A person with very elementary knowledge of culture
correctly perceives it to be more difficult to live and work in
some cultures than in others. Winter (1975) described the
enterprise of evangelizing at different cultural distances by using
the symbols E-1, E-2, and E-3. Thus, E-1 evangelization takes
place when a missionary works in a culture similar to his own in
language and general cultural experience, while E-3 work takes
place where the missionary's host culture is radically different
from his or her native rootage.
Similarly, Hesselgrave developed a more detailed means of
computing cultural distance (1978:101-5). His scheme involves a
ten-point scale on seven crucial items like linguistic forms,
social structure, and world view. Thus, a higher number on the
seventy-point scheme would indicate the need of greater effort and
more time in personal identification and adequate task performance.
Forewarned about the drastic cultural differences in an E-3 field
of work, the missiologically informed person determines to be
flexible and empathetic, seeking to understand and accept as valid
the alternative ways of thinking and acting in the new culture.
Perhaps on the front end it is understood that several years of
diligent effort will pass before the missionary feels "at home" in
the culture and is able to perform his or her tasks with some
degree of adequacy.
For a variety of reasons, however, one may choose to
evangelize in what Winter calls E-1 situations. In such cases a
person is prone to accent cultural similarities and minimize
cultural differences, especially at the physical level.
Consequently, one tends to reduce efforts at identification,
especially at the psychological level. The results may be as
deleterious as the failure to adjust in E-3 situations. This
article addresses the deceiving nature of evangelizing in close-
culture situations.
External similarities like language, food, levels of
technology, and housing are more obvious. Most popular discussions
of cultural differences seem to center on the physical.
Psychological factors are admitted but on world-scale the E-1
situations appear so similar that one is deceived into thinking
that little effort needs to be made by the missionary in adapting
to them. Neill (1964:392) reports that when Archibald Fleming,
Anglican missionary to the Arctic region, spent his first winter
with two Eskimo families in an igloo, he quoted favorably the words
of Commander Peary: "A night in one of these igloos, with a family
at home, is an offense to every civilized sense." Nothing
approaching that is the norm in E-1 situations. Often the
differences between cultures in E-1 situations are similar to the
regional differences one may find in one's own country. So why
exert a great effort in adaptation? Why not get into the work as
soon as possible?
There are numerous cases of missionaries who are miserable
in E-1 situations despite external similarities to their home
culture. Such unhappiness cuts short the period of work in the
second country, and potentially good workers have themselves to
thank for the outcome of their fatal assumptions about non-
adaptation or minimal adaptation.
It is certainly true that people may live fairly happily
for many years in a second culture by surrounding themselves with
the trappings of their home culture. But if their task is to work
with local people, they will be defeated by such arrangements.
This very scenario provoked Lederer and Burdick to write
Hall contends that the only time the famous defense lawyer,
Clarence Darrow, decisively lost a case was in Honolulu in 1932
where he did not know how to appeal to the "formal systems" of his
oriental jurors (1959:75). "Formal systems" is a crucial term;
largely psychological, it is freighted with implications for
identification. Perhaps more than the physical elements, the
psychological factors determine acceptance in E-1 situations.
Roman Catholic missionary anthropologist, Luzbetak,
illustrates the matter well. When he inquired about the problem of
missionary adjustment in Mexico, several bishops and religious
superiors remarked,
Lynn Anderson's research indicated that many U.S.A.
preachers with the Churches of Christ were not really accepted in
English speaking Canada because they failed to negotiate the
adjustments at the "formal systems" level (1965). Language,
automobiles, houses, and food were largely the same for U.S.
citizens and Canadians; but nationalistic feelings, matters of
etiquette, and task orientations were different. Similarly, an
English preacher informed me in the late 1960s that "at least half
of the American preachers who come to England are not accepted."
Where that is the case, one's effectiveness will be seriously
hampered. Winston Churchill's quip that "Britain and America are
two great nations separated only by a common language," is a gross
cultural overstatement. According to George Bernard Shaw, as
portrayed in "My Fair Lady," English has not been spoken in America
for years! But even though there is enough language commonality
for initial communication, other differences are very telling. As
a part of her contribution to the war effort, anthropologist
Margaret Mead wrote several booklets and articles designed to help
British and Americans, troops included, to understand each other as
allies in the 1940s (Mead, 1943, 1943a, 1944, 1944a, 1947). The
formal systems are different enough even in culturally similar
countries to cause a religious worker to be rejected if he neglects
them.
A Brazilian going to work in E-1 Portugal will be faced
with the same variables. A Honduran going to Bolivia or an
Argentine going to Chile will face numerous formal systems
differences. Language is only one dimension of a culture, and
having it in common may deceive one into thinking few adjustments
need to be made otherwise.
Even when a North American goes from Tennessee, Arkansas,
Oklahoma, or Texas to work in Minnesota, Wisconsin, or one of the
Dakotas, an unwillingness to make adjustments will hinder one's
work. A Southerner will not be accepted if his notion of a church
fellowship in the north is to eat Kentucky Fried Chicken and root
for the Dallas Cowboys. When students from the north describe
themselves as having "culture shock" as a result of their moving
south to study, it should be obvious that Southerners who go north
to evangelize will find enough difference to make adjustments
necessary.
A further complication is that close-culture, E-1
situations may attract workers who are unwilling to make "those
drastic changes." In other words, they may tend to be people who
study little missiology and are personally inflexible. Thus, they
put forth little effort to adjust to differences, and the result is
short periods of essentially poor work.
Cleveland, Harland, Gerard J. Mangone, and John C. Adams
1960 The Overseas Americans. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hall, Edward T.
1959 The Silent Language. Greenwich, Connecticut: Fawsett
Publications.
Hesselgrave, David J.
1978 Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Zondervan Pub. House.
Lederer, William J., and Eugene Burdick
1958 The Ugly American. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
Luzbetak, Louis J.
1970 The Church and Cultures: An Applied Anthropology for
the Religious Worker. Techny, Illinois: Divine
Word Publications.
Mead, Margaret
1942 "When Do Americans Fight?" Nation 155:16 (17
October):368-71.
1943a "What Makes Americans Tick?" The New York Times
Magazine (9 April):54, 57-60.
1944 "A GI View of Britain." The New York Times Magazine (9
April):14, 40.
1944a "What Is a Date?" Transatlantic. No. 10 (January):54,
57-60.
1947 "The English as a Foreigner Sees Them." The Listener
38:973 (18 September):475-6.
Neill, Stephen
1964 A History of Christian Missions. The Pelican History
of the Church:6. Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin
Books.
Shewmaker, Stan
1970 Tonga Christianity. South Pasadena, California:
William Carey Library.
Winter, Ralph D.
1975 "The Highest Priority: Cross-Cultural Evangelism." In
Let the Earth Hear His Voice, ed. J. D. Douglas, 213-
25. Minneapolis: World-Wide Publications.
The Deceiving Nature of Adaptation in E-1 Situations
by
C. Philip Slate
Harding Graduate School of Religion
Memphis, Tennessee
E-1 Opportunities
The Setback of Partial Adaptation
You North Americans are generally well disposed when
you come to our country as missionaries; at least, you
want to be "de-Yankeeized" whether you succeed or not.
The trouble is that your culture is so different from
ours that North American missionaries have a tough job
ahead of them. But they can learn our ways. It is quite
different with the Spaniards. The Spaniards come from
a background similar to ours, but just because their way
of life is so similar to ours they imagine that there
is no difference at all between Spain and Mexico, and
consequently they never really learn to know us (1970:70).
Cultural understanding and respect are always necessary, even in E-
1 situations where one may wrongly assume a similarity that does
not exist at the formal systems level. It is a horrible handicap
to pursue work among people who feel you do not know them.
Recommendations
References
1943 "Can You Tell One American from Another?" The Listener
30:777 (2 December):640.
Mirrored by permission of ACU Missions Personnel
Direct questions and comments to Ed Mathews,
![]()