The first one, called the “sect type” and developed by Tertullian is generally hostile to culture, and forms a radical countercultural structure, in which believers are invited to take a radical stance.
The second one, the “church type” which was Augustine‘s point of view suggested that there is goodness in different aspects cultures that must be used for the greater good.
It is interesting to see how these two ways of thinking still live today in more or less extreme forms. Is there a good or a bad way for the Church to deal with cultural matters?
Is one of these approaches better than the other?
It seems to me that each is good and benefic in specific contexts.
Tertullian wrote his texts during a time of Christian persecution, Augustine wrote his when Christianity was largely being accepted and paganism was on the decline.
A thought coming to my mind out of the blue is that Tertullian’s point of view is more of a ‘defensive’, and has the goal of protecting Christians and uniting them, while Augustine’s stance is rather ‘offensive’, finding compromises and ways for the Gospel to be shared and spread in a specific culture.
I’ll have to dig deeper in this. If anyone has insight about this, I’d love to hear your comments.
1 comment:
it'll be interesting to set these up and compare them with bevan's models.
Post a Comment