A Peculiar People (Rodney Clapp)
A Peculiar People: The Church as Culture in a Post-Modern Society
Clapp, Rodney
Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996
Reviewed by Michael J. Vlach
In his 1996 book, A Peculiar People: The Church as Culture in a Post-Modern Society, Rodney Clapp calls on the church to reclaim its heritage as a peculiar people and as unapologetic followers of the Way. Clapp, senior editor for general and academic books at InterVarsity Press, bases his book on some lectures that he gave at a retreat for the Episcopal clergy of the diocese of Iowa. In this review, we will evaluate Clapp’s book, focusing specifically on his main ideas and the effects of postmodernism and postliberalism on his prescription for the church of the twenty-first century. We will also evaluate the validity of Clapp’s principles.
Rodney Clapp
Clapp is honest and upfront about his theological leanings and about those who have influenced him. He is admittedly a “plebian postmodern Christian” (12) who believes that postliberalism offers the best solution and hope for the church. Those who have influenced his thinking include Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Richard H. Niebuhr, John Howard Yoder, Stanley Hauerwas, and George Lindbeck. Clapp is especially reliant on the ideas of the postliberal theologians Hauerwas and Lindbeck.
Clapp also points out his eclectic religious background. He is currently an Episcopalian, but he grew up in a United Methodist church. He has also had associations with Southern Baptist and Christian Missionary Alliance churches. Although currently an Episcopalian, his position as editor at IVP places him in the middle of evangelical thinking. He also shows great appreciation for neo-Anabaptists and Roman Catholics.
Clapp’s Main Ideas
Clapp believes that Christians today are living in a post-Christian, post-Constantinian society. From around A.D. 400 until recent years, Western civilization was basically a Constantinian society, he claims. The church merged itself into the state and, as Clapp puts it, saw itself as the sponsoring chaplain to society. With the recent postmodern era and increasing pluralism, however, the Constantinian merger between church and state has largely evaporated. Although many Christians today still want to view the church as holding a center place in society, Western society no longer sees the church as being of central importance. In Clapp’s words, society no longer needs Christianity as its sponsor. As Christians have begun to realize the fact the church is losing its place in society, more and more Christians have begun to feel useless and believe that they have nothing to offer this post-Christian world. What are Christians to do? This is the issue that Clapp addresses in his book.
Clapp mentions three ways that the church has responded to its current position in a post-Christian society. The first way is that of sentimental capitulation. This is often the approach of liberal, mainline Christianity. Those who take this route acknowledge that the church has nothing unique to offer the postmodern world, but they want to sentimentally hang on to some Christian language and practice anyway. The second approach is that of retrenchment. Those in the retrenchment model, including the politically active religious right, believe that the church must fight to regain its position as the sponsor of Western civilization. The ‘good old days’ of Christian influence in the main elements of society are longed for, and political means are used to try to regain Christianity’s previous privileged status within the state.
Clapp rejects these first two options and offers what he believes to be a better approach—radicalization. With the radicalization model, Christians should drop all ideas about being the sponsors of the state. Instead, they must live as radical followers of the Way—the Christian Way. Instead of trying to influence the state with an abstract “ethico-religious” system (65), the church must see itself as a culture and as a political community. Christianity must reclaim its center. Instead of merging with the state society and using its language and symbols, the church must reclaim its heritage as a “peculiar people” with its own language, symbols, customs, and sacraments. Yes, the church can have an influence on the state, but it should be in the form of a “sanctified subversion” (200). One example of such sanctified subversion is Daniel who, while staying true to his religious heritage, influenced pagan societies when he was a captive in Babylon.
According to Clapp, the church must also resist its tendency to emphasize belief systems and worldviews. For example, he is not into heavy theological discussions concerning the Trinity or eschatology. To Clapp, these abstract ideas are not as important as life and mission. Christianity, to him, must be practical and it must be something that helps people survive. Clapp also believes that the church must do away with its Gnostic tendency to individualize and privatize faith. This intense individualism and privatization are fairly modern and contrary to what the church is supposed to be as a community.
Clapp says the ideas in his book are not new. They were lived out in the early church era before the Constantinian merger of church and state. When the church was basically a Jewish community that viewed itself as the successor of Israel, the church saw itself as its own community that was separate from the state. At that time the church was political, social, and historical and not apolitical, asocial, and ahistorical. It had its own language, symbols, and customs. Instead of trying to be relevant to culture the early church itself was a culture.
Clapp argues that the church of today should reject sentimental capitulation and retrenchment. The church now has the real opportunity to get back to its historical roots. The state system no longer wants the church as its sponsoring chaplain, but this is not a bad thing, he asserts. Getting fired as the chaplain to the state does not mean the church is doomed to irrelevance. Rather, this is a chance for the church to become unique and set itself apart. Christians can find meaning in their own culture and not as part of the state. How does the church do this? The church must get back to its own language and customs. In addition to viewing itself as its own culture, Clapp believes that the church must get back to the concept of true community. This involves properly participating in the liturgy, celebrating the Eucharist, participating in the corporate reading of Scripture, interacting with others, using theological language, and using a holistic approach to evangelism.
The Influence of Postliberalism and Postmodernism on Clapp
One of the main influences of postmodernism on Clapp and his ideas is in the area of foundationalism. Clapp admits that he has “renounced the longing for sure and certain, universal, once-for-all foundations to knowledge and action” (13). The rejection of foundationalism is characteristic of postmodern thought. This rejection of universal foundations has large implications for the church in relation to how it defends itself in the arena of ideas. If Clapp is correct, the church really has no way to show with any certainty that it is offering the best way of life.
Clapp’s view of theology also appears to be postmodern. He appears to have a disdain for what he believes to be abstract doctrines. He seems to dismiss the importance of certain doctrines such the Trinity and eschatology. To him these issues don’t relate to helping people to survive. In this sense he is a pragmatic postmodern. In our view, his emphasis on practical theology is commendable, but we also hold that practical theology cannot be separated from doctrines such as the Trinity and eschatology. It is false to make a dualism between theology and practical living. The two go together. This is one aspect of Clapp’s approach that must be rejected by Christians.
Although Clapp identifies himself as a postmodern and he certainly has certain elements of postmodernism in his views, it is perhaps more correct to understand him as a postliberal. We assert this because Clapp’s ideas are essentially the same as the famous postliberal theologians—Stanley Hauerwas and George Lindbeck.
Postliberals often view their postliberalism as a renewal movement more than a theology. Postliberals want the church to be its own unique culture apart from the state, much like it was in the early years of the church. This certainly is an important theme of Clapp’s book. Like most postliberals, Clapp wants the church to move back to its own language, symbols, liturgy, and way of doing community. This approach is commendable and is consistent with the pattern of the early church, especially as presented in the Book of Acts.
Clapp also appears to be in line with the postliberal view of truth. Postliberals sometimes admit that there may be absolute truths, but they are quick to say that we only have relative access to these truths. Thus, most truth is beyond our grasp. According to postliberals, we must be reluctant to claim that we have knowledge of the truth. They hold that this should make us hesitant in condemning people who hold to other beliefs. This appears to be the view of Clapp. Yet this mostly pessimistic view of truth does not seem to line up with the emphasis on truth that the Scripture gives (cf. John 8:31; 17:17). On this issue we believe Clapp’s perspective is unhealthy and unbiblical. Although we should accept the postmodern and postliberal assumption that no person knows all of the truth perfectly and completely, the Bible does give us sufficient reason to believe we have access to the truth that God wants us to know. Though our knowledge of truth is always imperfect, it can be sufficient. Truth, then, should not be downplayed.
Like most postliberals, Clapp also rejects individualistic subjectivity and privatized Christianity. This point is commendable and should be taken seriously by the church because it is consistent with the New Testament pattern (cf. Acts 2:42, 46).
What Can We Learn From Clapp?
There are several things in Clapp’s book that are not commendable. The true message of the cross is largely absent from Clapp’s book. It is difficult to imagine a correct plan for how the church should operate that is not inseparably tied to the biblical Gospel, yet Clapp’s gospel does not look like the Gospel of the New Testament. In addition, his views on the acceptability of homosexuality and feminism are in conflict with Scripture. His position on pacifism was also out of place and weakly argued. Nevertheless, in his main assertion that the church must be a peculiar people with its own culture apart from the state, this reviewer is in agreement. Clapp is also correct that Christianity today is much too individualized and too privatized. The sense of community that the early church had is largely missing from the church today. Clapp is correct that the church needs to see itself as its own culture and community. In doing this, the church would be much more in line with what the New Testament says the church is to be.
This reviewer also agrees with Clapp that now is a good time for the church to reevaluate itself and look at what it is doing. The fact that postmodern factors have pushed Christianity from its center position in society should jolt the church into a reality check. The church is no longer the sponsor of Western civilization and probably never will be again. Clapp is also correct in his analysis of the three approaches to doing church in the post-Constantinian era. The sentimental capitulation approach is unacceptable because it offers no real message to society. It is a toothless Christianity. Theretrenchment approach also will never work. As Clapp states, “There are simply too many Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist, agnostic and other Americans who would not willingly accept even the mildest version of ‘Christian America’” (193). The correct approach, as he states, is radicalization. Christians must become unapologetic followers of the Way—radicals who do not seek to capitulate to surrounding cultures.
In his main assertion, then, Clapp is correct. Where Christians must go beyond Clapp, though, is in the area of a commitment to the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. Clapp’s Christianity is mostly social with little room for the cross. Yet the true church of Jesus Christ is rooted in the Gospel and its saving message of the cross. Clapp also does not deal with the important issue of the purity of the church, nor does he seem particularly concerned that people can be a part of the church community without being properly related to God in a saving way.
To summarize, Clapp wants the church to act like a community. With this we agree. However, the church cannot be separated from the biblical Gospel or sound doctrine. It is here that Clapp fails. It is our hope that the church of Jesus Christ will be a biblical community that is based on sound doctrine and the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Interested in buying this book?
Click here.