American and Global Christianities: Unpacking Forms of “Synchrony”
by Robbie B. H. Goh
Figure 1: a church in rural India.
Of the Protestant evangelical Christian hubs in the developed countries of the global North, perhaps the prominent nation is the United States, because of its wealth in various forms of Christian capital: books and publishers, seminaries, music and media, famous pastors, large movements, and conferences. This is not to deny the denominational, liturgical, demographic, and other differences between the different churches in the US. However, the American Christian culture and leadership that is exported today is a particular projection or manifestation of the whole that is Christianity in the US: evangelical, Pentecostal-charismatic, personality-driven, expansive, and globally-oriented. It may not be the Christianity of the small midwestern Lutheran church, but it is the well-known global face of church leaders like Bill Johnson and Tim Keller, writers like Rick Warren and Joel Osteen, musicians like Chris Tomlin and Israel Houghton, churches like Willow Creek and Lakewood.
While evangelism in theory seeks the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the whole world, regardless of agency or origins, in practice, global Christian flows—of leadership influence, doctrine, cultural products such as books and media, financial support, missionaries etc—can be unilateral, from the Christian hubs in the developed countries in the “global North” to newer (and often poorer) countries in the “global South.” This unilateral flow raises issues of whether unity or “synchrony” (Kaell 2020) may not be a form of cultural hegemony or domination. Is there also a fear of a “McDonaldization” of global Christianity (Drane 2001; Scott 2004)? This is particularly acute when the dominant Christian culture industries are aligned with the global language of English, and the global culture of capitalism and consumerism, as they are in the case of the US (Twitchell 2007; Bowler 2013).
The role and relative dominance of US Christianity on the rest of the world depends on the culture and status of the churches in the region being considered. I would like to suggest an analytical framework which can be used to assess the dominance of US Christianity on other Christianities, and could also be used to assess other forms of flow and correspondence between those Christianities and the US.
Dominance: effectively a wholesale adoption of the cultural products and thought leadership of US Christianity. US leadership is explicitly acknowledged, American cultural products predominate, and there is evidence of other borrowings (such as in doctrine, liturgical style, and format). If there are economic inequalities, then a degree of financial support from American church and para-church organizations may be expected, although, for reasons of political or cultural sensitivities, this may be implicit.
Influence: there is explicit influence of US Christianity and the use of some cultural products. While there is some mutuality and the influence can flow in both directions, the American influence still predominates.
Correspondence: there is some resemblance to US American Christian models and practices, but no explicit influences and little or no use of American Christian cultural products. The resemblance may be to a common-origin doctrine or practice such as Biblical accounts of the apostolic church.
Differentiation: no discernible influence of US Christianity or resemblance in terms of practices and material used. Evidence of quite distinct practices stemming from local cultures.
Clearly a comprehensive assessment of US and other Christianities would require exhaustive comparative fieldwork which is beyond the remit of the present remarks. Based on some of my (necessarily limited) fieldwork observations in India, China, Singapore and elsewhere, I will merely offer some illustrative examples.
The top two categories of strongest flows—dominance and influence—rely on certain basic socio-political factors. There must be enough broad competence in English so that US Christian cultural products can be directly consumed with little or no translation required; there must be religious freedom to allow for the more or less unimpeded inflow of American Christian leaders, products, and influence; there must be comparatively few political sensitivities concerning external political influence, including Christian influence that might be construed as foreign “interference” in domestic affairs. In addition to these basic socio-political and cultural conditions, there has to be a specific choice by local churches and leaders to emulate and leverage on US church models, usually so that local churches can grow rapidly or be seen to be aligned with models of rapid growth and dynamism. Such conditions obtain in countries and territories like Singapore, Hong Kong, Caribbean countries like Trinidad and Jamaica, and (to a lesser extent) New Zealand, Australia, Taiwan, and Malaysia. Looking at the list of bestselling books at a leading Christian bookseller in Singapore, SKS Books Warehouse, the dominance of American writers such as Timothy Keller, Ravi Zacharias, Max Lucado, and Lee Strobel is clear, together with the presence of some Singaporean writers such as Edmund Chan and Robert Solomon. In New Zealand’s Manna Christian Stores, American Christian writers such as Sharon Garlough Brown, Francine Rivers, and Lee Strobel, take prominent place among the bestsellers list, together with others such as C. S. Lewis. The music of American Christian artists such as Chris Tomlin and Michael W. Smith, and groups like Casting Crowns, are sung in many of the churches in these countries.
US denominational ties and connections account for another form of dominance. Historically, missions from denominations such as the Methodists and Presbyterians were highly influential in establishing churches and church-linked organizations such as schools and hospitals. More recently American groups have been planting churches in receptive overseas countries: one example is the “Redeemer City to City” network associated with Tim Keller, which has planted affiliate churches all around the world. Planted churches may be considered an example of cultural dominance because of the use of seminal concepts, training packages, leadership training programmes and other material in the growth of the planted churches. Dominance can also come in para-church forms, an example being the Texas-based Bible Study Fellowship (BSF) that operates in many countries globally, offering a package for training people in studying the Bible and leading Bible study groups. A less dominant, more influential model is one in which local church leaders choose to study in well-known American seminaries like Fuller (Pasadena, CA) and Wheaton (Wheaton, IL), or choose to invite well-known American pastors to preach in churches and as keynote speakers in conferences. T. D. Jakes, Bill Johnson, and the late Ravi Zacharias are examples of popular globe-trotting speakers.
Qualifications to this dominance and strong influence of American Christian culture come in several ways. Firstly, there are non-American models that are also highly influential in overseas markets. These include the Australian Hillsong Church, whose lead pastor Brian Houston is also a highly sought-after global speaker, and whose music arm writes and disseminates many of the songs that are sung in English-speaking churches around the world. Hillsong also has a global network of planted churches. Another example of non-American Christian cultural dominance is the role of the Alpha Programme—developed by the London, UK based Holy Trinity Brompton church—in offering a method and set of materials used by churches all around the world for reaching non-believers.
Figure 2: An underground church in China.
Secondly, US cultural influence is constrained in territories where English is not popularly used (and where translation into local languages is difficult for a variety of reasons), or where socio-political concerns prevent the propagation of what might be perceived as a “foreign” influence. Although historically there may have been influences from the work of American missionaries, more recent conditions have seen the development of church models differentiated from US ones. China is the major example, where the Communist expulsion of missionaries in 1949 led to the growth of a Chinese Christianity that was in many ways indigenous in character. Chinese Christianity today is largely divided between the larger official “Three Self” churches, and the unofficial (or “underground”) churches that tend to operate in small groups, sometimes moving between different locations (figure 1). Both types of Chinese churches usually rely on locally developed material: traditional worship songs or songs composed by Chinese Christians, preaching and teaching by the church’s own pastors, and so on. Churches are often under scrutiny, and some of the things that may lead to their being closed down include “foreign” doctrines and material and “foreign” practices (often taken for granted in American churches) such as mass altar calls or people falling under the power of the Holy Spirit as manifested by speaking in tongues, or weeping, or falling prone. While such practices continue in some underground churches, they have to be performed with caution.
India is another significant example where US American Christian cultural influence is constrained. On the one hand there has been considerable historical influence of American missionaries which can still be seen in mission schools, and the presence of US Christian organisations such as Youth with a Mission and Youth for Christ. On the other hand, India as a predominantly Hindu nation has long been suspicious of anything that can be seen as Christian proselytization, and of “foreign” groups funding or facilitating such activities (Goh 2018). Evangelical activities are more commonly conducted by Indian missions organisations (such as Indian Evangelical Mission or Indian Evangelical Team) or by individual churches. Many of the Indian churches, particularly in the rural areas, have their own local character, meeting in very small groups, conducting activities in local languages, and using improvised facilities and material—all very far from the accustomed picture of “church” in the United States (figure 2).
Finally there can be instances of correspondence between US and other Christianities that are not due to direct influence, but rather to common values or teachings and models from a common source, such as the practices of the early church recounted in the book of Acts in the Bible). Pentecostal practices such as speaking in tongues, supernatural healing, and falling down under the influence of the Holy Spirit, are often associated with the Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles (1906-1915), but there were Pentecostal revivals outside America which predated Azusa Street (such as the Welsh Revival of 1904-1905, associated with places such as Loughor and New Quay in Wales) which exhibited similar phenomena (Goh 2020). Even small churches in rural parts of India and China, without direct contact with Western Pentecostal churches, have similar practices. Likewise, the “megachurch” model of accessibility to non-believer “seekers,” rapid growth, and large size has been popularly associated with well-known US American examples like Willow Creek Community Church (in South Barrington, IL) and Lakewood (in Houston, TX), but examples like Yoido Full Gospel Church in Seoul, South Korea, whose origins predate those well-known American examples and which boasts the largest congregation in the world, can be seen as a parallel rather than an American-influenced development.
Two recent trends—increasing geopolitical tensions between America and other parts of the world (especially China) in the Trump era, and the Covid-19 pandemic—are likely to impact US evangelical Christianity’s relationship with other Christianities in the world. It is probable that these forces will, if anything, exacerbate the relationships outlined above: US Christian cultural dominance and influence are likely to intensify, but so will existing situations of differentiation. Relationships of correspondence may go in either direction: towards more explicit influence (including co-influence) in an increasingly globalized media, or towards more differentiation because of political sensitivities.
Bowler, Kate. 2013. Blessed: A History of the American Prosperity Gospel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drane, John. 2001. The McDonaldization of the Church: Consumer Culture and the Church’s Future. Macon, GA: Smith and Helwys Publishing.
Goh, Robbie B. H. 2018. Protestant Christianity in the Indian Diaspora: Abjected Identities, Evangelical Relations, and Pentecostal Visions. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
—2020. “Protestant Evangelical Pilgrimages: Hagiography, Supernatural Influence, Spiritual Mapping.” Journal of Cultural Geography. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2020.1770497.
Kaell, Hillary. 2020. Christian Globalism at Home: Child Sponsorship in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Scott, Dave. 2004. “The ‘McDonaldization of Youth Ministry.” Fuller Youth Institute, 5 October. Online at: https://fulleryouthinstitute.org/articles/the-mcdonaldization-of-youth-ministry [accessed 24 August 2020].
Twitchell, James B. 2007. Shopping for God: How Christianity Went from In Your Heart to In Your Face. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Robbie B. H. Goh is a professor in the department of English Language and Literature, National University of Singapore, and currently also Vice-Dean (Undergraduate Studies) of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. He obtained his B.A. Honours (1st Class, direct honours,1988) and M.A. (1989) from the National University of Singapore, and Ph.D from the University of Chicago (1993). His teaching and research interests lie in Diaspora Studies, Indian Anglophone Literature, Christianity in Asia, the Bible and Literature/Popular Culture, Late Nineteenth Century English Literature, and Speculative Fiction. He has served in a number of administrative roles in NUS, including as Head of the Department of English Language and Literature (2004-2010), Deputy Director of the Asia Research Institute (2008-2010), Deputy Director of the Centre for the Arts (1996-1999), and prior to these as Deputy Head of the Department of English Language and Literature, Sub-Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Member of the University Core Curriculum Committee (the precursor to the University Scholars Programme), member of the FASS Cities Research Cluster Steering Committee, and others.