========================

What are we going to do?

========================

·    We are going to discuss the following:

o   Indigenizing the gospel in the context of CDMCPM involves deculturalizing the gospel from a source culture and contextualizing the deculturalized gospel in a target culture. 

o   The Jerusalem Council is an instance of deculturalizing the theology of salvation and contextualizing the deculturalized theology of salvation.

o   We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing evangelism from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism in the target Japanese culture.

o   We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing church from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized church in the target Japanese culture.

========================

What are we going to do?

========================

 

 

 

 

========================

Indigenizing the gospel in the context of CDMCPM involves deculturalizing the gospel from a source culture and contextualizing the deculturalized gospel in a target culture

========================

In the document ‘The Traditional Model or CDMCPM’ it is pointed out that

-------------------------------------------

The gospel should be deculturalized by the missionary first so that it is free from their cultural and religious traditions and then contextualized in the target culture.  Deculturizing the gospel is to get at the transmissible gospel from the source culture that is destined for the target culture.  Contextualizing the deculturalized gospel is for speeding up its acceptance and transmission in the target culture. 

-------------------------------------------

 

Indigenizing the gospel in the context of CDMCPM involves deculturalizing the gospel from a source culture and contextualizing the deculturalized gospel in a target culture.  It is a handy term covering both deculturalization and contextualization.  We need to indigenize the gospel whenever we engage an unreached people using CDMCPM. 

 

In the context of CDMCPM the gospel is an umbrella term that covers the whole gamut of evangelism, church and theology. 

 

Deculturalizing the gospel includes deculturalizing

·    Evangelism.

·    Church.

·    Theology.

 

Likewise contextualizing the gospel includes contextualizing 

·    Evangelism.

·    Church.

·    Theology.

 

Indigenizing the gospel then involves deculturalizing evangelism, church and theology from a source culture and contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism, church and theology in a target culture. 

 

The gospel exists in context, i.e., in cultures.  We get to know the gospel through cultural means such as the language the gospel is conveyed in.  For that reason the gospel cannot be completely free from cultural entanglement.  Even the bible is culturalized because it is written and printed in a language.  Make no mistake that the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Old Testament of the bible are themselves culturalized.  So we can deculturalize the gospel only to a certain extent.  Deculturalizing the gospel can never be exact and complete because we live in cultures, always. 

 

In the current document we are going to go through examples of deculturalizing evangelism, church and theology from a source culture and examples of contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism, church and theology in a target culture in order to show how we can indigenize the gospel for an unreached people.  

========================

Indigenizing the gospel in the context of CDMCPM involves deculturalizing the gospel from a source culture and contextualizing the deculturalized gospel in a target culture

========================

 

 

 

 

========================

The Jerusalem Council is an instance of deculturalizing the theology of salvation and contextualizing the deculturalized theology of salvation

========================

The Jerusalem Council is an instance of deculturalizing the theology of salvation and contextualizing the deculturalized theology of salvation.

 

Acts 15:28-29

28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements:

29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

 

Deculturalization and contextualization of the theology of salvation performed by the Jerusalem Council is an action of substitution with the requirement of circumcision replaced by the requirement laid out in verse 29 in the target Gentile culture.  If circumcision is required for salvation, it would hinder acceptance and transmission of the gospel in any target culture today apart from the Jewish culture.  It would be the same back in those days.  The church at Antioch certainly had considered the requirement of circumcision a hindrance in addition to its contradicting the theology of salvation that is by grace through faith in Jesus alone.  So they initiated the consultation in Jerusalem. 

 

The church at Jerusalem in response acquiesced to the subtraction of the requirement of circumcision and proposed the replacement in verse 29 for Gentile daughter churches.  The replacement is a means for Gentile daughter churches to maintain some semblance of solidarity with the mother church at Jerusalem in order not to rupture the relationship.

 

The consultation for deculturalizing and contextualizing the theology of salvation was done for the sake of facilitating the acceptance and transmission of the gospel in the target Gentile culture and allowing churches in the target Gentile culture to remain on good terms with the church at Jerusalem in the source Jewish culture.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is driven by a need in the target culture. 

 

It took a deliberation process that draws on the work of the Holy Spirit among the Gentiles and the bible and that is recorded in verses 7-21 (not quoted above) to justify the deculturalization of the theology of salvation by way of subtraction of the requirement of circumcision.  Furthermore the contextualization of the deculturalized theology of salvation by way of a replacement in verse 29 for the requirement of circumcision does not hinder acceptance and transmission of the gospel in the target Gentile culture and is itself compatible with the bible.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is validated by the Holy Spirit/bible. 

 

The Jerusalem Council furnishes the model for deculturalizing and contextualizing the gospel that is

·    Driven by a need in the target culture.

·    Based on validation by the Holy Spirit/bible. 

 

Deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel for the sake of indigenizing the gospel always proceed in a pair.  Deculturalizing the gospel is a mental action of subtraction from the gospel in the source culture of something that is to be actually performed on the gospel in the target culture before the corresponding contextualization.  If what has been subtracted from the gospel in the target culture is to be replaced in the corresponding contextualization, deculturalizing and contextualizing the gospel involve an actual action of substitution in the target culture.  If there is no replacement, it is a simple action of subtraction.

 

Please note that the decision from the deliberation process of deculturalizing and contextualizing the gospel at the Jerusalem Council only refers to the subtraction item and the replacement item for the gospel in the target culture and not the totality of the gospel.  Every instance of deculturalizing and contextualizing the gospel is only concerned with changes that need to be made to the gospel in the target culture.

 

Please note that the deliberation process of deculturalizing and contextualizing the gospel at the Jerusalem Council is focused on justifying the subtraction from the gospel in the target culture and not on the replacement.  The replacement apparently does not hinder acceptance and transmission of the gospel in the target Gentile culture since nobody raised any objection.  It is compatible with the bible since the new requirement for the Gentiles is taken from the bible.  This indicates that subtraction from the gospel in the process of deculturalizing the gospel needs to undergo much scrutiny and must be explicitly validated by the Holy Spirit/bible, which is a stringent process.  On the other hand the corresponding replacement, if any, in the process of contextualizing the deculturalized gospel can proceed as long as it does not negate the reason for the deculturalization and contextualization and is not found to contradict the bible, which is a less stringent process. 

 

The division of indigenization into two separate processes, one for deculturalization and the other for contextualization, is to intentionally emphasize deculturalization such that it is not just an implicit part of contextualization as is commonly done.  The reason is that the justification required for the action of deculturalization is more stringent than that required for the action of contextualization.  Mixing the two together might blur the two different levels of justification required and result in confusion.  The division allows for a more systematic and cleaner indigenization.  Furthermore certain deculturalization can be done once and for all.  For instance deculturalization of individualism from evangelism from the western culture can be done once and for all for many target cultures.  Mixing deculturalization and contextualization would duplicate the effort.

 

We are going to apply the principle gleaned from deculturalizing and contextualizing the theology of salvation at the Jerusalem Council to an instance of deculturalizing and contextualizing evangelism and an instance of deculturalizing and contextualizing church respectively.  The process of deculturalization and contextualization for the sake of indigenization is not exact.  What we are doing is simply going through some examples that hopefully will shed some light on the complex task of indigenizing the gospel.

========================

The Jerusalem Council is an instance of deculturalizing the theology of salvation and contextualizing the deculturalized theology of salvation

========================

 

 

 

 

========================

We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing evangelism from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism in the target Japanese culture

========================

Let’s go through an instance of deculturalizing evangelism from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism in the target Japanese culture.  The western culture is individualistic.  Evangelism in the western culture conveys the idea that repenting and believing the good news is entirely a personal matter of the newly committed disciple that has no impact on people in the disciple’s social network.  That is the case in the western culture but not necessary the case in other cultures where it may have impact on people in the newly committed disciple’s social network, which in turn has impact on the disciple. 

 

In a target culture such as the Japanese culture that emphasizes individuals’ obligation to the group and where people are ostracized when they do not conform, emphasis of individualism in evangelism hinders evangelism.  People in that culture are suspicious of those who move out of the main stream by becoming committed disciples of Jesus.  Committed disciples of Jesus would need to deal with social pressure from their breaking ranks with fellow Japanese.  Deculturalizing evangelism by way of subtraction of individualism from evangelism in the target Japanese culture is required.  For instance all references to Jesus being our personal savior that conveys the idea that salvation is entirely personal need to be removed.  Contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism by way of offering support for newly committed disciples in dealing with social pressure against them in the target Japanese culture is also required.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is driven by a need in the target culture.   

 

John 4:42

42They said to the woman, “We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world.”

 

Jesus is the savior of the world and therefore a corporate savior and not necessarily just a personal savior.  Deculturalizing evangelism by way of refraining from referring to Jesus as a personal savior is justified from the bible.

 

In Japan where there is ancestral worship, the firstborn son in the family will perform worshipping rites of ancestors for a dead parent.  If a person dies without children and therefore has no one to perform worshipping rites for ancestors for the person, the Japanese believe that the person will become a wandering malevolent spirit that can cause people trouble.  If the firstborn son or an only child becomes a committed disciple of Jesus, the disciple will come under pressure from the parents.  So evangelism needs to be properly contextualized for the Japanese culture in order to help a person overcome social pressure against becoming a committed disciple.

 

According to Jesus what a disciple looses in terms of community when the disciple starts following him is substituted by what is gained from the faith community.

 

Mark 10:28-30

28Then Peter spoke up, “We have left everything to follow you!”

29 “Truly I tell you,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel

30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life.

 

John Mehn (Multiplying churches in Japanese soil. William Carey Library. eBook.) states in his book the following:

-------------------------------------------

There is a very high threshold for a Japanese to become a member of a church. Later, when these new believers feel they have failed and so lose face, the path from shame to save them honor is to simply quit or “leave the church by the backdoor.” Other Japanese finally give in to the unrelenting social pressure and leave the faith. Researchers report that “probably 1–2% of the Japanese population has “graduated from Christianity”.

 

 

Matsunaga, retired head of the largest Protestant seminary in Japan, revealed research stating that few people continue as active Christians past 2.8 years after their baptism. He insists that more effort is necessary to provide pastoral care, nurturing, and training in the Christian life.

-------------------------------------------

 

The above quote shows that there is room for improvement in the efficacy of discipleship in the Japanese church and the routine care for disciples for them to stay in the faith.  It only takes 2% of Japanese being committed disciples for Japan to relinquish the designation of being an unreached people and yet it is quoted above that probably 1–2% of the Japanese population has “graduated from Christianity” and left the church by the backdoor. 

 

For that reason there should be committed Japanese disciples in the catechized bible study light of the gospel of Mark for evangelism so that uncommitted Japanese disciples could see in the committed disciples the path forward in becoming committed.  Experience of committed Japanese disciples in coping with ostracization by society can help guide the uncommitted disciple.  Intercession on behalf of one another should be emphasized as a means of helping and caring for one another in the group.  The group provides relational support and serves as the substitute for the loss of relationship resulting from becoming committed disciples.  Evangelism that leverages the relational support of the faith community in dealing with social pressure against becoming committed disciples goes a long way in easing the difficult transition of becoming committed disciples.

 

The catechized bible study light of the gospel of Mark is discipleship-oriented.  The catechized bible study ‘Cost of Discipleship’ helps uncommitted disciples assess whether they are ready for bearing the cost of becoming committed.  It is only after uncommitted disciples have carefully counted the cost of discipleship that they are asked if they are willing to repent and believe the good news.  This helps reduce the rate of falling away after they have believed the good news and become committed disciples.

 

The above contextualization of deculturalized evangelism in the target Japanese culture is compatible with the bible.  Furthermore we have justified from the bible the deculturalization of evangelism that promulgates refraining from referring to Jesus as a personal savior earlier.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is validated by the bible. 

 

Please note that individualism is just one perspective from which evangelism can be deculturalized and contextualized.  There can be multiple perspectives from which evangelism can be deculturalized from the source western culture and contextualized in the target Japanese culture.  What has been done is simply to provide an example of how evangelism can be deculturalized and contextualized.

========================

We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing evangelism from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized evangelism in the target Japanese culture

========================

 

 

 

 

========================

We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing church from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized church in the target Japanese culture

========================

Let’s go through an instance of deculturalizing church from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized church in the target Japanese culture.  The church model in the western culture is primarily the traditional model with disciples meeting in a public place and preaching as the means of instructing them.  Missionaries from the west planted churches in Japan that are primarily of the traditional model.  So the church in Japan is primarily of the traditional model.

 

There is a graph in John Mehn’s book that shows that Japanese pastors who are under fifty years of age account for only 15% while those who are over fifty account for 85%. 

 

John Mehn in his book continues to state the following,

-------------------------------------------

 

Size of Protestant Churches in Japan

Size of Churches (attendance)

Percentage of Total

Under 50 people

81.5%

Under 30 people

62.4%

Under 15 people

30.6%

 

The number of congregations in Japan increased for over seventy years, but recently this growth rate slowed to a near crawl. In a study of churches in Japan from 1945–1985, Toyotome calculated the average annual growth rate was 4.15 percent but Montgomery determined the rate from 1960–1990 had dropped to 1.7 percent. Parrish assessed the average annual growth rate of Japanese churches from 1997–2007 as merely 0.10 percent.

 

 

For the last several years the net gain in churches has been a negative number in Japan. Exact causes for this decline are unknown, though churches have been closing at an alarming pace according to church researchers. In 2002, Mitsumori reported 271 churches closed, which is “the largest number in our experience”. No studies have been conducted, but the causes for church closings are assumed to be aging pastors and church members.

 

 

Some churches, without the cooperation of other churches, in a period of ten years could not reproduce their own church. Church planting workers find the task very difficult, expending 6–12 years or more, to get a church to a degree of stability in active numbers, ministry, organization and finances. This difficulty is compounded in a traditional church planting model by the considerable financial outlay to hire a full-time seminary-trained pastor and acquire land and a building. At present, there are few churches actually reproducing and many of those only have enough resources to start one church and therefore do not multiply.

 

 

Kenneth Dale has accurately described the reasons for the paucity of growth of the gospel in Japan as both (1) the Japanese culture and (2) the existing church, which lacks engagement and contextualization with the culture. The core issues are unavoidable at the local level. Many outside local churches feel the church is not connected to them as “its matters are of no interest and appear merely as ingrown self-interest”.

-------------------------------------------

 

So under the traditional model the church in Japan started growing significantly after world war two, but starting from around the sixties the growth rate has been declining for decades and for the last several years has been negative.  The declining growth rate is presumably due to aging pastors and church members.  In the meantime the capacity of the church in Japan to plant new churches is limited by the small size of churches and by the considerable financial outlay to hire a full-time seminary-trained pastor and acquire land and a building.

 

On the other hand church models like CDMCPM promote the priesthood of all believers and use rank and file believers to

·    Disciple one another in a group setting.

·    Hold one another accountable for obedience to instructions in the bible.

·    Start bible study groups and facilitate bible studies for evangelism.

·    Harvest the crops by forming churches.

 

CDMCPM churches meet at home or wherever is convenient and do not require a dedicated building.  Financial resources are not tied down by the church building and can be used for other ministry purposes that can build up the church.

 

There is the continual need to put a particular emphasis on group relational support in order to stamp the exodus of churchgoers through the back door of the Japanese church.  The CDMCPM church gathering is conducted like a prayer meeting in a small group in order to put an emphasis on praying for one another as the means for disciples to help and care for one another.  It

·    Draws out the pastoral care of individual disciples for one another.

·    Enhances their fellowship experience with one other.

·    Makes for a more cohesive church.

 

In order to engage and be relevant to the community, on the occasion the church meets to partake of the Lord’s Supper, the church after partaking of the Lord’s Supper immediately goes out to serve the community.  That is part of their obedience to the command for the church do good.

 

Because the traditional church model is not fully meeting the needs of and is putting a strain on the resources of the church in Japan, it is necessary to try a different church model like CDMCPM that addresses the needs and requires relatively few resources.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is driven by a need in the target culture.

 

The bible alludes to both the traditional church model with disciples meeting in public places and the house church model with disciples meeting in homes.  It is permissible for churches in Japan to go with the house church model instead of the traditional model.  Furthermore the operation of the CDMCPM house church model mentioned above is compatible with the bible.  So the deculturalization and contextualization of the gospel is validated by the bible.  

 

Please note that church model is just one perspective from which church can be deculturalized and contextualized.  There can be multiple perspectives from which church can be deculturalized from the source western culture and contextualized in the target Japanese culture.  What has been done is simply to provide an example of how church can be deculturalized and contextualized.

========================

We are going to go through an instance of deculturalizing church from the source western culture and contextualizing the deculturalized church in the target Japanese culture

========================