Christian Yogi - Part 3

After discussing the need for Christians to contextualize, along with the drawbacks that come from syncretism, I want to come back to the original question: should Christians participate in yoga? And more broadly, do we have any tools that we can use to help us make the decision? Thanks to the handy inter-web, I dug up Paul Hiebert’s model for critical contextualization. According to the Hiebert, the four steps of critical contextualization are:

1. Phenomenological analysis (exegesis of the culture)—studying the cultural practices phenomenologically and uncritically
2. Ontological critique (exegesis of the Scripture and the hermeneutical bridge)—studying the Scripture on what it has to say about a practice
3. Evaluative response (critical response)—evaluate the cultural practice in light of the new understanding in the Scripture
4. Transformative ministries (new contextualized practices)—incorporate new contextualized practices

(This is noted in Paul Hiebert’s article, “Critical Contextualization,” in the July 1987 edition of International Bulletin of Missionary Research, pgs 109-110.)

I find this helpful, but the terminology that Hiebert uses isn't exactly "user-friendly." In order to come up with something that is more workable, let me instead propose a couple of questions:

1) Does the physical nature of the activity align with what the scriptures teach?
In certain types of activities, the physical nature of the activity itself is incompatible with the teaching of Scripture. Prostitution and sexual activity outside of marriage would be pretty clear examples. There is no way that you could claim these as a legitimate contextualization of the gospel.

Another example would be the use of MMA in church. I cannot see how intentional physical harm is compatible with the calls of Scripture to love your neighbour, to live peaceably with each other, and to live out the fruits of the Spirit.

In the case of yoga, I would have to say that there is no scriptural prohibitions that apply. On the contrary, there seems to be an indication that there is some value in the discipline of the physical body.

2) Does the meaning of the activity align with what the Scriptures teach?
The fundamental meaning of yoga, that is, the purpose or goal of yoga, as understood by its leaders and facilitators, appears to run counter to Christian thought. As the Hindu scholar quoted in the article notes: “the idea that the body is a vehicle for reaching consciousness with the divine is fundamentally at odds with Christian teaching.” Christians believe that we have been marred by the effects of sin and are unable on our own accord to achieve relationship with God. Only God, in the person of Jesus, can make this happen. This distinction would convince me that yoga cannot simply be practiced uncritically, like training for a running race, or playing soccer.

3) If no to #2, can the activity be re-purposed?
While the aspirations of yoga and Christianity are clearly incompatible, It would seem possible to separate the form from meaning in yoga; that is, you can incorporate the stretching and breathing exercises into a practice where you replace the meaning of yoga with Christian thinking, much like some people in the original article advocate. Of course, some argue that this is no longer yoga, but call it what you will, the practices are still yoga-ish in nature.

So that would be my sentiment on the original question. Christians should be wary of practicing yoga in its regular form and as a general rule, should steer clear of group yoga practice. As the meaning of yoga is clearly understood by its practioners to run counter to Christian thought, it would seem strange for Christians to uncritically incorporate this practice. However, as I note, there is room for re-thinking yoga--using the stretching and breathing practices, but filling their meaning with Christian thought instead.

Finally, it should also be clear from my framework that Christians need to have a clear understanding of what Scripture teaches. This means not just memorizing a verse or two, but instead we need to be familiar with the major themes and ideas of the Old Testament and New Testament. In particular, let me make a plea for people to study OT and NT theology--rather than just systematic theology, because in my opinion, systematic theology itself is already contextualized. Instead, I urge you to become familiar with the ideas and themes as the OT and the NT uniquely articulate them. For example, if you're not aware of the significance of land in the OT, you need to do some work. And if you don’t know what topic Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus speaking about more than any other, you don’t know your NT theology (hint: it’s not love). Study up--it's worth it!