Cultural Analysis

According to cultural sociologist Jeffrey Alexander (2003, p. 4), the task of cultural sociology is “to bring the unconscious cultural structures that regulate society into the light of the mind…we must learn how to make them visible.”  In other words, one goal in the study of culture is to make the invisible visible. Doing so is important because we can reveal patterns that may be important for people to realize, of which they may be otherwise unaware. This may potentially lead to changes in their attitudes and/or behavior.

In an article that examines agency in narrative texts, Franzosi and colleagues (2012) ask "How can we measure something that is not there?" How we go about making culture visible in a systematic way is the focus of this page and the project of the Culture Lab in general. Sociologists and other scholars studying culture employ a range of methods to do so. We offer brief descriptions of some methods --  Content and Interpretive Analysis, Experiments, Ethnographic Interviews and Survey Research -- along with illustrative examples of studies that employ them. Different research questions demand different approaches to collecting and analyzing data. Each method has benefits and weaknesses and selecting a method is dependent on the question about culture being asked. For more information about methods of analyzing culture, you may also want to check out a special issue in Qualitative Sociology titled: Methods, Materials and Meanings: Designing Cultural Analysis.

Why use Content/Textual Analysis versus other Methods to study Culture? 
There are many advantages to systematically analyzing culture through examining texts such as books, newspapers, films, magazines, or social media which make up the shared context of the social world. Content Analysis is especially valuable for its ability to not only capture trends over time, but to reveal otherwise hard-to-detect, obfuscated patterns within a mass of cultural messages. Additionally, depending on the kind of content available, researchers can access purposeful communication over time (such as laws and policies), as well as unintentional and covert messages embedded in public discourse and media content, and can examine variations in content intended for different audiences. Moreover, textual analysis is an unobtrusive form of studying communication and has the strong benefit of being replicated by other scholars to substantiate researchers' findings. Finally, content or textual analysis enables researchers to answer theoretical questions about culture with empirical evidence, making for especially compelling arguments. Other methods can be excellent for assessing culture. Pugh (2013) outlines the benefits of approaching cultural analysis through interview techniques.

How have you measured and analyzed culture?  What are examples of other exemplary studies?  Continue the conversation here.

References
Alexander, Jeffrey C. 2003. The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Franzosi, Roberto, Gianluca De Fazio, and Stefania Vicari. 2012. "Ways of Measuring Agency: An Application of Quantitative Narrative Analysis to Lynchings in Georgia (1875-1930)." Sociological Methodology 42:1-42.

Pugh, Allison. 2013. “What Good Are Interviews for Thinking about Culture? Demystifying Interpretive Analysis.” American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1:42-68.

Sound Doctrine & The Downgrade

Sound Doctrine is the heart & soul of Christian Theology. Paul addressed this issue numerous times. 

Sound Doctrine is Healthy Doctrine. The precipitous decline of the evangelical church in America is directly attributable to the paucity and indolence regarding Sound Doctrine.

An often overlooked factor is not just what people know, but, what they don’t know. This deficiency in Sound Doctrine makes them susceptible to all manner of corrupt doctrine which results in a theological poverty that produces what Spurgeon described as The Downgrade. 

This phenomenon is prevalent and growing in the Evangelical Church in America. The following is a rationale for practicing Sound Doctrine in the church where you worship.

(1) Sound doctrine is necessary for establishing biblical truth and for refuting error

(2) Christian ministry and theology go hand in hand.

(3) Sound doctrine is the very heart of Christian faith.

(4) Sound doctrine is both relevant to and practical for Christian living

(5) Sound doctrine allows no compromise.

(6) Sound doctrine is not an option for one who belongs to Christ.

(7) Neglecting sound doctrine brings grave danger.

What are YOU doing to produce and maintain Sound Doctrine in the church where you worship?

6 Marks of Faithful Ministry

God is good to give us pastors. The very fact that God calls certain men to “care for the church of God” (Acts 20:28) proves that the church is in need of care. God gives us pastors because we need pastoring. But what is this ministry? How does a pastor minister to his people in a way that expresses due care and concern for them? Last week I spent some time studying Paul’s charge to the elders/pastors in Ephesus (see Acts 20) and saw him lay out a series of marks of a faithful ministry. 

The pastor’s ministry is a humble ministry. Paul reminded these church leaders, “You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, serving the Lord with all humility…” Paul could humbly say he had served them with humility. He had always desired their good and God’s glory rather than his good and his own glory. He had served them as a slave under the rule of God, faithfully carrying out his ministry. He was an example of selflessness, of esteeming others higher than himself. The pastor is to serve humbly, to serve just like Jesus served. An arrogant ministry is the most destructive kind of ministry. Pastors aren't called to be popular, but to be heralds of the truth. 

The pastor’s ministry is a bold ministry. Paul was humble, and his humility allowed him to be bold. “I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable.” Paul didn’t just whisper or suggest what was true. He declared it. He declared anything and everything that would be beneficial to his congregation. He held back nothing that would be good for the state of their souls. A few verses later he says “I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.” This church got all of it. They got the whole Bible, not just the parts that are easy or the parts that play nice with the surrounding culture. His confidence was in God, so he boldly declared the whole counsel of God. Pastors aren’t called to be popular, but to be heralds of the truth.

The pastor’s ministry is a teaching ministry. Paul reminds this church that he was “teaching you in public and from house to house.” There were both public and private dimensions to his ministry. There was a preaching component to it as well as a teaching or counseling component. He would preach before the entire congregation and he would meet with an individual or a small group. The pastor is first and foremost a minister of the Word of God and he is called to take the Word to the people by preaching it or by teaching it. Wherever they are is exactly where he will bring the Word.

The pastor’s ministry is a wide ministry. The pastor’s ministry goes out to all kinds of people and does not deliberately exclude any group. Paul reminds the church that he testified to both Jews and Greeks. He preached to anyone and everyone who would listen. He even actively sought out different kinds of people. Whoever was in his neighborhood would hear his gospel. He knew that the gospel is good news for everyone and he wanted everyone to worship together in one church, as one body. The news was too good to hold back from anyone.

The pastor’s ministry is a gospel ministry. What was the content of Paul’s message? When he spoke humbly and boldly, when he taught publicly and privately, when he went before Jews and Gentiles, what was it that he taught? “Repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.” This is the gospel, the gospel of repenting of sin and putting faith in Jesus Christ. Paul’s gospel was not a social gospel or a prosperity gospel or any other misaligned or flat-out false gospel. It was the true gospel. The whole gospel. The saving gospel. It was the good news that declares “Repent and believe and you will be saved.” The pastor’s ministry is a ministry that is all about the gospel.

The pastor who loves your money hates your soul.

The pastor’s ministry is a pure ministry. This one is so important in an age where the prosperity gospel has risen to such prominence. “I coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’” Paul’s ministry was not about personal enrichment. It was not about ego or status. It was about serving God by caring for God’s people. He served as a living, breathing illustration of Jesus’ words, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” If his church ever wanted to know what that looked like in real life, they just needed to think about him. Paul was not opposed to paying a pastor for his work, but in this context he wanted to demonstrate to these people the value of hard work and the beauty of a pure and selfless ministry. Paul could look these people in the eye and say, “I only ever gave. I never took.” The pastor’s ministry is a pure ministry that cares about souls, not self. The pastor who loves your money hates your soul.

The pastor’s ministry is humble and bold and pure. It is concerned with all kinds of teaching before all kinds of people. Its content is the gospel. This is the kind of ministry that fulfills the pastor’s duty to care for the church of God which he purchased with his own blood.

https://www.challies.com/articles/6-marks-of-a-faithful-ministry/

 

Is Formal Education Required?

Is a formal Bible education necessary for a pastor?

Some church traditions include formal requirements regarding Bible education for those who serve as a pastor. Is this biblical?

Many biblical principles are involved in answering this question. First, the person who serves as a pastor-teacher is someone called to ministry. Education is certainly helpful, but a pastor is one who is called and gifted. Ephesians 4:11-12 states, "And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ."

Second, there are many forms of Bible education, but not all training is formal training. For example, in many parts of the world, the majority of people in a village may be illiterate. Bible training in this context is still important, but may take a much different form than in a culture with a high level of formal education. Instead of writing papers and reading books, the focus is often on memorizing Scripture, biblical sermons, and interaction with other church leaders.

Third, not every person has the opportunity for formal Bible education. Some very gifted pastors have no formal Bible education, yet are very effective due to a combination of God's gifting, diligent self-study, and informal education. The renowned British pastor Charles Spurgeon lacked formal Bible education, yet read six books each week in addition to constantly reading the Bible. God used him to lead one of the largest churches of the nineteenth century in London despite his lack of formal Bible education.

While formal Bible education is not possible for every person and does not fit those in every culture or context, there are many reasons Bible education is important.

First, a formal Bible education allows an increased focus on Scripture and its applications for ministry.

Second, formal Bible education allows a student to gain from the learning and experiences of more mature Christian leaders. Professors often provide a wealth of wisdom and ministry experience that are invaluable to younger, growing leaders.

Third, formal Bible education provides a basis of strong Christian relationships. These include friendships with other students as well as mentoring relationships with faculty members.

Again, while formal Bible education is not always possible, growing in biblical wisdom should be a high priority for every church leader and encouraged whenever possible for those who seek to lead in Christian ministry.

Starting an Expositional Sermon

by Brett Selby  Feb 7, 2017 

  

Presuppositions are starting places. When we begin any task, we assume certain things, and many of them are held unconsciously. Although they are subtle and often undetected, they will guide any endeavor to a particular conclusion even if that object was not the intended one.

So, let’s say that I want to be a Bible teacher and preacher. Where do I start? How do I begin my work?

Our posture toward Scripture is crucial. First, we must be absolutely committed to, as David Helm says it, “staying on the line of Scripture.” We dare not say less than God says in His Word, neither can overreach and say more. The latter is liberalism, the former is legalism, and both kill the life and vitality of a church. This is how we have to orient ourselves in relation to the Bible.

Second, we must believe that Scripture is God speaking to us in the present tense. Hebrews 3:7-8 is intriguing in this regard. “Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness.” This is a quote from Psalm 95 but notice in what tense the Holy Spirit is speaking. It isn’t the past tense but the present: “as the Holy Spirit says…” God speaks in the present through ancient words. This is a powerful conviction and the possession of it changes everything in the way an expositor handles the text.

Given these presuppositions, how do I begin my work? Our tendency is to begin by asking, “What am I going to say about this text?” And that is the wrong question and the wrong place to begin the work. Instead, we must ask, “How did this text function in its original setting? What did the writer intend when he put it together–under the direction of the Holy Spirit–in this way?”