An Implication of World Christianity
What is “World Christianity” and why is it so important? Those are tough questions that a handful of eminent scholars are struggling to answer. Simply speaking, the phrase describes the global presence of Christians from diverse backgrounds, including race, nationality, culture, gender, etc. In studying “World Christianity,” however, the importance is not just the phenomenon, but its implications. From my point of view, in order to understand the implications, it is necessary to clarify the definition.
Christianity was a global movement from its beginning. Christian converts expanded in Asia, Africa and Europe, so that from an early stage Christian communities were found in almost every part of the globe, with the exception of the American Continent. Asia and North Africa, rather than Europe, was the stronghold of Christianity for its first thousand years, according to Philip Jenkins (The Next Christendom, 19). Only after about 1400 did Europe and Europeanized North America become the new Christian heartland.
During the nineteenth century, the expansion of Christianity was propelled dramatically by the contribution of European and North American missionaries, who made the literal completion of “World Christianity” possible. But, ironically, the Western domination of Christian mission resulted in a world Christianity that is now dominated by non-Westerners. The demographic shift in Christianity today fulfills what the Edinburgh missionary conference in 1910 anticipated: “the future of Christianity [is] a worldwide rather than a European religion” (Dana Robert, Christian Mission, 56). Christians are now rooted in new lands, and the religion’s future lies in the global South. The typical contemporary Christian is no longer a white, male, European but a black, female, African. The number of Christians who go to a Sunday worship service in China is now more than those who attend in Europe.
What then are the implications of “World Christianity”? For one thing, Western academia no longer has a monopoly on World Christianity. As Mark Noll has suggested, the history of Christianity needs diverse stories from non-Western perspectives (The New Shape of World Christianity, 33-37). But it goes deeper than that. Not only can no one group or part of the world claim a monopoly on the history of world Christianity, but neither can anyone assert primacy or privilege in doing theology. Diverse voices from around the globe are necessary in reflecting on scripture, history, and theology. Contributions from Christians all over the world need to fill in the mosaic of world Christianity. That never means an anti-Western theory, or a bias against Western traditions or theological reflections. Instead, the work of Christians everywhere needs to complement one another, and contribute toward a holistic view, which will eventually benefit all.
Throughout history, Christianity has experienced variations in terms of theology, members, and organizations. Any form of Christianity dominated by a certain culture has been changed when it encountered different forms of culture. The rise of “World Christianity” today asks us to reassess the essence and nature of Christianity, and to respect and accept the diverse expressions of Christian faiths around the world. Both diversity and cooperation are key implications of “World Christianity.”
Gun Cheol Kim
PhD Candidate in Mission Studies, School of Theology