The document discusses the importance of contextualizing theology so that it is relevant to local cultures while remaining true to biblical teachings. It provides definitions of contextualization from scholars like Darrell Whiteman and Paul Hiebert. Models of contextualization are outlined, such as translation, anthropological, praxis, and synthetic. The document also presents guidelines for determining whether a local theology demonstrates sound contextualization or drifts into heterodoxy, such as whether it is coherent with revelation, leads to Christ-like behavior, and challenges cultural norms. Overall, the document argues that all theology is contextual and aims to provide a framework for developing theologies that faithfully engage with local contexts.

1. TheologicalTheological
ContextualizationContextualization
by Robert H. Munson
www.munsonmissions.org
2017 Version

2.
All Theology is
contextual
All theology is meant to serve as a
bridge between God's revelation and
humans in their cultural setting.
As such, theology can generally be lumped into
two groups: well-contextualized theology, and
poorly-contextualized theology

3.
“Contextualization attempts to
communicate the Gospel in word and deed
to establish the church in ways that make
sense to people within their local cultural
context, presenting Christianity in such a
way that it meets people’s deepest needs
and penetrates their world-view, thus
allowing them to follow Christ and remain
within their own Culture.”
-Darrell Whiteman
The following are Whiteman's 3 Functions
of Contextualization:

4. Function #1Function #1
““To see the GospelTo see the Gospel
communicated in acommunicated in a
culturally relevant, butculturally relevant, but
Biblically appropriateBiblically appropriate
manner.”manner.”

5. Function #2Function #2
In Mission, “to offend forIn Mission, “to offend for
the right reasons” ... andthe right reasons” ... and
not for the wrong reasons.not for the wrong reasons.

6. Function #3Function #3
To develop contextualizedTo develop contextualized
expressions of the Gospel so thatexpressions of the Gospel so that
the Gospel itself will be understoodthe Gospel itself will be understood
in ways the universal church hasin ways the universal church has
neither experienced norneither experienced nor
understood before, thus expandingunderstood before, thus expanding
our understanding of the Kingdomour understanding of the Kingdom
of God.of God.

7. Four Self Church
David Bosch (1929-1992) added to the
Henry Venn/Rufus Anderson model of
the 3-self Indigenous Church, to
suggest the 4-self church:

Self-sustaining

Self-governing

Self-propagating

(Self-theologizing)

8. So... a vibrant local church
doesn't simply regurgitate the
theology from a different
place, or a different time. It's
theology needs to be TRUE---
but also RELEVANT to its
context.

9. Contextualized Theology
according to Stephen Bevans

Translation

Anthropological

Praxis

Synthetic

Transcendental

Countercultural

10. Translation Model

“Putting the Gospel Into” the Culture

Greater focus on the fidelity of the tradition.

One is seeking to put the message of Christ
into the language and culture of the
respondents.

The process is quite similar the process of
translating a book.

Recall Paul in Athens

11. Anthropological Model

Similar to Translation Model but with greater
focus on, and respect for, the respondent
culture.

Open to learn and grow from the insight of the
respondent culture. Preparatio Evangelica

Jesus with the Syro-Phoenician Woman

Justin Martyr's belief that the 'seeds of the
word” exist in other religions and cultures.

12. Praxis Model

Start with Action, and Reflect on it in light of
Scripture, Tradition, and Social Science.

The process is intentionally iterative. Action
leads to reflection, which in turn leads to
action.

Gustavo Gutierrez and Liberation Theology.

13. Synthetic Model

Mixing of Translation, Anthropological,
and Praxis methods... synthesizing them.

Seen as especially appropriate of
“synthesized” cultures, or cultures of
mixed traditions, such as the Philippines.
(Inter-traditionality)

Jose M. de Mesa / Horacio de la Costa

14. Transcendental Model

Looks to the power of faith to transcend
culture. More focused on process than
the resulting content.

In a new culture as a person of faith, one
experiences feelings of antipathy and
sympathy.

One seeks to learn, dynamically, through
reflection-- trying to understand the WHY
of these feelings.

15. Countercultural Model

Does not seek to be Cultural or Anti-
cultural... but sees Jesus and prophets
as counter-cultural.

Understand the symbols of the culture. →
Analyze the culture through the eyes of
Scripture. → Utilize the symbols of the
culture to challenge it.

“Subversive Fulfilment” of Culture

16. Note: Scott Moreau's book,
“Contextualization in World
Missions” takes Bevan's models and
relates them to Evangelical theology and
mission praxis.
takes Bevan's models and relates them
to Evangelical theology and mission
praxis.
takes Bevan's models and relates them
to Evangelical theology and mission
praxis.

17. Critical Contextualization
By Paul Hiebert
Reject Old Ways
“old culture is evil”
noncontextualization
Foreign Gospel
Old Goes
Underground
Old
Ways
Deal with Old Ways
“old culture is both good
and evil”
critical contextualization
Four-Step Process
•Analyze the old ways emphathically
•Study the Bible on the subject
•Judge old ways in light of biblical
teaching
•Create new contextualized ways
Accept Old Ways
“old culture is good”
uncritical contextualization
Syncretism
Cultural Anthropology for Christian Mission: A Lecture Series developed by Dr. Flint James Miller; Based on the lectures of Dr. Darrell Whiteman; Using many of the
concepts of Paul Hiebert, Charles Kraft, and Eugene Nida

18. So How Does One Know
When a Local Theology is
Contextually Sound and When
is it Unsound. Or When does
one drift from Orthodoxy to
Heterodoxy/Syncretism?

19. The goal is not to PROVE what is
good or bad, but to have a
compelling set of evidences
supporting or contradicting a local
theology.
We need to be humble and open
in our analysis.

20. Evidences of Good Contextual
Theology

The following Evidences are loosely
based on Bevans, Schreiter, de Mesa
and others.

However, they are organized differently
here.

21. Start from the Bottom
Guideliness and Work up.

22. Bottom Tier: Divinity
These tests have to do with God... the
character of God as revealed... the truth
of his spoken (special) revelation... the
insight from His general revelation.

23. Evidence #1. Revelation

Is the Theology COHERENT with
Revelation. (Revelation within the
Christian context is primarily referring to
God's Word.) Does it fit with revelation or
not?

Is the Theology HARMONIOUS with
Revelation, or disonant?

24. Evidence #1. Revelation

A BAD test involves “proof texting.”
Almost any strange belief can be justified
through a concerted effort to rip certain
verses out of their contexts. You cannot
create a good contextual theology based
on “cherry-picking” decontextualized
verses.

This test assumes the Unity and
Canonicity of the Holy Bible.

25. Evidence #2. God

Is the Theology in line with the NATURE
of God... particularly as being
Transcendant, Immanent, and Personal?

Does the Theology tend to lead to
behavior that is in line with the
CHARACTER of God?

26. Evidence #2. God

Bad theology revisualizes God/god as
less than worthy of worship, or relational
in prayer.

Bad theology supports, justifies, or
reinforces bad behavior... not in line with
the character of God.

This is based on the idea that God is the
object of theology, and that we are to
worship God in spirit AND in truth.

27. Evidence #3. Creation

Does the theology recognize the Created world
as God's good handiwork?

Does the theology see all human beings as
created in God's image?

Bad theology identifies the created world as
lacking value and undeserving of our concern.

Bad theology justifies demeaning a person or a
group of people.

28. Middle Tier: Community
The Community of Faith also challenges a
theology. This challenge comes from both
the local church (in which theology is
supposed to be relevant), and the
universal church (in which the theology
and local church exist)

29. Evidence #4. Local Church

Does the Theology eventually find
traction, or ACCEPTANCE within the
body of believers it exists for?

Did it come from the COMMUNITY?

Is it INTELLIGIBLE to members of the
community in simple language?

30. Evidence #4. Local Church

Bad contextual theology more commonly
comes from the outside (an outsider in the
community, or a single “prophetic” voice in
the community).

Bad contextual theology tends to use big
words or heavy concepts that cannot be
understood by many members of the
context.

This assumes the “priesthood of believers”
and God working in the community.

31. Evidence #5. Universal
Church
Is the Theology (or more correctly, the
community of faith that embraces this
theology) open to challenge from those
outside of the group.
Can the Theology, also, challenge those
outside of the group and even inspire new
thought and theologies?

32. Evidence #5. Universal
Church

Bad Contextual Theology says “We are
not open to challenge because outsiders
are simply wrong” or “Outsiders can never
understand us.”

This evidence presupposes the
universality (catholicity) and spiritual unity
of the church... not just its diversity.

33. Evidence #6. Spiritual Fruit

Does the community, living out its
theology, act in ethical, Christlike,
behavior.

Is the fruit of the spirit evidenced in
attitudes, motivations, and actions of
members?

34. Evidence #6. Spiritual Fruit

Bad contextual theology justifies bad
behavior, or ignores problems that Jesus
said should not be ignored.

This evidence presupposes the link
between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, as
well as the spiritual nature of the church.

35. Top Tier: Culture
If God's revelation to man is a call to
repentance and transformation of all
people in all cultures, an appropriately
contextualized theology must also relate
appropriately to its related culture.

36. Evidence #7. Resonance
Theology should “resonate” with the culture it is
linked to. That is, it must address questions the
culture has, and puts into words, stories, images
or ideas that members of the community can use
within their culture and relating to their culture.

37. Evidence #7. Resonance

Bad contextual theology “scratches where it
doesn't itch,” addressing concerns that the
culture does not have.

Or it may utilize cultural references to make the
theology “relevant” but fails to connect the
theology to the underlying thoughts, beliefs, and
concerns of the people.

This evidence is based on the belief that God
redeems culture--- fulfilling it, and that the unity
of the church is enhanced by its diversity.

38. Evidence #8. Tension
David Tracy notes that religion (and thus theology)
challenges the status quo with ultimate reality
that sharply contrasts the observable reality.
Therefore, theology should challenge all
institutions: such as government, education,
community, family... and the church.
In essence, a “state religion” is an oxymoron.

39. Evidence #8. Tension

Bad theology simply blesses or justifies the
culture, and the power structures in place.

Bad theology supports the status quo--
rejecting the need for transformation.

This tension presupposes the thought that
we, and all that is in the world are to some
extent “fallen.” As such, our prayer and aim
is that God's Kingdom come, and His will
be done on earth, as it is (already) done in
Heaven.

40. These guidelines don't prove a
theology is good or bad, but they
give us some basis for tentative
conclusions. Probably no good theology
passes these criteria 100%, and probably
no bad theology fails all of them either.

41. Or, in other words:

Good theologies may be questionable in
one or more evidences.

Bad theologies may seem sound based
on one or more evidences.

The weight of the evidences ultimately
provide good insight on whether a
contextual theology is sound or not.

42. Remember

We have a Universal God and
Universal Revelation... but it
comes to us in and through our
Context.

All Theology is Contextual...
either contextualized well or
contextualized poorly.

43. References

Robert Schreiter, “Constructing Local Theologies” (1985)

Stephen Bevans, “Models of Contextual Theology” (2002)

Darrell L. Whiteman, “Contextualization: The Theory, the Gap,
the Challenge” (IBMR, 1997)

Paul G. Hiebert, “Critical Contextualization” (IBMR, 1987)

David J. Bosch, “Transforming Mission” (1991)

David J. Hesselgrave & Edward Rommen, “Contextualization,
Meaning, Methods, and Models” (1989)

David Tracy, "Plurality and Ambiguity.: Hermeneutics, Religion
and Hope" (1985)

A. Scott Moreau “Contextualization in World Mission” (2012)

Robert H. Munson, “Theo-Storying: Reflections on God,
Narrative, and Culture” (2015)