Chapter Four AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF CULTURE AND CULTU CHANGE IN ELEVEN PROPOSITIONS Ase mera ew of wk nd change thc emerge from ie are ince, largely because they take nto acount che ature of ular in es complexity and the ive it stength and resilience overtime “Toaddress this fling, however, is ogo right to dhe heat of sci News 0 sa, this arena of scholarship can be highly esoteric—any derailed elucidation would require comes. To ly ie all ox, ee, rosble but, in the en, it would Be a distaction from the ar tandlAnd oT il simply lay ou the heart of a alernaive eleven proposcions—seven about culeue itself and four about Change, Here again, more could be sid about each one, but these sion ad their shore descriptions cover the major highlights chat Aifeene and, I believe, beer direction Seven Propositions on Culture PROPOSITION ONE: CULTURE IS A SYSTEM OF TRUTH CLAIMS AND MORAL OBLIGATIONS Culeue is, Sst and foremost, SOENETRER|by which we comp others, the larger world, and ourselves and through which we individ and collectively order our experience. Ae che eare of culeure isa ‘FFAs social scientists are prone to call them. But these norms are bet understood as cmmondng truhs, which define the “should” and “should na of our experience and, accordingly, the good and dhe ei, the eight and. wrong, the appropiate and the inappropriate, che honorable and the: cular involves the obligacions to adhere coches rhs, obli- ome about by virtue of ope's membership in a group. Put ed ches ruth claims and moral demands co not exist a Set vrais ee tat they mostly can be expressed as aphorisms of bu people sacl if ever grasp them within consciousness as @ pe formulations. Rather, chey are embedded within naracves foverlapping themes and within various myths that often ideals. vagy abridged sense, then, is culeurea worldview. Perhaps the thing eo realize is that this "worldview" is so deeply ‘the hubs of ur ives, and in our social Mee are acl-consciou of and aticulate about aur workview, but ts the frameworks of meaning by which we navigate fe exis ciel” prior co conscious awareness, Tht i, our understanding of eso tken-forgranted that it seems utterly obviows, Te bears hac iio justo view of wha ight or wrong or tue oilse the very sence of re experience it so becuse the frameworks of knowledge and understanding (and in his sense) ae age corerminous with language. Langs, Dose system of symbols, provides the primary medium shrough ple apprehend thee conscious experience in the world. Through stuctre and its meaning-—ies syntax and semantcs—it provides eres thr which people wndencand themselves, others and ‘world, To acquire langage i sete world and oneself iit fis why one cannot merely Ng worldviews or question ones own Mos of what really counts, in tems of what shapes us and directs noe aware of ic operates fr below what most of us ae capable of sessing. OSITION TWO: CULTURE IS A PRODUCT OF HISTORY re provides one reason why culture is sected so deeply into con- and social practice, histo another reason. Culture rakes form as Acretions of meaning in society over long periods of time. la this is much less an invention ofthe will ehan ie i slow produce‘A bie of jasgon can help here. In his development ofthe old and Mamsise concept of abit, che French social theorist fers an insighe inc just how imporane the inceration of history ‘ure is. Bourdieu defines habieus asa system of dispositions shared society o within community Experienced as internal law and external sity, habias represents “the past which survives in che present” of a it elsewhere, itis “history cured into nature,”* sad nature, if you ‘organizesa way of being, nd not just a course of action, and ie dessin thae makes our understanding of the word and oue way of life seem For these historical reason, culate is highly eesilient, durable vee ti ‘This does not mean chae cultures are closed systems and impervi influence and change. Obviously enough, they are open and vat lays given to some modification, adaptation, and alteration, I ij ‘hey are not easily change in these ways of changed in the direction we ‘hem to change. The ineria built inco culture by vreue oft elati its long history tends to make it lumbering an eeatic a the same ti 1, the state, education, the media of mass communications, scientific ological reach, nd he ily nits sian capacities are nat atoll neta buhay hee owe logic place, ad history ha inte th the ideas and ideals fo which they are caries. I is che failure 0 tac and integrate this bac fact that makes most Americans and Christians efcivelyIMgelinsiven it comes to caleure. cis anoher way in which culere i itrinsially daletical—one would seem s obvious cate does not need any explanation. This sche hip between individuals nd insttions. Indvidal, of couse, do belie and vac, and such they are consitative ofa social order ics intctions. Bu atthe same time, those sitions and the larger der of which they ae pare noc nly provide the framework of mean- and social lacions in which individuals operate bu als act back” on duals form the structures of thie consciousness Tn shor, individ- nd istitatione are insparble.Insiatonscanno eit without the viduals who make them work, bu individuals canoe be understood out- ‘ofthe instieutons that form them aod fame all of chee aciviy, That Lin che formation of culture, one should noe be under the illusion chat lsectic i evenly balanced. While individuals are nox powedess by any ofthe imagination instieaions have much greater power PROPOSITION THREE: CULTURE 1S INTRINSICALLY DIALECTICAL ‘There are ewo ways in which this proposition plays our. ‘The fise has ‘with the relationship beeween ideas and institutions. Given the ‘tendencies coward idealism, we are prone ¢o view culeure in terms leading ideas. We often speak ofthese as chough culeure was ike a ‘vapor—you cant see it but you know it is chere because people ae it by itor infected by it (asthe case may be). Yer ideas are noe free-loa consciousness but are grounded in the social world in the most concrete ‘To pur it bluntly, culearesiess'muchrsminfeasteuccureawieiideas! It shape in concrete institutional form. One must view culture, chen, aot a notmative order reflected in well-established symbols, but also as ‘orgunization of human activity surrounding che production, distri ‘manipulation, and administration of those symbols. Another way co say is char culture is intrinsically di@teiedl'Ic is generaced and exises at ‘interface beeween ideas and insicutions; between the symbolic and the sand physical environment. Ideas are important, of course, but without understanding the ‘workings, and power of the institutions in which those ideas are generated ‘managed, one only understands half of what is going on in culture. Ie is ‘othink of culeure asa ching, if you will, mafierueednoe by lone indivi but rather byinstieutions and’ the elites who lead them Insticucions such POSITION FOUR: CULTURE IS A RESOURCE AND, AS SUCH, IRM OF POWER ink of culture institutionally and organizational allows one co chink of symbols eke the form of ides, information, news, wis- indeed, knowledge of ll kinds and these in turn are expressed in pro- ements, speeches, edicts, tracts, essays, books, fil, at, lw, and the “The amount of cultural ousput of course, varies considerably by sociery by the institutions producing i* ‘At che same time, symbols in he form of knowledge, technical know tentials, and culeurl accomplishments can also be though of a @ oF capital Pacciculrly in sheen mean input o such thing. eure can be understood as spmbulceaptal? Though, unlike money, sym- i capital cannot readily be transfered from one generation co another, of ne individual co anocher, like money, symbolic cpical can be accurnu- ‘Some individuals, some organizations, and some objets have more and ulate more symbolic cape than others. Fr example.a/PhsDshas money smbec ofthe National Academy of ces has more symbolic capital than a high school science teacher; thewinner of Nobel Prize in iteratre has more symbolic capil hana novelist. Likewise, whatever els one may think about the New Yr has moe sybolic capital tha dhe Dla Maing Nav, Yale hs bolic capital than Bob Jones University and some say (hough ei pute) har che Yankees ave greater symbolic capital han che Rd ‘isk of droning on, an Oscar has more symbole capital than a C and Television Excellence Award, a Rhodes scholarship cries moe capital chan a Rotary Club scholarship, ana BMW has more symbole ‘han a Honda All ofthese ae extreme contrasts but they make the Importantly, "uleuress not neural in relation wo power b spon other words, ingosrki of fOWEFand influence. But influence of what kind? Ie seit an authoiey one possesses which puts one ina position to tened ro and ken seriously. Ke ends asthe Bourdieu puts i, i i the power of “legitimate naming” Take Solahenitzynas an example. While many people endured the Gul, so whom wrote of their experiences, ie was Solzhenitsyn's reputation ah bility thar was catapulted far beyood his pers. This was large meas ‘to his Nobel Prize in literature. This symbolic capital, incur, gave abilcy co speak on a wide range of oer issues far ouside che realm al acue with great auhorry. To give another example, an op-ed in York Times confers greater credibility and authority than anything opi the Chattang Tims Fre Pras. Ao ally, one might point the practic of “book-bluehing.” When one urs to che ack cover of by an Evangelical and ind an enthusiastic endorsement by James Dab J. Packer, ehe book immediately gins an enormous boos in legit “This ocurs whether or ac the endorser his ay expertise inthe subject book. Symbolic capita is conferred almost magically on che book viree ofthe endorsers celebrity stats wien the Evangelical Chistian munity. Indeed, often enough it takes little more thin a celebrity bl a catchy cover o give an echerwise mediocre book manuscript the p inuence the perceptions and convictions of is readers, PROPOSITION FIVE: CULTURAL PRODUCTION AND SYMBOLIC ‘CAPITAL ARE STRATIFIED IN A FAIRLY RIGID STRUCTURE. (OF “CENTER” AND “PERIPHERY” ‘This proposition is merely an extension of Proposition Four, Le me put i ‘way: with economic capital, quantity i paramount. I che ways ofthe more is almost always becer, and mote influential, chan les, With jeis't quanity but qualicy tha macters mos, Fis the satus of euler Flea accomplishment and stasis organize in aseraccure that ranges me “center” ad the periphery” The individuals, networks and instca- ctl isla i the production of a culture operate i dhe cencer”| rstig ste highest, ne on che periphery, where starus is low. USA Taey nay sll more copies of newspapers chan the Naw’ York itis the Naw Yok Tims that isthe newspaper of recordin America hewie, one can sell a hundred chowand copier published by Loyola, Orbis, Zondervan, IVP, Bake, and only 5,200 hook published by Knopf bue es the book by Knopf tae is more be eeviewed inthe Nav York Revi of Bok the Naw Relic or the reer : uence follows acondingly ce ener hese green erate cr Baca in Bluefield, West Virginia, as one would at Harvat, bur HA ‘Therefore, somone with a credential fom Harvard will ay more opportunities than someone from Bluefield Seat andl will mone up in position of geater influence chan the over could give mytia examples but the poine is clea: che taus structure and culeual production is of paramount imporeance to undet- caleure and culeuel change. OSITION SIX: CULTURE IS GENERATED WITHIN ORKS ‘of ws are inclined ro what has been called the jigratnan” (or great Alby che nineteenth-centary Scottish historian, Thomas Calle. Ia his ls, the history ofthe world is bu the biography of great me 25 take it, Universal History the history of what maa has accom cl inthis world, sat bottom che HISTO OF GFETE ME who worked hete. They were che leaders of men, these geet ones; the ers, paterns, and in a wide sense creators, of whatsoever the ‘mass of men contrived to door to attain ll chings that we see ling accomplished in che world are properly the outer material the practical realization and embodiment, of Thoughes chat Jin che Great Men sent into the world: che soul of the whole lds history, it may justly be considered, were che history of these.”For Caryl, heroes shaped history through the vision of thie la Power of chit inellc, the beauty and delight of thei aesthetic, mating jt ll, a certain inspiration from above. When che word’ most acute, great leaders rise to che occasion and provide the co vision co address that need. In all epochs of the worlds history, we ‘the Great Man to have heen the indispensable savior of his epoch. ‘calm of the spi, ie was Moses, che Buddha Jesus, and Mohammed ‘others. In the case of war, i¢ was Julius Caesar, Alexander, Chae Napoleon, Washington, Bismarck, and oehers. Inthe case of the intl was Plato and Arstocle, Se. Paul, St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Lather and John Calvin, Jonathan Edwatds, Chacles Darwin, Sigmund ‘Albert Einstein, and che lke. In the case of the ats, it was Michel Raphael, Caravaggio, da Vinci, Titian, Monet, Degas, and the like. All an aristocracy of knowledge, tlen, ability, ambition, and virtue, ‘endowed have stod like switchmen on he tain tacks of history it i ‘genus an che genius of other heroic individuals that have guided the tion of civilization this way oth; fr better or for worse” The only problem with this perspectives that i is mostly wrong. ‘his great-man view of hsgory and culture, I would argue (along with others) char ‘out culture fom other spheres of ife and activity in an analytical In cality,eulture=sosidesad BICUEIONS-is mixed ropether in ‘complex ways imaginable wich all other institutions, noc least of ur own day are the markee economy and the sae. elaionship of culeure t the economy is especialy complex in con- “America because so much of wha drives and sustains the economy ‘much of whar ir sells is knowledge, information, images, symbols, jinn, and the ike Long gone isthe time when economy was mainly by che production and distribution of “things.” Since che mid ech century, larger and larger tegions ofthe aeyplacece based 08 tla of which is Criseian the same Come, dhe government is inextricable from the work of cul- some way, che expansion ofthe stain the ast several decades ue rowing coe inthe production of knowledge and information. Science con are, in che main, appendages of the stte, as are the myriad agencies dealing with bealch, occupational sfey, welfare, and cis among ahers. So oo, ofcourse, is the juicy This means iy tac the state provides mich ofthe Sania, personne, and admin- Fnfascuceure for the knowlege industry but alo tha the sate can dlisenttheough its coercive powers. Ie isin che realm of education these powers ae mos critically at work. Since school attendance is forall chldeen up to che eighth grade, and since the government ‘monopoly on public education, children ate required co be educated the auspices of che state. The only alteratves avilable, 38 we know, families tat have the tiene to give to hemor the money co Private education. And chen take electoral pliice. This has come lusry oriented far more coward che management of images and he of « candidate than to the propagation of political ideals “dense” the network—that is, che more ative and interactive the net the more influential ic could be. This is where the stuff ofculeure and change is produced In making chis case, I don't wane to underplay the role of individual ‘ixma and genius. Within any network, there is usuilly one who prov certain unprecedented leadership, who ofes a greater degre of arte ‘or who pus more at risk financially, socially, and reputationaly, or provides the connective tissue forthe network itself. This is where we do the greatness of a Marcin Luther oe John Calvin, a William Wil Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King, and soon, My point i simply that ‘isma and genius and heir cultural consequences do not \sesvors ofsimilarrorened peopled similarly aligned insiutons. ee are just ewo arenas in which the insictions and work of euleue are le from ete institutional spheres. These instiution have thei gic, dynamics, and direction, as wells cei own center an periphery reasons ulate sneer flly autonomous ture also is composed of innumerable feld:—eelatively distinct and lapping regions of meaning, activity, network, and relationships, Hla ules nd incre, Religious dons and Heol verens be thought of as ied of culture a can publishingentersinmenree and the like. Each of ches hs is own range of subi, By very nacre, these too ave their own logic, dynamics, and diection, a PROPOSITION SEVEN: CULTURE IS NEITHER AUTONOMOUS NOR FULLY COHERENT ‘There isa tendency to view che culture a an autonomous and coherent of life, a sphere of activity that is independent, cobesive, and self-lrect ‘Thete are useful reasons to think cis way. The fact is, however, one can eh | I Ns aquences than othets. How is ehis? What explains the difference? rs seatemene would be truer if it were reworded as: "Under spf am. and ics ideas can have consequences." When these conditions place, ideas can inspice greatness, creativity, scriice, and human floue- Bur keep in mind, under che very same conditions, other ideas can to extuordinaryflly or unspeakable destruction, he question is: What are chose condicions and circumstances? A fully answer to this question is noe within our reach. There are some 5 observations chat we can make, however ‘well as thei own center and periphery: The compleity of culture is indeed bur i does not end thee. 7 Beyond al of this there ate the relatively distinc, and often con perspectives cae are drawn from differen geographical regions of a 0 various ethnic groups and socal classes, and an infinie range of| traditions and moral communities." These are not only relatively isting they are regulacly in eesion if oe antagonistic toward eachother, For reasons, culeure, especially in che modern world, can neve be flly co Ideas Sometimes Have Consequences: Four Propositions on Gultural Change Calta, iis fie co say a cis poin, is a knoe, dificult, complex, impossible puzale. And whae Ihave offeed above is jue a sketch; 0 POSITION FIGHT: CULTURES CHANGE FROM #FIBTORS RARELY IF EVER FROM THE BOTTOM UP sometimes tre that economic revels (asin labor protests) and social ments (suchas environmentalism) occur from the "bottom up"; that iy gh the mobilization of oedinary people. Aad while chey can have ee- ous influence, on zr oum ts, the specific ends are often limited and! ore-lived. Ie is also true cha politcal revolutions (such as the French ron, che Communist Revolution in China, and the assortment of r= ns in Mexigos Yugoslavia, Vietnam, Algeria, Cua Boliviagy Angola, mbique, Guinea-Bissau, and Echiopia)can take form and spread through cruitment and organization of popular proces. Such revolutions, how realy always involve leadership from the ranks of marginal and dis td elites who build new organizations that coalesce revolutionary changes new state and nacional identity. Here too thei influence can be Yer the deepest and most enduring forms of aaa change nearly ‘occurs from he “top down.” In other words, shesworkeofworld- then the ides that changing a culeure mainly by changing the hears minds of ordinary people is looking less and less plausible. Yer cule change. Yes, they ae enduring bue they are never permanent. What, ‘an be std for how culeures change? Let us begin with a well-knowa masien adage comes from a book by this tite published in the Unive Chicago profesor of English, Richa Weaver. Ie has become a man ‘many people who chink about che culture roday and it has done so beau is so obviously correct. Even a pragmatic economise like John May Keynes recognized the truth ofthis insight when he wrote, in his book, General Thr of Employment, Inst ad Money, “Tse of economic and political philosophers, boch when they righ and when they are wrong, are more powerfal chan is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by lite else. Practical mens ‘who believe chemselves tobe quite exempt from any intellectual nfl cnces are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in| authority, who heae voices in the ait are distilling eeie frenzy frm Some academic scibblings ofa few years back. I'am sure chat the power of vested interests is vasly exaggerated compared with the sradual encroachment of ideas” ‘The reason for tis, a Ihave said, is that culeue is about how societies ealiey—what is good, bad, righe, wrong, rel, unreal, important, un- nt and soon, This capaci is oe evenly distributed in a society, but nitrated in eran insticutions and among certain ladesship groups @ havea lopsided acces tothe means of cultural production. These elites in well-developed networks and powerful institutions ‘Over rime, culeuril innovation is ranslated and difused. Deep-rooted eral change tends to bein with those whose work icmose conceptual and and it moves through to those whose work is most concrete and It's indiporably roe that ideas do ave consequences, Yer i is also thar ma al ideas ave conequencs, and among those tha do, some have‘alls into question the rightness and legitimacy of te established practices ofthe culture's leading gatekeepers. The goal of any such toa isco inert the center and, in time, redefine the leading ideas ices ofthe centr. proposition is sympathetic to the insight of che Malian sociaiche>- who argued chat chifigeaccursshrowgnceeultion of is theory was fisly complex, ehough in ies simple and saniized argued that ees were either foxes o lions, Foxes, she pu it, were ho innovated, experimented, and took risks. Lions, by contest, were So defended the status quo in che name of social stability. Foxes and in cension over power. When Hons were ascendant, foxes chal thie auchoriey and would seck co inflate thie ranks in onder co them. Yer because its dificule for foxes co maintain a stable social lions would eventually seplace them or—more interestingl)—ehe pwould become lions. validate ideas; moves on ro wagheruaors who pss ces hn eso ptosis who apply chore des. Al of his, of ou, sructuesofcueunl production, Cultural change is most enduring when it penetrates che struct imagination, fameworks of knowledge and discussion, the perce everyday reality, This rarely if ever happens through grassroots ‘mobilization though grasstoots mobilization can be & manife deeper cultural ransformation, Change ofthis nacre can only come f cop down, PROPOSITION NINE: CHANGE IS TYPICALLY INITIATED BY BITES WHO ARE OUISIDEOF-THEGENTERMOST POSITIONS OF PRESTIGE (TION TEN: WORLD-CHANGING 1 MOST -ENTRATED WHEN THE-NETWORKS OF'BLITES: THE INSTITUTIONS THEY LEAD OVERENP As Langue in Proposition Five, spheres of clea if are broadly st according to tlative degrees of prestige. In the broadest terms, on ‘his a «divin beeweencemteand peipher® But i is imps cuphasze cat “center” and “periphery” are relative eather chan i cept. That soa, pestges noe dichotomous, in the ene cha pcs, energy, end direction for world-making and world-changing rest where various forms of cultural, social, economic, and often resources overlap. Inshore, when networks of elites in overlapping of culrure and overlapping spheres of socal life come together with ed resources and actin common purpose, culeues do change and profoundly. Persistence overtime is essential litle of significance Bue when cultuea and symbolic capital overlap cial capital and economic capital and, in time, political capital, and various resources are directed toward shared ends, the word, indeed, Isic or one doesnt, bu is rather «range wih infinite gradations. within the "center," one can observe degrees of prestige with the wey i levels atthe core or nucleus. Thus, for example, among universities ‘York University isceeainly in the “cenet” bu is nota the very co ‘would have even higher prestige. Among newspapers, che Buon Gi _great deal of symbolic capital, especially compared to smaller papers in regions ofthe councy, but i i noe at the nucleus of che center, wh would find che New York Times. Among public policy eink tanks, the America Foundation is close tothe center if notin it, bute does noth symbolic capital you would find a che Hoover Institution, ‘These kinds of distinctions are imporeane because are oueide"OF#hercenreRORE FSAI. When change is initiated chen ic rypically comes from outside ofthe centers nucleus. Wh OSITION ELEVEN: CULTURES CHANGE, BUT RARELY FER WITHOUT RIGHT” fil of culace and, thus, clue icselfgqpesenesxeririnwhics and in which ideal neress, and power serge ery nate, cult is elm in which instications and thir agents @ end ne understanding of the work agaist altermatives, which are titer present or latent. That wok is che work of legitimation end ion of naming oe oer a sight and ies competion, devia, ‘innovation begins, i ‘systems defined by che elites who possess the highest levels of. xpital. Innovation, i ether words, generally moves fom elices and stitutions they lead ro the general populaion but among elites who d necessarily occupy the highest echelons of prestige. The novelty they teInferior, upd, inadequate, ridiculous, un Ames ‘or june plain evi. This is co suggest thatthe tera of culture is char struggle eer ate never i Bat ic i alo never uncontested, By ‘a ad symbialpedsadanegd a cei such as Michel snl HomisBhaby have noced, have a est some power co del established euler auchorits, Ofcourse conic saxty culture. Often enough, change wil occu through movements fom assimilacon, of eleral change eis eypcilly through diferent manifestations of and cones tat change in cleure ie oged ‘When chee ate challenges ro the sas quo, chee challenges avciculae wih the social seeing" That is, an aleratve vi sociey-—ies discourse, moral demands, institution, symbols, an an, policialy ino th they create, and the communities cat surround Mat make the diflerence. Finally, aguiiChsiamapieith, which sus to sce the individual’ “heare and mind’ asthe primary source and Gory of culture, we now sce thit hears and minds ae only eangentially fo the movements of culture, that culeue is mach more complicated has life independent of individual mind, feeling, and wis indeed chat pot so much individual hares and minds that move cultures bugenleures ind even concord. Yee confit is one of the permanent fi "The movement between the individual and culture in other words, in boch directions and peshaps moves even more strony inthe acer Semennia! coat acchllng:valtenaaeacieal ete rere eae parochial, and hus either unrealistic or irelevane. On he other hand, challenge articulates coo closely with the social envionment that proc the alcrnatve will likely be co-opted by that which ic seks to chal and change. chs overview teaches ‘They are certainly resistant to the mere exertion of by ordinary individuals or by a well-organized movement of individ ‘The ides, suggested by James Dobson, that "ia one generation, you ge the whole culcure™ istthingeshorcofidie@usy Change in polit- al systems and economic condivions cae occur relatively quickly but the profound changes in culture typically ake place over the course of “The most profound changes in culeure canbe seen isp In Sum {eas do have consequences in history, yet not because those ides are i ently cruthful or obviously correct but rather because of the way they embedded in very powerfl institutions, networks, interests, and ‘These factors—overlapping necworks of leders and overlapping ees all operating neat oti the center institutions and in common purpos some ofehe practical dynamics within which wos are the conditions under which ideas finally have consequences. While it be pedantic to make this pon, lec us call attention eo the fact that we ended up with a very diflerene understanding of culeue chan the one ‘monly accepted today ‘To draw the distinction even more sharply, lee me brielly ecurn 0 & philosophical influences I spoke of etle, influences cha prejudice our vi ‘of culture and culeurl change. Againi@idealim, che view tha ideas history, we now see ideas inexorably grounded in social conditions and ci ‘cumseances (and noc just material objects). Against, which fluences us to view the autonomous and rational individual—even if ‘eenius—as the key actor in social change, we now se the 0, i then penetrates the hierarchy of rewards and pisleges and de one and punishments cha organize socal if. I ls Rogaine reordering the organization of pulse and inhibition. One cannoe sce change taking place in these ways, ‘sor prcepeible as an event oe of evens curently unfoing. Rather, leur change of this depth can only be seen and described in retrospect, the eansformation hasbeen incorporated ito @ new configuation of onl control Theis lighe, we can se chat gangs palitisesociatefien, and che tion of artifice ieffecive—al bring abo go ends change ears minds, change laws, ehaRFE Nabe. Buc chey doa’ dnsely uence the mora fabric that makes these changes sustainable ove he long , sustainable precisely Because they ae impliie and as implicit, chey am the presupposiional base of social ie. Only indirectly do evangelism, elit, and social reform effect language, symbol, areaive, myth, and insteutions of formation that change the DNA of a civilization, changing ous=~ Imagine, inthis regard, a genuine “third great awakening” occ America, where half of the population is converted toa deep Christian ‘Unless tis awakening extended ro envelop the cultural gatekeepers ie have ltl fcc onthe characte ofthe symbols cha ate produced and in public and the institutions of culture Formation and eeansmission in our sci market, government-sponsored culeurl inition, eduction at all advertising, entertainment, publishing, andthe news media, 90 0 Cob ahere fe Imagine Further several sacal reform movements rounding, say, educational reform and family policy, becoming very ‘organized and funded, and ontop ofthis, serous Christians being voted «every major office and appoinced co a majriy of judgeships. Legislation bbe passed and judicial rlings may be properly handed down, but legal political victories will be shor-lved or pyeehic without the brond- sitimacy thar makes the aleernatives seem unthinkable, Such i the story of one of che most pera social -movernents ofthe nineteenth and cael eweatieth cen “movement. This movement failed, of couse, no lease because i did noe could not addesseheculeure of esrsint on which the particular inte cemperance depended. In the end, the ideal of "emperance” finally ex derision withthe repeal ofthe Volstead Act in 1933, the word now ha Aisoppeared from our public vocabulary. ‘most radimentary level. Invitations by Christian leaders co fist and ‘are mst worth; but chit main effect will be to renew the churh rather cep America from “losing ts soul” All such engagement may be wor ut if che end is co “save civilization,” it mose certainly is nave. By ies or even together, evangelism, politics, and social reform, then, il to bring about the ends hoped for and intended, important qualification one must make nal of hiss thac even when rm nthe effects for which people hope. There are almost alvays mins particularly atthe macro-hstoical and these are, often enough, eragic. The architects ofthe Enlightenment undestood che power of science and predicted the progressive ameliora- of human sufering chrough it, would never have desired or predicted the ent of nuclear weapons. ThesPracestaneReformers ofthe sixteenth never would have imagined chat thessusmssawandindividualscan- could have contributed to an economic syseem would Likewise, the ans who founded Harvard and Yale would have never expected tae their lk would become strongholds of scularity. And che missionaries who he sid co impoverished pares of the Third World would have never for the growing cycle of dependency they unwictngly helped foster. st goes. One can never quite predic where chings wil go. Calture is endlessly complex and dificule and ic is highly resistane co assion to change it, however well intentioned and heroic our efforts be. Bue with tae sid, one thing is clea: Christians will noc engage the cffctively, much less hope to change it, without attention £0 the 1 mentioned here. vate culeue. And, without «fundamental restract, ‘The pasion and earnest resolve generated by all such movements may ch people and may effeee communities and they may, for time, change but chey generally will ne influence ee course and direction of ce cult asa whole unless they are tied co larger suctual changes i the cultare. CCuleure, a roe, provides the very terms by which lif is ofdere. Ia ‘own culture, the inherited categories derived largely from biblical and c sical soures by which we understand the most basic aspect of human Ihave been and are being transformed by very powerful forces over which dividuals and social groups have litle contol, forces such a consumeri communications technology nd soon, The mose humane understandings personhood, relationships, community, time, space freedom, obligation, ‘eral wealth, canaoe be established or ecovered through a five-year plan even in a generation —certainly noe through politics, noe through soc reform, and aot even in and through revival. In his light, eh he