If you’ve ever spent time in another culture, you’ve experienced culture shock. Your living conditions, language, mores and other expected behaviors are different than the culture you’re used to, grew up in. Often times the culture shock is exhibited in two extreme ways: complete rejection of the different, including denigration of the culture into which you’re immersed; complete adoption of the different, including denigration of your home culture. When you’re a minority, you are often faced with these choices. Most of us only face being the minority when we’re on vacation in a new place here or abroad (yes, there are subcultures in the US and with their own ‘languages’—terminology, nuances, accents, acceptable behaviors and clothing, etc.) or a short-term mission trip or an extended assignment for work or mission. (We even experience this when we visit a place with another religious tradition—imagine a Baptist trying to figure out Catholic Mass, or vice versa when the Catholic is wondering when one genuflects during the service.)
Let’s assume you’re now a refugee in your adopted country. Or it’s a similar situation, if you’re a missionary. Or even if you’re born in this country and you’re non-white...
Or you’re an Israelite and there’s an occupying, foreign force and political authority—Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Rome. Or Korea before WWII, occupied by Japan. Or any of the other colonized territories by European powers.
Or you’re a Hebrew in Egypt, flourishing until forced into slavery. What you really want is the freedom to be yourself, to practice your culture without limitations or loss of security and stability.
You have two major choices like the extreme choices with culture shock: adoption or rejection. And then you have subordinate choices within those. Within adoption, you can practice imitation—which risks a massive loss of self-respect and identity—as some commentators have suggested was King Herod’s plan and the Sadducees practice to retain power and influence. Hellenistic Jews are another example, living as Gentiles though ethnically they were Jews. Imitation reduces the risk of ostracization by the ruling authorities and the potential for violent acts against you.
The middle ground response is to avoid contact with the majority or ruling authority. The Essenes and even John the Baptizer chose this by withdrawing to the wilderness. All of us choose this to some extent when we live, work and worship only with people like us—whether they’re like us in appearance, socioeconomic status, religious or political affiliations. There may not be active adoption or rejection, but there is contempt for the prevailing culture and fear of the consequences of the other choices.
There is active rejection of the dominant culture: fighting back to change that opposing culture. Colonizers did this. American migration into unsettled territories forced First Nations’ assimilation into American-British customs. Western missionaries often did this until 50 or so years ago, when they recognized that becoming a follower of Christ did not mean becoming part of Western culture. And this is often the mistake, we make when interacting with Muslims. We assume that adoption of belief in Christ means adoption of American or European lifestyle; some have even been advised to change their given names to ones of an Anglo heritage. We saw a similar thing with celebrities who adopted Islam changing their Anglo names to Arabic ones as a form of rejection of the dominant culture: Cat Stevens to Yusuf Islam; Lew Alcindor to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar; Cassius Clay to Muhammad Ali, for examples. We know of violent opposition to colonialism. In biblical times, there were uprisings (Maccabees, e.g.) nearly every decade. And subversive actions taken by Zealots.
The second middle ground is making contact and it’s neither adoption nor rejection. It’s humility in the sense of honoring who you are and seeing the good in the other. It’s interesting that in a discourse about the people’s response to mourning over the state of Israel and hope for coming heavenly kingdom, Christ admonishes the rejection of His and John’s behavior. And in speaking to the present situation, He invites those who are confused by an appropriate response to the oppression and spiritual drought of God’s favor.
Then Jesus said, “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle at heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy to bear, and the burden I give you is light.”
The Good News is that God’s favor is not shown in the circumstances. It’s felt in our head and heart as a child of God and knowing this allows us to resist any epithets (N*** word, drunkard, glutton, sympathizer, demon-possessed). Others cannot control us with their tongues by forcing a response—either subjugation or violent reaction. We are, in the words of Stephen Covey, response-able. We can choose how to respond in our security that our identity is secure. Our adverse circumstances—maybe even our ‘verse’ circumstances—are a temptation to abdicate our status and our cultural heritage, our faith in our ‘
Ezer’ (Help). And by our example of loving even our enemies, praying for them (yes, for the authorities as Paul advises in Romans) and blessing them as Christ says, we might redeem them and invite them into His kingdom and out of the earthly kingdom.
By the way, if you think doesn’t apply to followers of Christ in the US, consider this: God’s people have almost always been in the minority, the oppressed, the disinherited, the marginalized...found in and finding the least, the last and the lost. If you’re not, whose footsteps are you following?
