A Reflective Review of "Christianity Rediscovered" by Vincent J. Donovan

[K. Rex Butts]

Vincent J. Donovan, Christianity Rediscovered: Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Edition, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1978; reprint, Maryknoll, NY Orbis Books, 2003.

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

What would it look like to know nothing except the gospel and to establish that gospel among a people of a different culture? This was the desire of author Vincent J. Donovan as he set about the task of evangelizing the Masai people of Tanzania which is documented in this book. Believing the existing mission and ecclesiological paradigm of Catholicism to have insufficient for the task, the author begins “…with perhaps, only one conviction …that Christianity is of value to the world around it” (p. 1). This meant beginning without any preconceived ideas as to what Christianity tangibly looks like or what a pagan culture actually is.

The result of such an endeavor is one that ought to find a welcome reception among all who have been part of the Reformation and later Restoration traditions. Yet it is one that will also elevate a level of discomfort too, as the rediscovery process will present a challenge to even the paradigms of those traditions.

As Donovan approached the Masai people, his point of departure was to affirm their knowledge about God and pious demeanor long before his arrival, and insisting that God loves them as much as he loves Christians (p. 20). This forced Donovan to rethink and re-question the central message of Christianity, resulting in an outcome that would not be easily recognizable to the Christianity built up through philosophical and theological tradition (p. 21). Taking a dialogical, he sought not just to teach them but to also learn from them in order to allow the Christian message to be fully contextualized as an indigenous Christian faith rather than transplanting the gospel housed within a Western and Vatican paradigm. For example, instead of pressing a definition of faith through a Western mind-set, he allowed the Masai to describe biblical faith through the use of an analogy of a lion hunting and killing its prey (p. 48). Another example of this contextualized approach can be found in the way Donovan employed Masai vocabulary such as tribe, clan, warrior, legwanan (a person regarded as a chief), etc… to tell the story of Jesus within the story of Israel beginning with Abraham.

Having completed teaching the gospel to the Masai people, Donovan neither forced them to accept it nor used what we might call evangelistic manipulation to ensure the acceptance of the gospel. Instead, he left them with the gospel proclaimed believing the choice to respond was up to them (p. 61). As the Masai people chose to accept the gospel, Donovan’s following instructions illustrate how much he was resolved to allow an indigenous faith evolve rather than force a transplanted faith. He told them the response to accepting the gospel and becoming church based on the book of Acts was simple, “Repent, believe, be baptized, witness to Christ in the Spirit until [Christ] comes again. This is the response to the Christian message. That is the church” (p. 63). The result was a community whose life and organization as a church became saturated with the gospel while organically and culturally forming from the indigenous culture. For example, Donovan writes:

I think we come here to a notion and definition of the church that is of utmost importance in understanding what is involved in the carrying out and completion of missionary work – the idea of a eucharistic community with a mission. That is the goal of preaching the gospel to a nation; that is the response to the good news; that is the immediate and infallible result of baptism – a eucharistic community with a mission. A pagan community, with its built-in human functions, waits for years of centuries for the good news. The preaching of the gospel simply adds the dimension of faith to that community. …Baptism brings the life of that community to sacramental fulfillment; making sacred the human symbols they find fitting to signify all the sages in that life… (pp. 115-116).

As an example of how this practically plays out, there was recognition for the pastoral and evangelistic leadership in the church. However, it is the indigenous culture in conversation with the original “perfect example of culturization… a true cultural interpretation of the gospel” (p. 112) – the New Testament – that must be allowed to speak and shape how this biblical need for leadership will take form. The result was not the ordination of a priest or what we might call a preacher or pastor to serve one village and be sent to another should he should fail his duty in the village in which emerged from and lives in. Nor, in an effort to be faithful to the gospel, did they want to continue recognizing the role of a witch doctor, pagan priest, the tribal chief, or the elevation of the wealthy for the service of leadership. Instead, as Donovan tells it, they replayed the gospel over again and seeing no place for “dominant characters”, they settled on an ilaretok (which means ‘helper’) to serve as ministers (pp. 117-118). It is interesting to read that as Donovan discusses this with the various tribes, he mentions discussing it with Christian elders but I do not recall any discussion at how the Masai people developed and established elders. Coming from a church tradition that has often understood elders in more of an authoritarian sense then pastoral, it would have been nice to read how an indigenous Christian community understands the role of elders and their relationship with the ministers (ilaretok).

Christians holding a high regard for Sola Scriptura will appreciate Donovan’s willingness to wrestle afresh with the scriptures and his willingness to critically engage in theological and missiological conversation with contemporary Christendom. It became apparent that despite his noble attempt to know nothing but the gospel, there were still a few times in which his Catholic tradition still had influence. However, neither I nor anyone else should be quick to judge since would be a difficult task for anyone to know a Christian faith apart from the lens of their historic tradition.

I wanted to write a reflective review on this somewhat dated book because of the potential value I believe it has for beginning a conversation on how to establish an indigenous gospel rather than a transplanted gospel. For those of us who are vocationally engaged in ministry within the Western world and most likely within North America either as church planters or ministers among an established church, we are engaging ministry among a foreign culture. The difference is that the foreign culture I am speaking of is a social culture rather than geographic. Taking cues from Donovan’s methodology, what would it mean to proclaim the gospel contextualized for a postmodern (and yes, increasingly post-Christian) culture – to know nothing but the gospel without any preconceived notion of what the pagan culture is? How would we translate the terminology and great themes within the gospel into a postmodern language and remain faithful to the gospel? What would it look like upon acceptance of the Christian message to allow a Christian community to emerge that is indigenous to a postmodern culture? How would that endeavor to allow an indigenous community to form shape the functions and organization of the community? How would the worship and assembly, which is so central to the Christian community, emerge as an indigenous response to the gospel rather than a transplanted imposition of another Christian community from a different social-culture? Lastly, as difficult questions like these are asked, how would we ensure that our efforts to allow an indigenous contextualization remains faithful to the gospel preached rather than becoming an adoption without sanctification of a pagan culture?

Why must we begin asking these missiological questions and applying the lessons of missiology to our own ministries? I was raised in a northern Indiana church that lived out a transplanted gospel from a southern Bible-belt community. Since serving in the vocation of ministry, I have served with congregations in the north which also were established by means of a transplanted southern gospel. While these churches have many things to celebrate, they also all share the common struggle of good leadership and living out the gospel as a vibrant missional witness within their culture. I have reached the conclusion that one of the main reasons for this struggle is due to the fact that as a local Christian community, they are living out a transplanted gospel rather than a contextually indigenous gospel. So what are we to do, continue the same pattern of establishing a transplanted gospel or take up the difficult task of learning how to establish an indigenous gospel? I would hope we would affirm the second option and if so, how do we begin that and help those Christian communities we serve begin to think about the establishment of an indigenous gospel?

[James Nored]

T.Rex., my recent D.Min. paper, entitled, sharing the story of redemption in a postmodern context (james nore...Sharing the Story of Redemption in a Postmodern Context, seeks to address many of the issues that you raise in this blog post, including aspects of the atonement.

[K. Rex Butts]

"So what aspect of the atonement resonates in postmodern culture?"

Now you are getting at some of the very questions we need to ask in order to proclaim an indigenous gospel which effects both how we theologically and practically translate the gospel. I look forward to hearing you answer this question you raise.

[James Nored]

T.Rex., since this is a book review, I would copy this post and also place it under the Discussion Forum under one of the Missional or Postmodern categories.

[James Nored]

T.Rex, excellent book review, reflection, and follow-up questions. Donovan found a way to describe the atonement that was culturally appropriate to that people. This is hugely important. For instance, for years, Christian missionaries failed in Japan because they did not emphasize the right aspect of the atonement. They were using a sacrificial description, whereas Japan is a shame-based culture. When they began to tell the Japanese that Jesus died to take away their shame, huge doors were opened. This is reported in Joel Green's excellent book, Recovering the Scandal of the Cross: Atonement in the New Testament and Contemporary Contexts.

Typical evangelicalism has emphasized penal substitutionary theory - that Christ died as a sacrifice to take on our sins. I do not go so far as to say that this is an improper theory, as some have done. But, in a culture that is not sacrificial, this cannot be the only atonement idea that we teach. So what aspect of the atonement resonates in postmodern culture? I will say something about this soon!