Redeeming Not Replacing: A Case for Culturally Rooted Christianity
My take on this topic is not to condemn Western Christianity. Rather, I would like to point out the history and learn from it. In the mid-20th century, Western churches and missions discovered the reasons behind their failure to invest millions, if not billions, of dollars in Asia and South Africa. Western missions confused gospel with culture. They thought that their evangelistic model, tools, and guidelines would be the best means to win the souls of those who were deeply shaped by animistic worldviews and raised in pluralistic societies with distinct value systems.
The West imposed their understanding of the Gospel onto very different cultures with distinctive values and characteristics in Latin America and Southeast Asia. History shows us how significantly the mission declined during this period until they recognized that their evangelistic blueprint was ineffective in the cultural contexts they were working in at the time.1 The translatability of the gospel to all cultures makes it inherently adaptable to all cultures, as it is not limited to Western expressions. Thus, the gospel is relevant to all cultures, but navigating a different culture with sensitivity requires careful consideration.2 When the West encountered conflict in the field due to differences in cultural values and norms, they tended to view it in a binary manner. They have no problem celebrating Halloween and Groundhog Day. However, they identify pagan elements in everything and discourage the indigenous people from adopting their culture.
Yes, intent matters. The early church did not copy the pagan elements but adopted them after repurposing them. They also re-baptized many pagan symbols. As we claim that God redeems the culture, we can redeem the pagan elements and repurpose them for God’s glory. Replacing the indigenous culture with an imported Western culture demonstrates the dominant character of Western missionaries, who often exhibit a superiority complex.3 For example, the approach taken by Scottish Presbyterians in Sikkim, Northeast India, was significant. They discouraged or barred the indigenous ministers from wearing their costumes when approaching the pulpit. They enforced a dress code that required preachers to approach the pulpit or lectern only in neatly worn suits and ties. No preacher, even today, wearing their indigenous costume, can preach without a dress imposed by the West. Such an act is a form of imperialistic invasion of another culture.
Mary Scott (1887-1964) was an exception to this strategy. She demonstrates that not all Western missionaries enforced their cultural imposition on the indigenous population. She rather empowered locals and respected other faith customs while working as a Christian missionary. She trained and equipped Sikkimese workers to run the medical mission themselves. Despite “strong opposition to Christian activities by the Chogyal,” she received permission to open a church in 1936 because of her reputation for serving all Sikkimese people, not just Christians.4 Her efforts and strategies of adapting local cultural values specifically contributed to her success. The ‘behind-the-scenes, indigenous-led’ approaches worked within the same Scottish Presbyterian mission system, aside from the imposition of the Western dress codes and etiquette.
In Nepal’s context, the Western missionaries took a different approach that yielded more fruits. They trained indigenous individuals to engage with their communities using their language and within their unique cultural context. They rather chose to work behind the scenes, and the native speakers did the heavy lifting on the front line. This approach has a booming effect on church growth in Nepal.56 Indigenous churches have flourished because they do not strictly follow or implement the western blueprint for evangelism. The conversions happened through the indigenous-led methodology. This approach was evident in the early Catholic mission in Nepal (1703-1769). The Capuchin missionaries invested themselves in learning the Nepal Bhasha (Newari) language, composing original theological works in the local vernacular, and engaging with Nepalese kings.7 This approach not only establishes a historical precedent for contextualization in Nepal, but also demonstrates how they trained indigenous leaders to engage with their local communities throughout the Kathmandu valley.
However, Western-branded Christianity, along with its associated practices of worship, parroting theology, and individualistic salvation culture, has been quietly haunting Nepalese churches. This is not only our problem, but churches across Asia, Africa, and Latin America also have the same branded, imported Christianity from the West. In our specific context, significant concerns arise from promoting the doctrine of individualistic salvation, adopting Western worship styles that demonize indigenous musical instruments by associating them with devil worship, and discarding the ‘honor-shame’ theological framework in favor of the Western ‘guilt-innocent’ framework.8 This issue has overshadowed the biblical idea that we are a new people of God called to redeem the culture we are placed in.
Lamin Sanneh, the most prominent scholar, agrees that the gospel is “translatable” into any language and culture. His key argument is that Christianity has no fixed cultural or linguistic center, unlike Islam. The missionary effort of translating the Bible for the destination or target (indigenous) culture bolstered the preservation of the indigenous cultures. The imposition of the foreign culture alongside the gospel on the indigenous culture, in fact, harms the host culture. He asserts that it contradicts the very nature of Christianity:
I realized that a culture paradigm had usurped the place of God in our enlightened scheme of things… I was unable to reconcile myself to that fundamental compromise with the world. I thought Jesus was for real in spite of the prevarications of the church.9
Today, Nepalese churches bear the stigma of being considered Western agents because they have abandoned indigenous values in favor of wholeheartedly adopting and promoting Western values. The Nepalese church will be responsible for eroding the “Nepaleseness” in Christianity until it learns to redeem its culture by repurposing and rebaptizing it. The early church teaches us to repurpose, not replace, the culture. There are biblical precedents: Paul in Areopagus (Acts 17) quotes pagan poets10 and Old Testament prophets, repurposing Canaanite imagery. Early Christians adopted various elements from Roman culture, including household codes, the fish symbol, and the celebration of December 25.11
We need to understand that Western culture is not Christianity. The Nepalese church need not abandon the gospel to reclaim its cultural identity. Nor must it reject every Western gift and contribution to missions—Bible translations, theological education, or global connections. It must learn to receive these as tools, not as a manual. The early church took pagan symbols and repurposed and baptized them. The Nepalese church can do the same with its own music, dress, and art. God has placed us in a different culture for a reason. We are called to redeem “Nepaleseness,” our culture, with the Gospel. Only then will Christianity cease to be considered a Western import and become, once again, a faith that truly dwells among the Nepalese people.
- David Maxwell, “Decolonization,” in Missions and Empire, Oxford History of the British Empire Companion Series (Oxford University Press, 2008), 285–306.
↩︎ - Jeffrey P. Greenman and Gene L. Green, eds., Global Theology in Evangelical Perspective: Exploring the Contextual Nature of Theology and Mission (IVP Academic, 2012).
↩︎ - Bryony Lau, “The limits of the civilizing mission: a comparative analysis of British Protestant missionary campaigns to end footbinding and female circumcision,” Social Sciences and Missions 21, no. 2 (2008): 193–227.
↩︎ - Wikipedia, “Mary Scott (missionary),” accessed 2026.
↩︎ - Brian C. Stiller, “Nepal: A Nation With More Than Mountains,” World Evangelical Alliance (2012).
According to Stiller of the World Evangelical Alliance, there were only 30 known Christians in 1960, but in the span of a few decades, the number exceeded 1.5 million. The native church leaders claim the number of Christians is around 3 million. The Operation World also describes “a remarkable indigenous movement” that promotes thoroughly indigenous structures and networks. The explosive growth of Christians was attributed to the power of indigenous (local) leadership and witness.
↩︎ - Jason Mandryk, Operation World: The Definitive Prayer Guide to Every Nation, 7th ed. (InterVarsity Press, 2010).
↩︎ - Ian Alsop, “Christians at the Malla Court: The Capuchin ‘piccolo libro’,” Asianart.com (March 11, 2021).
↩︎ - Jayson Georges, “From Shame to Honor: A Theological Reading of Romans for Honor-Shame Contexts,” Missiology: An International Review 38, no. 3 (2010): 295–307.
↩︎ - Sanneh, Lamin. Translating the Message: The Missionary Impact on Culture. 2nd ed. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2009.
↩︎ - Scott Sollom, “A Pagan Poet in Our Eucharistic Prayers,” Franciscan at Home (March 23, 2021).
↩︎ - Bible Hub, “Why does Christianity incorporate pagan traditions (e.g., Christmas trees, Easter eggs?)” (2024).
↩︎
