‘Involution’ is a current hot word on the Web. Its popularity is constantly expanding and is applied to all sectors. Beneath its popularity, the concept is actually used to explain the predicament emerged within a society itself in the process of its development. The only way to solve involution may be accomplished by continuous innovation. Paradoxically, however, involution prevents innovation.
The word ‘involution’ was originally used in the field of agricultural development. Clifford Geerds published a book on Indonesia in 1963: Agricultural Involution - The Processes of Ecological Change in Indonesia. It describes how the residents of Java Island can not introduce more advanced production equipment because of the lack of capital. When the colonists of the outer islands are blessed by advanced technology and their production is continuously intensive and capitalized, the people of Java turn to labor-intensive industries, and employees constantly increase in the rice planting industry with limited land. This phenomenon is involution. The earlier user of this concept was the American anthropologist Alexander Goldenweiser, who used this word to describe a kind of cultural pattern, that is, after reaching a certain final state, there is no way to further develop or stabilize a society itself, but instead, the society keeps complicating its own internals.
I think that in today’s Christianity, there is definitely serious involution.
Since Christianity entered China, it has experienced more than 200 years of development, with a long history and far-reaching influence. However, this kind of profound influence is now history, and the depth of its social influence can not match that of the past. Although the number of followers and scale of today’s Christianity have already surpassed that of history, the extent of its involution is already in play to affect the development of Christianity.
The kind of involution has the following aspects.
First of all, the church over emphasizes the strict observance of gatherings. The church often warns everyone about the importance of gatherings and stresses what will happen if they do not come to the service. These gatherings include Sunday worship, weekly Bible study and testimony, and daily repentance.
Secondly, it is the excessive dogma of the Bible. Reading the Bible every day, the number of times one reads it, and even reciting the Bible, are used to measure the relationship between a person and God. I once participated in a church that often held Bible contests. In one Bible contest, there was even such a question, “Who has the loudest prayer voice in the Bible?”
Thirdly, it is the argument between different theological positions. What theological position the church originally held should be a matter of free choice, because no position is absolutely correct. However, in its own theological position, the church judges other churches that hold different opinions and even attacks other churches. When the church can not break through its own theological understanding, it chooses to attack other churches in order to pose as being well represented.
Fourthly, there is the emphasis on legalism. Although the church criticizes the laws of the Pharisees, it emphasizes the observance of legalism and even the adherence to it in daily life. In life, we have made rules and regulations that restrict people, for example, forbidding keeping chayote (the plant’s name is literally ‘Buddha’s hand’ in Chinese, translator’s note) and drinking Guanyin tea (The Chinese word ‘Guanyin’ refers to the goddess of mercy in Buddhism). The food and daily necessities that contain pagan names are excluded, and we think that these will violate the faith in God.
Fifthly, it is the pursuit of all kinds of superficial glory. Pastoral staff pursue academic qualifications in a secular way and even take shortcuts to get fake academic qualifications and certificates. They hire people to take their exams for them. In terms of developing believers, they boast of converting celebrities or baptizing famous people. In terms of church buildings, they take pride in constructing cathedrals, big projects of decoration, and putting up big crosses. These superficial pursuits of glory are constantly consuming Christian resources.
Analyzing the reasons behind Christianity’s involution, I would ask: Is today’s Christianity in its final state? After thousands of years of development, can Christianity no longer break through its own bottleneck? It is obviously not so.
The reasons behind involution are the pursuits of interest of various kinds. Just like agricultural involution, within the limited arable land, people are constantly rushing in to plant the same crops without considering the introduction of advanced technology and capital.
First of all, the involution of Christianity is caused by the pastors. It is inevitable that a certain proportion of ministers will join Christianity, who become pastors or leaders not out of the gospel, but out of employment considerations, or out of economic interest. Many pastors, due to their limited educational level, find it difficult to further improve their Christian theology and education. This causes the church to stand still, which can only be refined by imposing legalism and ceremony.
Secondly, it is the limitation of the church and the influx of pastors. Churches are like the limited land in agriculture, and pastors are like people who are engaged in the industry. Twenty years ago, there was a craze for pastors in China, and underground training institutions boomed everywhere. For instance, some old Christian areas such as Wenzhou, Anhui, Henan, provided many theological classes to train pastors. At that time, the slogan of the training was “plenty harvest but fewer hands”. However, after these pastors entered the church, they could only do more repetitive work due to the circumstances of their own and the church.
If the church is likened to limited land, how can we increase the output in this limited land?
Obviously, there are two ways to increase the output. One is to improve the efficiency, that is, to reduce the labor cost per unit area. If the output is constant, the economic benefits per unit of land will increase. Another is to increase the actual output of land, but this requires increasing investment in technology and capital. Obviously, neither of these two schemes is the best choice. With the increasing number of people and the lack of technical capital, the way of land cultivation can not be further broken. The involution of Christianity makes the church focus not on the gospel, but on the control of the church, which includes preventing other pastors and constantly increasing the tension between the church and the society, so as to restrict the free flow of members and maintain the stability of the church.
To break through the involution of agriculture, efforts should be made in technology and capital, and the same is true for breaking through the involution of Christianity.
First of all, I suggest we break through the tendency of ignoring the gospel. The core of the church is the gospel, not legalism, or the pastors. The church should consider how to practice the gospel, but not how to reduce the member mobility and maintain stability.
Secondly, it is suggested that we break through interest orientation. The church is not an economic unit, but a witness of the gospel, which cannot be measured by the economy. The church belongs to God, but not a private group of pastors.
The third suggestion is that we break through dualism. Only when the church enters the society can it serve the society and testify the glory of God instead of staying away from the society and becoming complicated in its own church circle.
Fourthly, we should break through the tendency of uniformity and dogmatism while improving ourselves. No matter whether pastors or believers are in the church, they should create a learning atmosphere. Not only should the Bible be studied but also the Christian history and culture instead of staying on the tedious and dogmatic understanding of the Bible.
Fifthly, we should break through the tendency of pastor-centeredness. In the church’s system of obedience, the pastor is at the top, which limits the possibility of further development and breakthrough of the church. Then, breaking through the pastor-centeredness mechanism, allowing free association of believers into groups, free exploration, and restoration of the atmosphere of the laity movement during the church revival in the 1980s and 1990s can bring fresh blood to the development of Christianity.
Only by breaking through the traditional church system can Christianity stop its involution and enter the society so that the gospel can glorify God in the society, and we can discover a new world.
- Translated by Charlie Li
内卷是近年来兴起的热词，其热度不断从一个行业扩展到整个社会。内卷这个概念的流行背后，其实是说明社会发展本身遇到的困境，解决内卷的唯一方式，可能就是不断创新。但矛盾的是，内卷是阻止创新的。
内卷这个词，最初是被用于农业发展领域。格尔茨( Clifford Geertz) 1963年出版的一部研究印度尼西亚的著作：《农业的内卷化( agricultural involution) ：印度尼西亚生态变迁的过程》，写的是爪哇岛居民因为缺乏资本，不能引进更先进的生产设备，当外岛殖民者在先进技术加持下，生产不断集约化资本化的时候，爪哇岛人却向劳动密集型产业发展，在土地有限的水稻种植行业人员不断增多。这种现象就是内卷现象。而这一概念的更早使用者则是美国人类学家戈登威泽( Alexander Goldenweiser)，他用这个词来描述一类文化模式，那就是当达到了某一种最终状态之后，既没办法让自己进一步发展，也没办法让自己稳定下来，取而代之的是不断让自己的内部变得更加复杂。
我认为，在当今的基督教中，同样存在严重的内卷化。
基督教自进入中国以来，经历了两百多年的发展，有着悠久的历史和深远的影响。但是这种深渊影响只是在历史中，今天的基督教的社会影响深度和过去的基督教历史已经无法相比。尽管今天的基督教在人数和规模上早已超越历史时期，但是其内卷的程度已经影响了基督教的发展。
这种内卷的表现有以下几个方面。
首先，教会强调聚会仪式的严格遵守。
教会常常告诫大家，聚会的重要性，一旦不来参加聚会，就会怎样。这些聚会包括周日的主日敬拜、周间的查经见证、日常的悔改。
其次对圣经的过分教条。
每日读经以及读经的遍数，甚至圣经的背诵程度，以此来衡量一个人和上帝之间的关系。我曾经参加过一个教会，这个教会经常搞一些圣经竞赛，有一次圣经知识竞赛有一道题是“圣经中谁的祷告声音最大？”
第三，不同神学立场之间的彼此争论。
本来教会持什么神学立场是一个自由选择的事情，因为没有哪个立场是绝对正确的。但是教会在自己神学立场上，论断其它与自己不同立场的教会，甚至攻击其它教会的神学立场。自己在神学上无法突破，只能挑别人的刺来刷自己的存在感。
第四，对律法的强调。
尽管教会对法利赛人的律法持批判意见，但是在日常生活中，却又强调对律法的遵守，甚至对律法的死守。在生活中制定了这也不能那也不能的戒律规条，如家里不能养佛手，不能饮用观音茶等，这些包含异教名字的食品和生活用品都被排斥在外，认为这些会违背对上帝的信仰。
第五，追求各种外在的荣耀。
教牧人员追求世俗学历，甚至走捷径办假学历，假资格证书，让人替考。在发展信徒方面，以发展名人基督徒为荣耀，以为名人施洗而骄傲。在建筑方面，追求大教堂，大装修，大十字架。这些外在的追求，正在不断消耗着基督教的资源。
究其基督教内卷化的原因，是否当今的基督教是一个最终状态，经过几千年的发展之后，基督教已经再也无法突破自己的瓶颈呢？显然不是。
内卷化的原因，是因为基督教的利益化。正如农业内卷化一样，在有限的耕地范围内，不断涌入人群从事同样的作物种植，而不考虑引进先进的技术和资本。
首先，基督教的内卷来自于传道人自身。不能回避的是，的确有一定比例的的传道人加入基督教、成为牧者或者领袖，不是出于福音，而是出于职业考虑，或者出于一种经济利益考虑。很多传道人限于自身的文化程度，在基督教神学和文化上，很难进一步提升。这造成教会在原地踏步，只能从律法和仪式的角度不断精细化。
其次，教会的有限和传道人的涌入。
教会就如内卷农业中的有限土地，而传道人就如不断涌入从事该产业的人群。二十年前，中国兴起了一股传道人热，地下培训机构遍地开花，比如一些基督教老区如温州、安徽、河南等办了很多神学班，培训传道人。当时培训的口号就是“羊多牧人少”。但是这些传道人进入教会后，限于自身和教会条件，只能做更多的重复劳动。
如果把教会比喻成有限的土地，那么怎样在这有限的土地上提升产量？
显然提升产量有两种方式，一种提高效率，也就是减少单位面积的劳动成本，产量不变的情况下，单位土地经济效益增加；还有一种就是提高土地实际产出，但是这需要增加技术和资本投入。显然这两种方案都不是最佳选择。人数不断增加，和技术资本的缺乏，让土地耕作方式不能进一步突破。基督教的内卷化，让教会把目光不是停留在福音上，而是停留在对教会的控制上，这包括排斥其它传道人的加入，不断增大教会与社会的张力，以此来限制成员的自由流动，保持教会的稳定。
突破农业的内卷，要在技术和资本上下功夫，而突破基督教的内卷同样如此。
首先突破基督教漠视福音的倾向。教会的核心是福音，不是律法，不是传道人，教会应该考量的是怎样实践福音，而不是怎样减少流动和维持稳定。
其次突破基督教利益化的倾向。教会的存在不是一个经济单位，而是福音的见证者，这是不能以经济来衡量的。教会是上帝的教会，不是传道人的私人团体。
第三突破二元论的倾向。教会要进入社会才能服务社会，在社会中见证上帝的荣耀，而不是远离社会，在自己教会小圈子里不断复杂化。
第四突破基督教学习单一性和教条性的倾向。教会不论传道人还是信徒，都要保持学习的风气，不仅学习圣经还要学习基督教历史和文化，而不是停留在对圣经的繁琐和教条的理解上。
第五突破唯传道人的倾向。教会在讲究顺服的一套体系中，传道人处于顶端的机制，限制了教会进一步发展和突破的可能。那么突破唯传道人的机制，信徒自由组合成团体，自由探索，恢复80-90年代教会复兴时的平信徒运动的气氛，可为基督教发展带来新鲜血液。
只有突破了传统教会的体制，基督教才能停止内卷，并进入社会，让福音在社会中荣耀上帝，我们才能发现一片新的天地。
角声| 试析基督教内卷的实质与出路
‘Involution’ is a current hot word on the Web. Its popularity is constantly expanding and is applied to all sectors. Beneath its popularity, the concept is actually used to explain the predicament emerged within a society itself in the process of its development. The only way to solve involution may be accomplished by continuous innovation. Paradoxically, however, involution prevents innovation.
The word ‘involution’ was originally used in the field of agricultural development. Clifford Geerds published a book on Indonesia in 1963: Agricultural Involution - The Processes of Ecological Change in Indonesia. It describes how the residents of Java Island can not introduce more advanced production equipment because of the lack of capital. When the colonists of the outer islands are blessed by advanced technology and their production is continuously intensive and capitalized, the people of Java turn to labor-intensive industries, and employees constantly increase in the rice planting industry with limited land. This phenomenon is involution. The earlier user of this concept was the American anthropologist Alexander Goldenweiser, who used this word to describe a kind of cultural pattern, that is, after reaching a certain final state, there is no way to further develop or stabilize a society itself, but instead, the society keeps complicating its own internals.
I think that in today’s Christianity, there is definitely serious involution.
Since Christianity entered China, it has experienced more than 200 years of development, with a long history and far-reaching influence. However, this kind of profound influence is now history, and the depth of its social influence can not match that of the past. Although the number of followers and scale of today’s Christianity have already surpassed that of history, the extent of its involution is already in play to affect the development of Christianity.
The kind of involution has the following aspects.
First of all, the church over emphasizes the strict observance of gatherings. The church often warns everyone about the importance of gatherings and stresses what will happen if they do not come to the service. These gatherings include Sunday worship, weekly Bible study and testimony, and daily repentance.
Secondly, it is the excessive dogma of the Bible. Reading the Bible every day, the number of times one reads it, and even reciting the Bible, are used to measure the relationship between a person and God. I once participated in a church that often held Bible contests. In one Bible contest, there was even such a question, “Who has the loudest prayer voice in the Bible?”
Thirdly, it is the argument between different theological positions. What theological position the church originally held should be a matter of free choice, because no position is absolutely correct. However, in its own theological position, the church judges other churches that hold different opinions and even attacks other churches. When the church can not break through its own theological understanding, it chooses to attack other churches in order to pose as being well represented.
Fourthly, there is the emphasis on legalism. Although the church criticizes the laws of the Pharisees, it emphasizes the observance of legalism and even the adherence to it in daily life. In life, we have made rules and regulations that restrict people, for example, forbidding keeping chayote (the plant’s name is literally ‘Buddha’s hand’ in Chinese, translator’s note) and drinking Guanyin tea (The Chinese word ‘Guanyin’ refers to the goddess of mercy in Buddhism). The food and daily necessities that contain pagan names are excluded, and we think that these will violate the faith in God.
Fifthly, it is the pursuit of all kinds of superficial glory. Pastoral staff pursue academic qualifications in a secular way and even take shortcuts to get fake academic qualifications and certificates. They hire people to take their exams for them. In terms of developing believers, they boast of converting celebrities or baptizing famous people. In terms of church buildings, they take pride in constructing cathedrals, big projects of decoration, and putting up big crosses. These superficial pursuits of glory are constantly consuming Christian resources.
Analyzing the reasons behind Christianity’s involution, I would ask: Is today’s Christianity in its final state? After thousands of years of development, can Christianity no longer break through its own bottleneck? It is obviously not so.
The reasons behind involution are the pursuits of interest of various kinds. Just like agricultural involution, within the limited arable land, people are constantly rushing in to plant the same crops without considering the introduction of advanced technology and capital.
First of all, the involution of Christianity is caused by the pastors. It is inevitable that a certain proportion of ministers will join Christianity, who become pastors or leaders not out of the gospel, but out of employment considerations, or out of economic interest. Many pastors, due to their limited educational level, find it difficult to further improve their Christian theology and education. This causes the church to stand still, which can only be refined by imposing legalism and ceremony.
Secondly, it is the limitation of the church and the influx of pastors. Churches are like the limited land in agriculture, and pastors are like people who are engaged in the industry. Twenty years ago, there was a craze for pastors in China, and underground training institutions boomed everywhere. For instance, some old Christian areas such as Wenzhou, Anhui, Henan, provided many theological classes to train pastors. At that time, the slogan of the training was “plenty harvest but fewer hands”. However, after these pastors entered the church, they could only do more repetitive work due to the circumstances of their own and the church.
If the church is likened to limited land, how can we increase the output in this limited land?
Obviously, there are two ways to increase the output. One is to improve the efficiency, that is, to reduce the labor cost per unit area. If the output is constant, the economic benefits per unit of land will increase. Another is to increase the actual output of land, but this requires increasing investment in technology and capital. Obviously, neither of these two schemes is the best choice. With the increasing number of people and the lack of technical capital, the way of land cultivation can not be further broken. The involution of Christianity makes the church focus not on the gospel, but on the control of the church, which includes preventing other pastors and constantly increasing the tension between the church and the society, so as to restrict the free flow of members and maintain the stability of the church.
To break through the involution of agriculture, efforts should be made in technology and capital, and the same is true for breaking through the involution of Christianity.
First of all, I suggest we break through the tendency of ignoring the gospel. The core of the church is the gospel, not legalism, or the pastors. The church should consider how to practice the gospel, but not how to reduce the member mobility and maintain stability.
Secondly, it is suggested that we break through interest orientation. The church is not an economic unit, but a witness of the gospel, which cannot be measured by the economy. The church belongs to God, but not a private group of pastors.
The third suggestion is that we break through dualism. Only when the church enters the society can it serve the society and testify the glory of God instead of staying away from the society and becoming complicated in its own church circle.
Fourthly, we should break through the tendency of uniformity and dogmatism while improving ourselves. No matter whether pastors or believers are in the church, they should create a learning atmosphere. Not only should the Bible be studied but also the Christian history and culture instead of staying on the tedious and dogmatic understanding of the Bible.
Fifthly, we should break through the tendency of pastor-centeredness. In the church’s system of obedience, the pastor is at the top, which limits the possibility of further development and breakthrough of the church. Then, breaking through the pastor-centeredness mechanism, allowing free association of believers into groups, free exploration, and restoration of the atmosphere of the laity movement during the church revival in the 1980s and 1990s can bring fresh blood to the development of Christianity.
Only by breaking through the traditional church system can Christianity stop its involution and enter the society so that the gospel can glorify God in the society, and we can discover a new world.
- Translated by Charlie Li
Voice: Analysis of the Essence, Outlet of the Involution of Christianity
