African Americans, but because I had seen them act very familiar with each other and talk about ministries that seemed so similar that I thought it was the same one. They both laughed and said, NO, they went to separate churches. Just because they were both black (their words, not mine) I shouldn't think they did EVERYTHING together. They were individuals too.
"I didn't think you were part of the same church because you were both black, I thought it was because I've heard you talking about your ministries and thought it was the same one."
They let it go but I'm not sure if they believed me or not.
This part of the world seems to have several layers to the social life. I was thinking about it today as I hung out with a dear friend of mine and her family. The father is of british descent although very much American, and the mother is originally from the Philippines, but grew up in California. Their daughter is a computer and ancient linguistic whiz who is currently undergoing the process of applying for Wycliffe Bible translators. They are a very interesting family and have blessed my socks off since I arrived in college. Introducing me to amazing things such as Stargate Atlantis and NCIS, and the Chicago deep-dish pizza resturaunt. :-)
However, the mom has a little bit of a fix when trying to socialize here. She has forgotten most if not all her Tagalog, yet looks very filipino. So she doesn't quite fit in with the other filipinos here in town. However, at some churches she will be avoided because she is obviously 'different.' People will say hi to her husband and daughter, but not so much to her.

I understand that the South tends to cling to their legendary 'genteelity' and I've heard the phrase "The South will rise again!" in half jest. One girl confessed to me that she had been fairly certain that she and I wouldn't be friends, as she was sure that I was a 'yank' and her 'people' were most decidedly from south of the Mason-Dixon line. But once she discovered that, while I was born on the East coast, I grew up in the West, which was far better than the North, and we could therefore be friends.

Now, while there is the assuing element of humor in these discussions, the underlying tone piques my interest.
I have yet another friend here at school who is from Nigeria. I had a few Nigerian friends at the International Church I went to in Romania, and really appreciated their friendship. They were warm and jovial and had intriguing perspectives on theology and doctrine. So I talked with this new student for a little during the class break that day and the next, and whenever I saw him was sure to say hi and ask how he was doing. I had discovered that he had a wife and two kids back and Nigeria, and asked him about them when I saw him.
A few months later I saw him again and was introducing him to a new friend of mine I was hanging out with who had just returned from the mission field and just started school. My Nigerian friend shook the new acquaintance's hand vigorously and exclaimed,
"You will really like this girl. When I first came here, she made me feel SOOO welcome! She is kind and hospitible. You are really lucky to be her friend."
Hunh? Seriously? By simply saying, 'hey, how ya doin? How's the wife and kids?'
Yet when I think of it, the only other people I ever see engaged in conversation are the other Africans he works with, or the family I mentioned earlier with the Filipino mom.

What is predjudice? When I think of it, my first thought is Jim Crow laws and lynchings as depicted in Huck Finn. However, after a conversation with a friend who just joined ROTC and is currently living in Detroit, I realize more deeply that prejudice often takes far more subtler forms.
Of course it is found all over the world, in every culture and region. Yet the type I've encountered here is different from the one up North.
My parents have been in the North for just a few years shy of a decade, and I must say that I am not a fan of the neighborhood full of Norse descendants. Their prejudice is not a vibrant, easily pin-pointed type. Its masked in smiles, yet reveals itself through the lack of interaction that people group engages in with people from outside their immediate family circle. There may be ties of allegience to those outside their immediate family, but then again they may take advantage of their close kin to come out on top in a business deal, leaving their relatives in the dust. Yet when disaster strikes a church member, the whole congregation rallies together to make heroic, unexpected moves of generosity and help. Once they deem the crisis over, however, they delve back into their hobbit holes and will make great exhultations and commotions about the need to get together and socialize, and then do nothing to follow through with their promises and assurances of deep lasting friendship.
In the South, it is a little more tangent. The condescention is not overt, yet still there. The friend mentioned at the very beginning of the post had experienced the constant need to either prove intelligence despite accent or just deal with the assumtions from others that he didnt have a lot between his ears.

I have no idea what to do with all these observations. I sometimes feel a little like Esther depicted in One Night With The King; 'Are you crazy? This is not just you against (insert opposing character's name), this is you against the protocol! This is you against an Empire! Why do you think you, one person, is going to change centuries of tradition?!"
In Romania it seemed to my young mind rather easy. Targeted people group gets saved, GOd sactifies them out of their small-mind-ed-ness. Of course it was far more complicated than that, but to sum up, there it is.
Yet this is amongst fellow Believers; not only that, but Believers who are loudly proclaiming their desire to serve the Lord. This is supposed to be the 'Cream of the Crop' as it were. I am baffled how they think they are going to go overseas as missionaries when they don't even greet the foreigners in their midst.

I get a taste of it on a far smaller scale (like microscopically smaller) when I work in food service on campus. I wear the black apron and cap, I therefore am entitled to being subjugated to your bad attitude towards the menu and lack of your preferences therein. They are perfectly fine, sweet, and considerate when I'm not in uniform. However get me in black and its all over with the formalities. This is not to say that every student who hops through our doors is awful, but there are a few times when I really wish I could dispense with the customer service and give them a good, western, frank-to-a-fault piece of my mind. All backed up with Scripture and said with the gentility of a lady and Christian sister, of course. Yet scathing none the less.

Now, this just comes with the territory of working in food service, I realize. However, I do apply it to my argument in that as a food server I am no longer capable of socializing in the normal way because I'm at work. I can offer a quick hello and get a nutshell-version of whatever updates they have to offer, but can't get the whole heart-to-heart talk. THerefore, abnormality is suddenly put into place and different dynamics arrive on the scene.

Now, this helps me understand a little better the dynamics put into play with my filipino and appalachian friend. Differences are detected, and the proper social protocols are no longer able to function at the black-and-white, easily-applied pace they were previously able to in the past.

I suppose it does take a certain kind of person who hops from one social circle to another and has a myriad of types of friends. Just like it takes a certain kind of person to globe-trot, containing everything necessary for existance in a few small bags, if not one.

However, if one is going to engage in ministry, one must realize that ministry is not done to people who are fine and comfortable for one to engage with. Sick people don't need doctors. Religion is not an opiate of masses (at least, the Christian one isn't), its intended to be physical therapy until we get to the other side. Therapists, of any sort, get to deal with the worst of their particular brand and help them become better. If they are blinded with indignation that they are not just peachy keen like the therapist, then how can they help them to get better?

I've run into trouble with these various friends I describe, because my attitude is, "I'm quirky in my own ways, you are quirky in your own ways. Lets make our quirkyness compatible, be friends, and have fun." However, I glaze over the years and years of history and hurt that has assimilated behind various neuoncis of culture, and unintentionally allude to something that brings insult.
The balancing act I'm trying to learn is how to encourage the barriers to drop to let forgiveness and healing and new opportunities to flood in; yet be sensitive to the fact that those barriers are there, and for good reason.

So all that to say. My life as a anthropological, psychological, and sociological observer continues to be interesting.
I hope none of this was communicated in an offensive way; they are merely observations that I'm externalizing for my own examination, curious if anyone has any feedback. If they come across as excessively emphatic or anything, its because I am actually pretty tired from traveling and reacquanting myself with old friends while preparing for a J-term next week. And I'm realizing that, for some reason, the one-hour time difference between here and my parent's is effecting my sleep schedule considerably. I'm not having any trouble getting up, just going to sleep.

But, all that to say, if you encounter someone with a unique accent, don't assume they are dumb. If you have a unique accent, don't assume that I assume you are dumb. At least, any dumber than I am. 'Cause if you think about it, we're all dumb; some more than others and with splashes of creativity and uniqueness in how the dumbness manifests itself. But dumb nonetheless. ;-)

~Princess Ouch~

High Context Cultures

I have two very dear friends, who we'll call "Pamela" and "Sally." Both are from high-context, hot, shame-based cultures that are similar but still unique in their own ways. Sally is quite a bit older than Pamela, and see's herself as the local friendly matrona looking out for our well-being and offering gems of wisdom when she deems them necessary. Both Pamela and I love her to pieces, but have upon occasion pulled the other aside and asked the other to serve as a 'sounding board' as to how seriously we should take our dear elder.
As an American, I am from a low-context hot culture.
For those of you not studying anthropology, allow me to explain briefly before I continue my story:
High Context Culture: Usually a culture that is very very old, for example Asian or Arab cultures. They have been around for so long that things are defined to ridiculous details. (If one does not bow appropriately or offer the correct title when addressing people of various rank, insult ensues). These cultures are still very friendly but more challenging for people from Low Context Cultures to understand. The reason being:
Low Context Culture: Usually a rather newer culture, such as American or Australian. There are still cultural distinctives that dictate when insult or compliments will be interpreted by certain interactions, but much more loosely defined. In other words, far more laid back. More polite to address elders by "Mrs" or "Mr" but not that big of a deal if it's "Mrs" "Ma'am" "Hey Wazzup!"
Hot Climate Culture: Focuses on the good of the group, or extended family. Emphasizes hospitality; friendly and outgoing. Most of my experience with hot climate cultures is that they talk a LOT. Think "My Big Fat Greek Wedding."
Cold Climate Culture: More individually focused, or if group-oriented the group is the family, usually immediate family. Often hospitality is an art or matter of honor, but not very personal. Keeps people at arms length until you get to know them very very very well (like, ten or twenty years well). Most of my experience with cold-climate cultures is that they are, as a group, more quiet and introverted people.
Shame Based Culture: "You have done this and therefore shamed our family's honor." An individuals actions do not effect simply the individual, but the group. Bad feelings come when the ramifications towards the group are considered. The goal is the good of the group, saving the group's honor.
Guilt Based Culture: Individual focused. "I ought not to do this because it will effect me in these ways." The goal is the individual's honor, the good of the individual.

O.k. so there is your anthropology lesson for the day. Now for some background to my story:
A lot of my learning at school has been focused around this saying:
"Learn the culture
to use the culture
to reach the culture."
Good lesson, but it has it's limits. Don't get me wrong, the top complaints I've heard against American missionaries is that they
~Don't make an effort to learn the culture and become culturally appropriate to contextualize in a functional, effective way
~Are selfish
~Are too extravagant in their lifestyles (Which stems from not acculturating and being selfish in my opinion)
I place very very high importance on being culturally relevant and appropriate. I love learning about different cultures, and as I've mentioned before have sensed something pushing/tugging/nudging me towards the more challenging cultures. HOWEVER:
Two things I've also realized through going through a period where I wanted to be so culturally appropriate that I dissolved into the culture and was no longer American was:

~All cultures are corrupted by Adam and Eve's fall in the Garden. There is no best or better culture. All cultures have nuances and traits that are detrimental and even at times evil. As Christians we cannot be blind to that fact. I don't mean be the missionary accused of ruining cultures for the sake of the Gospel. I mean be that missionary who helps sanctify a culture for Christ to be a better witness to the other cultures.

~God made each of us individuals in our home culture for a reason. To forsake that or give that up is, according to my conviction, ungodly. God wants to use our character traits in other cultures to show them things they would not have realized otherwise. People outside the situation can often see things that people in the situation are completely blind to. Thank God for that.

Okay so anyway today all these lessons kind of came to a head when I was given an opportunity to act on them:

Pamela bumped into me in the hallway, grabbed my hand and pulled me into a secluded alcove and asked me emphatically to pray for her. Of course I said I would, but asked what on earth was wrong.
Sally and Pamela had, once again, had a run-in. Something that, in my opinion, wasn't a big deal, but to Pamela was a very big deal as it slighted her integrity and honor in the eyes of another of her superiors. She was afraid her character would be questioned by another individual, and Sally had painted the situation to the superior in a way that put the whole weight of the matter on Pamela. There was no apparent reason for it. However, a little bit ago Sally had confessed to me that she was very frustrated and a little angry at Pamela for not respecting an admonition Sally had given her. It was an admonition I agreed with, but in Sally's mind it was a sin issue and in my mind it was a situational issue that would go away with time. I wasn't happy about the present situation but was fairly confident it was occurring for valid reasons.
It seemed as though the frustration and miscommunication was causing a snowball effect, making it miserable for Pamela to interact with Sally and apparently frustrating for Sally to interact with Pamela. I didn't tell all this to Pamela, because Sally had told me in confidence, but I knew that things were going south.
These two women were dear sisters of mine and each other, and all three of us loved each other.
"Pamela, things are getting rapidly worse between the two of you. I think you need to go sit down and talk with Sally about this."
"No! I cannot confront an elder! Because of culture, you know. Besides, I am a little bit afraid of Sally. She is so strong! But you know, there are others who are cutting contact with her because of this."
"Exactly, and you don't want that to happen between you two. You love Sally and you know that she loves you, and you don't want to loose her friendship over this."
"yes, that is true."
"Come on, let's pray now." I said. Pamela felt a little better after I put my arms around her and prayed, but I felt emboldened to speak some more, although as I did it I was sure roots of mountains were crumbling and the threat of being struck by lightning might be increasing.
"Look, I know that I am an outsider of your culture, and I don't understand everything. I don't want to encourage you to be culturally inappropriate or American or anything. BUT you know that all cultures are effected by sin, and all cultures have aspects that are not godly, even my own. The Bible says that when you have a problem with your brother or sister, you must go to him or her and resolve it. There is not peace between you and Sally. I will pray for an opportunity for you to talk about this in a culturally appropriate way. But I want to encourage you to look for that opportunity."
"But she is so strong, Rachel. So stubborn."
"Yes I know, and when you speak with her you must not be intimidated by this but use it. You say 'Sally, I am sad because I feel there is no peace between us. I don't want to be pushed away because of this. I want there to be happiness and peace, not frustration and anger. What can I do to help that happen?' Affirm her, tell her you love her. Show her that you want her input and wisdom in your life, because you do. We both know how much she has helped each of us and how she is wise in so many ways. And this way you are not confronting her or telling her what to do or instructing her or in anyway questioning her eldership in your life. You are asking her to help you bring peace between the two of you. See what happens. But you cannot let this continue out of control, because it is burdening you."
Pamela nodded and thanked me and scurried off as we both had things we needed to do.

Now I don't know that what I said was perfect, and I don't know that Pamela should follow my advice to a T. I think she should - and will - pray about what I've said and obey God's leading, not my own.
However, I am encouraged by this situation because for a long time I felt that to work in a high-context, shame based culture would be impossible and incredibly painful for me. I thought that my frank-to-a-fault self and brutal honesty would paint me in such a bad light that I couldn't and wouldn't be effective at all to those cultures should I ever go there. I was of the opinion that Asian cultures specifically would judge and not accept me.
Of course I am very well aware that all these things are still likely and applicable anywhere (shoot, that happens here in the States for crying out loud!). And I do recognize the need for me to curb my frankness and soften my directness more often than not.
But I also was encouraged that, when used biblically and powered by prayer, these traits are encouraging and helpful in these cultures I feared. They can in fact be used by God as tools to bring about edifying change that is much-needed, if used with humility.

So all that to say, still being stretched.

Sanctification. How deplorable!!!!

Yet at the same time, how necessary and encouraging.

~Princess Ouch~

Anthropological Insights for Missionaries

I am currently reading a really good book for my "Cross Cultural Evangelism" class called "Anthropological Insignts for Missionaries" by Paul G. Hiebert. Thought I would share two articles from the book I found particularly thought provoking and helpful. They are actually quotes from Missiological magazines, so that's why there's the little blurb at the end about the copyright etc.

The Viable Miossionary: Learner, Trader, Story Teller

by Donald N. Larson

As I see it, there are three roles that the missionary can develop in order to establish viability in the eyes of the national non-Christian: Learner, trader and story teller. I would first become a learner. After three months I would add another: trader. After three more months, I would add a third: story teller. After three more months, while continuing to be learner, trader and story teller, I would begin to develop other roles specified in my job description.

Let me elaborate. From his position as an outsider, the missionary must find a way to move toward the center if he hopes to influence people. Some roles will help him make this move. Others will not. His first task is to identify those which are most appropriate and effective. Then he can begin to develop ways and means of communicating his Christian experience through these roles in which he has found acceptance.

Learner

More specifically, as learner, my major emphasis is on language, the primary symbol of identification in my host community. When I try to learn it, they know that I mean business - that they are worth something to me because I make an effort to communicate on their terms. I learn a little each day and put it to use. I talk to a new person every day. I say something new every day. I gradually reach the point where I understand and am understood a little. I can learn much in three months.

I spend my mornings with a language helper (in a structured program or one that I design on my own) from which I elicit the kinds of materials that I need to talk to people in the afternoons. I show him how to drill me on these materials and then spend a good portion of the morning in practice. Then in the afternoon I go out into public places and make whatever contacts are natural with local residents, talking to them as best I can with my limited proficiency - starting the very first day. I initiate one conversation after antoher, each of which says both verbally and non-verbally, "I am a learner. Please talk with me and help me." With each conversation partner, I get a little more practice and a little more proficiency, from the first day on.

At the end of my first three months, I have established myself with potentially dozens of people and reached the point where I can make simple statements, ask and answer simple questions, find my way around, learning the meaning of new words on the spot, and most importantly, experience some measure of "at-homeness" in my adopted community. I cannot learn the "whole language'' in three months, but I can learn to initiate conversations, control them in a limited way and learn a litle more about the language from everyone whom I meet.

Trader

When my fourth month begins,
I add a role - that of trader,
trading experience and insight
with people of my adopted
community - seeing ourselves
more clearly as part of mankind,

not just members of different
communities or nations. I prepare for this role by periods of residence in as many other places as I can, or vicariously, through course work in anthropology and related fields. I also come equipped with a set of 8 x 10 photos illustrating a wide range of ways to be human.

During the second three months I spend mornings with my language helper learning to talk about the photos in my collection. thus I build on the language proficiency developed in the first month. I practice my description of these pictures and prepare myself as best I can to answer questions about them. Then in the afternoon I visit casually in the community, using the photos as part of my "show and tell" demonstration. I tell as much as I can about the way others live, how they make their livings, what they do for enjoyment, how they hurt, and how they struggle for survival and satisfaction.

At the end of this second phase, I establish myself not only as a learner but as one who is interested in other people and seeks to trade one bit of information for another. My language proficiency is still developing. I meet many people. Depending upon the size and complexity of the community, I establish myself as a well-known figure by this time. I become a bridge between the people of the local community and a larger world - at least symbolically.

Story Teller

When I begin my seventh month, I shift emphasis again to a new role. Now I become a story teller. I spend mornings with my language helper. Now it is to learn to tella very simple story to the people whom I meet and respond to their inquiries as best I can. The stories that I tell are based on the wanderings of the people of Israel, the coming of Christ, the formation of God's new people, the movement of the Church into all the world and ultimately, into this very community, and finally, my own story of my encounter with Christ and my walk as a Christian. During the mornings I develop these stories and practice them intensively. Then in the afternoon I go into the community, as I have been doing for months, but now to encounter a people as story teller. I am still language learner and trader, but I have added the role of story teller. I share as much of the story with as many people as I can each day.

At the end of this third phase, I have made acquaintances and friends. I have had countless experiences that I will never forget. I have left positive impressions as learner, trader and story teller. I am ready for another role, and another and another.

~From Missiology 6 (April 1978): 158-161~

Omodo

By Walter A. Trobisch

On one of my trips I worshipped in an African church where nobody knew me. After the service i talked to two boys who had also attended.

"How many brothers and sisters do you have?" I asked the first one.

"Three."

"Are they all from the same stomach?"

"Yes, my father is a Christian."

"How about you?" I addressed the other boy.

He hesitated. In his mind he was adding up. I knew immediately that he came from a polygamous family.

"We are nine," he finally said.

"Is your father a Christian?"

"No," was the typical answer, "he is a polygamist."

"Are you baptised?"

"Yes, and my brothers and sister too," He added proudly.

"And their mothers?"

"They are all three baptised, but only the first wife takes communion."

"Take me to your father."

The boy led me to a compound with many individual houses. It breathed an atmosphere of cleanliness, order and wealth. Each wife had her own house and her own kitchen. The father, a middle-aged, good-looking man, tall, fat and impressive, received me without embarrassment and with apparent joy. I found Omodo, as we shall call him, a well-educated person, wide awake and intelligent, with a sharp wit and a rare sense of humor. From the outset he made no apologies for being a polygamist, he was proud of it. Let me try to put down here the essential content of our conversation that day which lasted for several hours.

"Welcome to the hut of a poor sinner!" The words were accompanied by good-hearted laughter.

"It looks like a rich sinner," I retorted.

"The saints come very seldom to this place," he said, "they don't want to be contaminated with sin."

"But they are not afraid to receive your wives and children. I just met them in church."

"I know. I give everyone a coin for the collection plate. I guess I finance half of the church's budget. They are glad to take my money, but they don't want me."

I sat in thoughtful silence. After a while he continued, "I feel sorry for the pastor. By refusing to accept all the polygamous men in town as church members he has made his flock poor and they shall always be dependent upon subsidies from America. he has created a church of women whom he tells every Sunday that polygamy is wrong."

"Wasn't your wife heart-broken when you took a second one?"

Omodo looked at me almost with pity. "It was her happiest day," he said finally.

"Tell me how it happened."

"Well, one day after she had come home from the garden and had fetched wood and water, she was preparing the evening meal, while I sat in front of my house and watched her. Suddenly she turned to me and mocked me. She called me a 'poor man,' because I had only one wife. She pointed to our neighbor's wife who could care for her children while the other wife prepard the food."

"Poor man," Omodo repeated. "I can take much, but not that. I had to admit that she was right. She needed help. She had already picked out a second wife for me and they get along fine."

I glanced around the courtyard and saw a beautiful young woman, about 19 or 20, come out of one of the huts.

"It was a sacrifice for me," Omodo commented. "Her father demanded a very high bride price."

"Do you mean that the wife, who caused you to become a polygamist is the only one of your family who recieves communion?"

"Yes, she told the missionary how hard it was for her to share her love for me with another woman. According to the church my wives are considered sinless because each of them only has one husband. I, the father, am the only sinner in our family. Since the Lord's supper is not given to sinners, I am excluded from it. Do you understand that, pastor?"

I was entirely confused.

"And you see," Omodo continued, "they are all praying for me that I might be saved from sin, but they don't agree from which sin I must be saved."

"What do you mean?"

"Well, the pastor prays that I may not continue to commit the sin of polygamy. My wives pray that I may not commit the sin of divorce. I wonder whose prayers are heard first."

"So your wives are afraid that you become a Christian?"

"They are afraid that I become a church member. Let's put it that way. For me there is a difference. You see they can only have intimate relations with me as long as I do not belong to the church. In the moment I would become a Church member their mariage relations with me would become sinful."

"Wouldn't you like to become a church member?"

"Pastor, don't lead me into temptation! How can I become a church member, if it means to disobey Christ? Christ forbade divorce, but not polygamy. The church forbids polygamy but demands divorce. How can I become a church member, if I want to be a Christian? For me there is only one way, to be a Christian without the church."

"Have you ever talked to your pastor about that?"

"He does not dare to talk to me, because he knows as well as I do that some of his elders have a second wife secretely. The only difference between them and me is that I am honest and they are hypocrites."

"Did a missionary ever talk to you?"

"Yes, once. I told him that with the high divorce rate in Europe, they have only a successive form of polygamy while we have a simultaneous polygamy. That did it. He never came back."

I was speechless. Omodo accompanied me back to the village. He evidently enjoyed to be seen with a pastor.

"But tell me, why did you take a third wife?" I asked him.

"I did not take her. I inherited her from my late brother, including her children. Actually my olderbrother would have been next in line. But he is an elder. He is not allowed to sin by giving security to a widow."

I looked in his eyes. "Do you want to become a Christian?"

"I am a Christian." Omodo said without smiling.

As I walked down the path, the verse came to my mind: "You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel."

What does it mean to take responsibility as a congregation for Omodo? I am sorry that I was not able to see Omodo again, because I had met him while I was on a trip. I just report to you the essence of our conversation because it contains in a nutshell the main attitudes of polygamists toward the church. It is always healthy to see ourseves with the eyes of an outsider.

I asked myself: What would I have done if I were pastor in Omodo's town?

~From Walter A. trobisch, "Congregational Responsibility for the Christian Individual," in Readings in a Missionary Anthropology II, ed. William A. Smalley (South Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1978), pp. 223-235.~

Theological Foundations

What are the theological foundations for critical contextualization? First, it affirms the priesthood of all believers. With critical contextualization, decisions are made not by the leaders for the people, but by all of the believers.

Leaders and missionaries throughout history have often felt threatened by this approach to biblical hermeneutics. Since they believe themselves better trained, they claim for themselves the exclusive right to make theological decisions. They are afriad things might get out of hand if the laity were involved in interpreting the Bible and in applying its message to their everyday lives.

What does keep matters from going astray when all are involved in the application of Scripture to the problems of life? Does not the process open the door for wild interpretations of the Bible and Christian practices? There are three checks on such excessiveness.

First, the Bible is taken as the final and difinitive authority for Christian beliefs and practices. Everyone, therefore, must begin at the same place.

Second, the priesthood of believers assumes that all the faithful have the Holy Spirit to guide them in the understanding and application of the Scriptures to their own lives. It is all too easy for leaders to accept this belief in theory, but to shy away from it in practice. To deny young believers the right to be involved in bliblical interpretation and decision making is to deny that the same Holy Spirit we know to be within us and guiding us into the truth is also within them.

Third, there is the constant check of the Church. C. Norman Kraus (1979) points out that the contextualization of the gospel is ultimately the task not of individuals and leaders, but of the church as a "discerning community." Within that community, individuals contribute according to their gifts and abilities. The pastor and missionary have a greater knowledge of the Bible and therefore should provide the exegesis of the appropriate texts within their biblical context. The people, however, understand their own culture and problems and should play an important part in determining the hermeneutical application of the Scripture to their own lives. But they must be subject to the church as a whole.

The church is not an aggregate of individuals, each seeking his or her own interpretation of the Bible. It is to be a true community of people seeking to follow Christ and serve one another. Only then will it become what Kraus calls an "authentic Christian community," a hermeneutical community that strives to understand God's message to it and bears witness to the world of what it means to be a Christian, not only in beliefs but also in life. The church as a body is a "new order." "

~Paul G. Hiebert, Anthropological Insights for Missionaries (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 1985) pp. 191-192~