You are on page 1of 23

1

Cross-Cultural Perspectives In Pastoral Leadership


The American church is increasingly multi-cultural. Church members now commonly include migrants, overseas students, radical post-moderns, and members of various ethnic minorities. Spanish worship songs are increasingly evident in California and churches are increasingly employing translators or having services in a number of different languages. Many of these groups have varying theological beliefs and pastoral needs. According to George Barna (2004), the white population of the U.S. is the largest racial group (68%) but also the slowest growing while the fastest growing are the Hispanic (currently 14% of the U.S. population) and Asian populations (4%), with the black population experiencing moderate growth (13%). The overwhelming size of the white population often obscures the significant gaps in belief and practice among the different racial groups. The following table illustrates some of this theological diversity: Table 1: Theological Diversity By Race
Belief or Practice Read the Bible in the last week Attended religious service in past week Prayed to God in the past week Participated in a small group, past week Bible is totally accurate (strongly agree) Satan is not a living being (strongly disagree) Jesus Christ sinned while on earth (strongly disagree) Born again Christian Atheist or agnostic Aligned with a non-christian faith Subgroup size White Black Hispanic Asian 36% 41% 81% 16% 36% 30% 37% 41% 12% 11% 1695 59% 48% 91% 31% 57% 27% 49% 47% 5% 12% 330 39% 38% 86% 27% 40% 30% 35% 29% 7% 10% 360 20% 23% 46% 13% 24% 14% 22% 12% 20% 45% 94

2
From time to time the pastor of a moderate sized church will probably now have to counsel and advise parishioners who do not speak English as a primary language and who may have markedly different world-views and modes of personal expression. Parishioners from non-white cultural milieus may have pastoral problems that have not been covered in conventional theological training - for instance Asian Christians may have questions about meat sacrificed to idols or the existence of ancestral spirits. This means that it is now essential for pastors to have an understanding of the cross-cultural implications of pastoral ministry.

Incorporation vs. Isolation One of the challenges of ethnic communities is the dimension of incorporation into American culture or isolation from it. In James Choungs poignant paper and PowerPoint presentation on: Multi-Ethnicity: An Asian-American Christian Perspective (Choung, 2004) he raises the following important points:
1. The two most common positions are Melting Pot (total incorporation) or Ethnic ghetto

(total isolation).
2. That the Christian position is based on the vision in Revelation where varying ethnicities

are identifiable in Heaven and thus culture is preserved yet unity is attained. Choung calls this Beethovens Fifth a symphonic approach to unity.
3. That migrants have a triple consciousness: Not fully connected with the ancestral

country; not fully connected with the residential country but somewhere in between.
4. That community perceptions create substantial barriers to incorporation. Taken from a

recent Yankelovich survey as cited by Choung: 68% have somewhat negative or very negative feelings toward Chinese-Americans 46% believe Chinese-Americans passing secrets to China is a problem 34% believe Chinese-Americans have too much influence in the U.S. high-tech sector. With these sort of statistics the formation of separate ethnic churches is inevitable (after all who would want to go to a church where 68% of people felt negatively about you). As Martin Luther King once said Sunday is still the most segregated day of the week. Other factors forcing the

3
formation of ethnic churches include language (e.g. Spanish speaking churches), having ones own food (Asian churches), and variations in Christian rules (e.g. kava drinking is allowed in many Fijian churches). Culture also weighs heavily on the nature and role of the clergy. For instance, Chinese churches tend to prefer pastors who have noted professional accomplishments in medicine or one of the higher status professions.

Thus the barriers to incorporation are very real and the forces towards isolation are considerable. This was experienced in the New Testament during the early years of the church in Jerusalem with the disputes between the widows of the Greek speaking Jews and the widow of the Hebrew speaking Jews over food distribution with the Greek speaking Jews (the immigrants from the Diaspora) being left out. (Acts 6:1-6).

Unresolved ethnic tensions have a habit of becoming theological and moral divides: The James-led Jerusalem church (Ebionites) which was led by relatives of Jesus until 135 AD, seems to have been in sharp tension with the Pauline led Gentile Church. The East-West tensions of orthodoxy versus Catholicism, which resulted in the Creeds and iconoclastic controversies. The Reformation was assisted by the existing Germanic/Nordic resistance to Roman domination. The formation of African independent churches as a reaction to colonialism and what is perceived as overly abstract and irrelevant Western theology. (Jenkins, 2002) The plethora of mainland Chinese sects that have formed as a reaction to foreign influences in the Church.

Thus isolated ethnic groups are a breeding ground for innovative theologies that serve as a means of maintaining psychological distance from the dominant culture. These can have good

4
outcomes as well as bad the Full Gospel Businessmans Fellowship was formed out of the experiences of Demos Shakarian an Armenian immigrant to the USA.

Incorporation as a theoretical ideal is very different from incorporation in practice. Most pastors would probably say that their church is open to people from all ethnic backgrounds yet may baulk when confronted with the realities of what such incorporation would mean. Few pastors would learn another language just to minister in a migrant community. Most struggle with adapting worship to two generations of worshippers (young and old) let alone adapting it to the six or seven different cultures that most churches would have (Anglo-Saxon, Western European, African-American, Hispanic, North-East Asian, South Asian and South-East Asian).

The Homogenous Unit Principle The homogenous unit principle of Donald McGavran (1973) and other church growth advocates states that people like to become Christians without crossing racial, linguistic or class barriers.. The homogenous unit principle means that churches tend to grow fastest among groups of likeminded individuals. But can a church exclude people on the grounds that they need to be exclusive in order to grow? Can a black church exclude white people or an Asian church exclude Mexicans in order to focus on their own cultural group? What is the line between being culturally focused for genuine strategic reasons and being racist?

Even the early church was not fully able to reconcile the differences between the apostolic Hebrew-speaking, culturally Jewish Jerusalem Church and the Greek-speaking Gentile churches. It appears that the men from James, were in great tension with the Pauline adherents and kept to the Torah for many years, so that Paul tried to win their favor by shaving his head and taking a Nazarite vow (Acts 18:18). The historians who study the Nazarene /

5
Ebionite movement (e.g. Maccoby;1987) tend to be very radical liberals but they are almost united in maintaining that the Jerusalem Church, led by relatives of Jesus, kept to the Gospel of Matthew, endorsed holy poverty, and may have refused Pauls offering of international relief (Ludemann,1989). While I certainly do not endorse their liberal theology, the evidence is clear that cultural tensions existed and had long-lasting theological consequences and that all the good-will in the world was not able to resolve these differences. Thus the question arises if cross-cultural unity did not work even in the apostolic age, can it work now? Should we retreat into our mono-cultural enclaves each with our own separate theologies and practices?

On the other hand it is commonly agreed that there is no one right culture that all must endorse or otherwise be damned.

Thus we are between two poles here. At one pole, churches grow better when Christians are grouped according to their racial and cultural preferences; one the other pole ethnically isolated groups tend to produce unique theologies, which are often divisive and undesirable. On one hand there is a clear New Testament mandate for the Kingdom of God being multicultural. (Revelation 5:9, Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11). In this view the ideal church would be all-embracing, multicultural, and multi-lingual, going across all classes and creeds and shades of politics and ability and disability.

On the other hand, in practical terms such a church would have significant challenges in terms of maintaining unity, meeting needs and incorporating new people so they felt at home. It also would require a very high level of love, spirituality and pastoral skill.

6
Cultural Complexity and Church Growth How much cultural complexity can a church tolerate? There is some neurological basis for a limit to the human ability to manage and tolerate complexity. This lies in the inability of the reticular formation to process beyond a certain level and number of complex inputs. (Wilkie. W,1987). Dr Wilkie maintains that doing too much that is too complex is a primary cause of stress breakdown, one of the symptoms of which is the development of intolerance. Humans are therefore hard-wired to move towards simplifying their environment. Thus, if complexity is increased in one area of church life it may need to be decreased elsewhere in the life of the church. Then an increase in cultural complexity could be expected to result in a corresponding simplification elsewhere such as a narrowness in doctrine or a focus on just one educational or socio-economic level.

A common case of where increasing cultural complexity results in a narrowed educational and socio-economic focus is when churches are devoted to overseas students like Swanston Street, Church of Christ in Melbourne, Australia and the Chinese Christian Church of Brisbane, Australia. The international church movement is another example. In these multi-racial churches the unifying factors are tertiary education, social class and the common experience of being aliens in a foreign land. International churches differ from student churches in being mainly composed of professionals who are working for organizations like the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, WHO and the like. The Union Church of Manila is one such church and attendees come from over 40 different nations, nearly all of them professionals, diplomats and businessmen. In such churches crossing cultural barriers is common, but the language is English and the class distinction is quite rigid. It is as if humanity can only cope with so much complexity in social relationships. If the complexity in one area (such as race) is increased, then in will be correspondingly reduced in another area (by having only a single language and a single social class). As a result of our natural intolerance for complexity most Christians will

7
generally prefer to worship with those of similar race, language, class and theological background (except for a few cross-culturally gifted individuals).

The Theological Tension Can we use the intolerance for complexity argument to excuse racism? I hope not! The Spirit transcends the flesh (John 3:7-7, Galatians 5:16-18). People who are still carnal cannot tolerate differences and will not go to a church that is too culturally diverse by their reckoning and in practice many poorly discipled Christians will choose to move out of churches and neighborhoods that have become too ethnically diverse. This is not Gods perfect will. Gods perfect will is for us to have renewed minds and to love one another in unity and forbearance as co-members of the one mystical body of Christ (Romans 12:1-21). Indeed, in Heaven, all races will be in harmony and making melody together around the Throne (Revelation 5:9).

It seems that if we are to keep immature folk in church then the church must follow the HUP (Homogenous Unit Principle) - but if we are to please God we must not follow the HUP! But this brings about a massive theological tension. How can it be resolved? By teaching Christians to love one another in the power of the Holy Spirit. The leadership must be a living example of inclusiveness and acceptance and the club mentality must be put to death. However normal it seems we cannot stop with the HUP, we have to move to higher levels of Spirit-filled worship and more rigorous and more loving discipleship that can embrace numerous differences among human beings. As we grow in Christ we will be able to love one another more deeply and build churches that are true reflections of the Kingdom of God.

Contextualization The Christian gospel has to be incarnated into the people, culture, time and place where it is preached. In missionary work a spectrum ranging from C1 (almost no accommodation to the

8
culture) to C6 (secret believers invisible to the surrounding culture) is used to describe the degree to which the missionary allows the message to be clothed in the culture of the people (Parshall,1998). It is generally agreed that there are theological and practical limits to contextualization. For instance a missionary to Thai culture would clearly be going too far from biblical principles if he venerated statues of Buddha out of respect. On the other hand it is generally agreed that: 1. The gospel should be proclaimed in the heart language of the people. 2. That local cultural music forms can and generally should be used in worship. 3. That most normal cultural food and dress norms can be safely retained - with the exception of the eating of blood, food sacrificed to idols, and cannibalism. 4. That generally church architecture should use local forms, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 5. That some aspects of culture may need replacement with a more positive alternative e.g. the replacement of witch doctors with prayer healings in the name of Jesus. 6. That grass-roots theology using the thought-forms, stories and modes of reasoning of that culture should be encouraged in order to bring the Church to maturity. 7. That things should not be forbidden simply because they are not Western but rather because they are overtly unscriptural. Witchcraft, sorcery, feuds, murder and immorality are clearly proscribed along with sins such as laziness, greed, covetousness and treachery. Sometimes there will be considerable debate about what is not scriptural such as in the area of polygamy among male Muslim converts. The following is a direct quote from Charles Krafts paper The Contextualization of Theology which appeared in Evangelical Missions Quarterly in 1978. (Kraft, 1978, p32)

Contextualization becomes a very sensitive issue when two different cultures or sub-cultures occupy the same church. Huge ecclesiastical battles have raged over issues such as the necessity of circumcision, or of eating meat offered to idols, and later the use of icons in churches, the veneration of statues, and more recently the kind of clothing Christians should wear and even whether musical instruments (no instruments, some instruments, or all kinds of instruments) should be used. Also authors such as Brian McLaren and Leonard Sweet have attempted to address the massive theological challenges of incarnating the gospel into postmodern culture. Craig Van Gelder (1994 ) identifies two key issues for the North American church ministering to postmoderns:

10

Each denomination tends to have its own approach to contextualization. Liberal denominations tend to go as far as even to make major theological modifications. Some denominations such as the Church of Christ Acapella make a particular issue of contextualization a ecclesiastical distinctive (in this case having no music). How does the Church distinguish itself from the world while remaining enough in contact with it to be able to present the gospel? Does a group like the Amish have a great disadvantage in presenting Christ because of their distance from US mainstream culture? On the other hand, have post-modern churches become so much like the world that they have lost contact with the Scriptures and the demands for personal holiness? A good guiding Scripture in this respect is Hebrews 12:14 Seek peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no-one can see the Lord. Contextualization is an act of peacemaking, of building bridges with all men (and women) but we cannot go so far across those bridges that we leave the Lord behind. Sanctification is primary and without it we will not see the Lord.

So how do we build bridges with Caribbean culture or post-modern culture in the context of pastoring a church in America? The question how can I be a true friend to these people? is a good starting point. To befriend post-moderns is to honor their unique relational style and their

11
need for Experience, Personhood, Image, and Connection (EPIC). To befriend post-moderns is also to warn them that sexual freedom can have catastrophic consequences and to inform them of the wisdom of their Creator on these matters. Similarly to befriend those of Caribbean culture would mean acknowledging their music, dance and worship styles, and their need for the demonstrable evidence of spiritual power. It also would involve clear issues of sanctification such as forbidding Macumba, Voodoo and other such practices.

The question does the end justify the means is behind many of the arguments over contextualization. For example the heated C4 or C5 debate among missionaries to Muslims (Parshall 1998). If a slight amount of theological compromise will greatly increase the safety of believers and the acceptability of the gospel surely it is worth it. Unfortunately, church history is against this view. In fact it has been argued that Islam itself may not have arisen had the Arab (Arian) Christians not been so paganized and so thoroughly syncretized with the surrounding culture. In my view, to allow Christian believers to say There is one God Allah, and Mohammed is His prophet is a theological compromise that we cannot make.

Similarly in post-modern US culture we should be very careful about throwing out the notion of absolute Truth in the rush to be acceptable to post-moderns and to avoid the criticism of being bigoted. In discussions I have had with post-moderns some of the key issues are the inerrancy of the Scriptures, the uniqueness of Jesus and the claim that salvation is only in His name, the acceptability of homosexuality as a valid alternative lifestyle, the existence of Hell and judgment, and the insistence that modern dating habits - including sex before marriage with multiple successive partners be condoned. To my mind these are all core issues of faith that cannot easily be compromised in order to make the gospel acceptable. Certainly some or many of these issues can wait until after conversion, but they cannot be avoided completely.

12
The clamor to throw out core beliefs in the name of compassion is misguided - and the whole of church history and missiological experience bear witness to this. Once a segment of the Church gives away core doctrines they are not easily reintroduced - and that segment becomes increasingly idiosyncratic, or withers and dies like the Marcionites, the Arians, or nineteenth century Tubingen school did.

Valid cross-cultural contextualization keeps core beliefs intact, while changing the way they are presented. This is where the importance of the Spirit not the letter comes in. The Holy Spirit is the proper guide to such matters, for He is both holy, and deeply concerned with true communication of Gods inspired truth in order to exalt His Son. Without the Holy Spirit contextualization can reach comical extremes. In the Jerusalem Post (23rd December 2004) Rabbi Wein writes on the matter of Jewish beards and the laws governing the use of a straight razor on male facial hair. It turns out that it is acceptable for a male Jew to be clean-shaven as long as he uses a depilatory compound or an electric razor that does not have a straight edge, however if he shaves his beard with a normal straight-edged razor is a violation of halaka! This sort of rabbinical nit-picking is a contradiction to the liberty that we have in Christ (Romans 14).

The New Testament has much to say about contextualization and one of its key concepts is the stocihea, elemental things - or measured out things. These are the basic astrological building blocks of pagan Graeco-Roman and even some (Sadducean) Jewish thought. Each day of the week was named after a different God Sunday was the Sun God, Saturday was Saturn etc, and each hour of the day was ruled by a different sign of the Zodiac hence the 12 hour clock cycle. This system told people what powers were at work at what time and thus what precautions were necessary. The world was filled with religious taboos that must be kept. For instance the pan-pipes were not to be played at noon, when Pan was supposed to be sleeping. The contracts with these gods were commonly reinforced through shrines, oblations, sacrifices

13
and feast days. The average person lived inside vast machinery of the gods and under the iron hand of astrological fate. Astrological questions such as where is He who is to be born King of the Jews were treated with utmost seriousness - resulting in the massacre of the infants. This whole system was demolished by Christ when He took captivity captive and passed through the heavens. So Paul is rightly indignant when the Galatians wanted to go back to old Jewish religious practices including a religious calendar of some sort: Galatians 4:8-11 MKJV But then, indeed, not knowing God, you served as slaves to those not by nature being gods. (9) But now, knowing God, but rather are known by God, how do you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you again desire to slave anew? (10) You observe days and months and times and years. (11) I fear for you, lest somehow I have labored among you in vain. Serving days and months and seasons and years was to go back to the old system where the gods ruled time and there were propitious moments. It was to go back to superstitious fear and dread and slavery for whoever rules our use of time, enslaves us. That is the reason that Scripture does not name the days or the hours by their traditional names but uses numbers instead the first day, the ninth hour etc. to avoid taking the names of pagan gods upon their lips or acknowledge their control of time. Paul addresses the issue of the stoichea at length in Colossians 2:8-23: Colossians 2:8-23 MKJV Beware lest anyone rob you through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ. (9) For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (10) And you are complete in Him, who is the Head of all principality and power, (11) in whom also you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ, (12) buried with Him in baptism, in whom also you were raised through the faith of the working of God, raising Him from the dead. (13) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, (14) blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (15) Having stripped rulers and authorities, He made a show of them publicly, triumphing over them in it. (16) Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths. (17) For these are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. (18) Let no one defraud you, delighting in humility and worship of the angels, intruding into things which he has not seen, without a cause being vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, (19) and not holding the Head, from whom all the body, having been supplied through the joints and bands, and having been joined together, will grow with the growth of God. (20) If then you died with Christ from the elements of the world, why, as though living in the world, are you subject to its ordinances: (21) touch not, taste not, handle not; (22) which things are all for corruption in

14
the using, according to the commands and doctrines of men? (23) These things indeed have a reputation of wisdom in self-imposed worship and humility, and unsparing severity of the body, but are not of any value for the satisfying of the flesh. According to Paul Christians have died with Christ and are dead to the world and to the pagan religious principles that govern it including food and drink, feasts, new moons, Sabbaths, and taboos (such as touch not, taste not, handle not). To serve such traditions was to serve the old gods and demons and was thus spiritually detrimental to the believer. These customs may have even seemed humble and wise but they were ineffective for true sanctification.

All religions prior to Christ had a similar basic framework a god who dwelt in a shrine or temple and had certain powers over a certain grove or city or nation and who was served on certain feast days by priests and rituals. The local god (Zeus or Moloch or Pan or Demeter or Baal) had taboos about food and drink and relationships between people and categories of clean and unclean that must be strictly observed. For instance the Gogodala people of the Fly River in Papua New Guinea where I served as a missionary, used to believe that the spirits of the dead would attack women and the only way they could escape was by wearing a body length rattan cane cage during the full mourning period. Since death in the clan was commonplace, most women wore this cage for life. With the coming of the gospel and the acceptance of Christ this form of spiritual protection was soon deemed to be unnecessary.

Christ has demolished the whole technology of spiritual bondage - taboos, feasts, temples, priests, sacrifices, libations, circumcision, Sabbaths, new moons, and so forth. This has been fulfilled in the cross and then replaced with the heavenly priesthood of Christ according to the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 6-10) and leading of the Holy Spirit.

15
The fulfillment and revocation of traditional temple and shrine-based religious formats has an enormous bearing on the topic of contextualization, especially in the application of Old Testament spiritual technology in Christian fellowships. Throughout Church history there have been numerous attempts to reinstate the temple, the shrine and the priesthood and a religious calendar of highly obligatory feast days. The medieval church calendar with its numerous obligatory feasts and saints days would have horrified Paul. The Seventh-day Adventists have also made what seem to be serious errors regarding the application of the Old Testament to the New, especially in requiring a compulsory Sabbath and in taboos about food and drink. When the gospel enters a new culture there is a great temptation to retain some of the old religious baggage and baptize it into service. Without a proper understanding of the stoichea this can lead to unintentional errors in practice such as requiring attendance at Mass at Christmas and Easter for salvation.

Many similar questions still arise in Asian migrant churches: Should Chinese New Year be celebrated? Should Chinese Christians talk about the Year of the Goat? Can a Christian practice feng-shui in their Chinese restaurant?

Directly legislating such things by pastoral fiat can quickly turn into a conflict-ridden nightmare similar to the meat-eating controversy in the first century. The biblical way of handling such issues is to teach clearly on what Christ has done for us, and on the stoichea and then let the Holy Spirit guide the consciences of individual believers. The central point of such teaching is always a very clear explanation of what Christ has done through His death, resurrection and ascension into Heaven. Once the work of Christ is clearly understood then many of the answers to contextual issues are almost obvious. There is also a strong NT conviction that a church that is committed to following the leading of the Holy Spirit will not go far wrong (1 John 2:20,27;

16
John 14;26). Yet if we observe the NT record we do find that some churches need more teaching than others especially those that were from very pagan backgrounds such as Corinth. A final word on the stoichea from the editor of Missiology who was writing about the missiological implications of Colossians (The Editor, 1977):

Migrant Churches Many churches are springing up among migrant groups, particularly among Filipino and Hispanic migrants. In multi-cultural Carson California, where I live, there are 6 Filipino, 3 Korean, 4 Hispanic and 4 Samoan congregations - out of a total of about 55 churches. Attending a prayer meeting at one of these churches is unique the prayer points are all about immigration issues such as the approval of Green Cards, visa status issues and also concern about the health of relatives overseas. The common bonds of language, culture and similar life experience bind these churches together. Migrant churches are also networks - where Christians can find help with orientation to the USA as well as a sharing of resources and tips about good immigration lawyers and cheap but good rental accommodation. Migrant churches also have different ways of being church than the Anglo-centric mainstream models. For instance, at a Samoan church you will find people smoking, playing bingo and drinking copious quantities of kava, a Pacific Island drink with mild psycho-active properties. In this culture the parish church is the center of the normal cultural life and is not strongly divorced from the world. Practical helpfulness is an essential component of spiritual life in migrant churches. Pastors are expected to provide transport, know reliable attorneys, help their parishioners negotiate with car

17
salesmen (many migrants have never owned a car before coming to the USA) and assist with a wide range of practical tasks. In return parishioners are often happy to give generously from the little that they have and to provide food for church functions. Migrant churches do not necessarily need to have pastors who are from that cultural group. It is often better that the pastor be an Anglo who can steer the parishioners in the right direction as they settle into the USA. In this regard migrant churches are different from second-generation ethnic churches, (such as many Armenian or Greek churches) where the parishioners are US citizens already and the experience of migration is at least a generation past. Migrant churches tend to struggle with the issues surrounding full acceptance into American society visas, education, employment, racial discrimination, inter-marriage, and politics. Most migrant church members would vote Democrat while most white evangelical clergy are Republican. This was a significant issue in a number of churches during the 2004 Presidential elections.

Language Use The first church that I pastored had services in English, Chinese and Mandarin, and the second church I pastored had services in English, Pidgin and Motu; and in my travels in Asia I have been translated into many different languages over the years. Language is a major factor in both theological formation and discipleship. I have found that when a person is a fluent speaker of English as a second language they tend to read theology in English but prefer preaching, counselling and discipling to be in their heart language. Worship is nearly always deeper and more spontaneous when it is in the heart language.

The Pentecost event (Acts 2) was a language event that established the right of people to hear the glories of God proclaimed in the language that they were born to

18

Acts 2:8-11 MKJV And how do we each hear in our own dialect in which we were born? (9) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (10) Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya around Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, (11) Cretans and Arabians, we hear them speaking the great things of God in our own languages. This insight that God speaks to each in his/her own language, has been the theological justification behind Christian groups such as the various Bible Societies, Wycliffe Bible Translators /Summer Institute of Linguistics, and Gospel Recordings. On a pastoral level it means that churches should have a wide range of resources in differing languages. For instance in California a church bookstore should have items in both English and Spanish. Churches should have bi-lingual or multi-lingual counsellors available who are able to listen to church members who express their grief in their heart languages. It could even be made a requirement by denominations that licensed clergy be multi-lingual since in many places in America highly effective pastoring cannot be done in English alone.

This is also an issue of incorporation versus isolation. Traditionally incorporation is to have everyone in the same service with a translator out front however this can double the length of the service. On the other hand isolation is to have different services in different languages which can end up fracturing the congregation. Technology offers a solution here - simultaneous translation with headsets. This is becoming more affordable with the availability of inexpensive Wi-Fi broadband routers and headsets now available. Training church translators to be swift, accurate simultaneous translators may take some time however.

19
Pastoral leadership should at least be familiar with where to obtain resources in languages other than English including bibles and discipleship courses. The various bible societies have many translations available and the Asian Internet Bible Institute has two-year training courses available in Spanish, Thai, Russian and Tagalog. Most denominations now have an officer dedicated to home mission and these are generally familiar with resources in languages other than English.

House Churches Much of the cross-cultural conflict over group norms comes about because modern churches are so immense compared to churches in the first century. It is quite difficult to get 300 or 3000 people to agree on all aspects of church practice and so the issues are avoided or a lowest common denominator approach is taken. Smaller churches, such as house churches can more easily agree on group norms and thus more deeply contextualize the gospel into their own culture. Campus bible studies and prayer groups have often been the centre of innovation in this regard - a notable example being John Wesleys Holy Club at Oxford University. Famous missionaries such as Hudson Taylor and William Carey were more freely able to contextualize the gospel into Indian or Chinese culture because their missions were basically a relatively small band of men stationed a long way from adverse denominational influence. Thus a multicultural church could allow a large measure of contextualization in cell groups and house churches where the participants could use their own language, dress, music and meeting style under the leading of the Holy Spirit.

House churches have proved very successful in India when modeled after the ashram or place of spiritual enquiry, and in Muslim nations as they do not westernize the believers or become a target as easily as a church can. On the other hand, house churches can, and do, go overboard theologically - for instance, Muslim background believers are frequently dismissive of

20
the Trinity. In the New Testament this problem was solved by the presence of roving apostles and teachers who would go from house to house teaching common doctrine and solving problems in the fellowships. Another approach is the tightly controlled cell church model of Dr. Paul Yongi Cho of Korea.

The NT model of solving problems of contextualization at the local level, in house churches led by elders, under the authority of pneumatically gifted five-fold ministers of the gospel, seems to be both robust and practical and to allow a great deal of freedom for the growth of the new church.

Indigenous Leadership Initially all NT churches were led by the Jewish missionaries that founded them or by their delegates, however by the time the epistle to Titus is written this was beginning to change with a Greek Christian convert (Titus) appointing national Cretan elders in every city in Crete. The rapid growth of the Gentile Church forced the use indigenous leadership from this quite early phase.

Indigenous leadership has the advantage of understanding the language, culture, and thought forms of the people and also feels the full weight of the issues of contextualization and generally proceeds more cautiously and less iconoclastically. Indigenous leadership also counsels pastorally with a sensitivity and accuracy that is generally superior to even a very experienced outsider. So the recruiting, discipling and training of spiritually sensitive indigenous leaders becomes a top priority in cross-cultural ministry.

However there is also a case for non-indigenous leadership. This is particularly the case in US migrant churches where the pastor is the link to the majority culture and may be the only friend

21
in that culture that the church members have. Since a major need of most migrants is to have a true American friend the white pastor fulfills this role and at the same time guides the congregation through the acculturation process. The congregation must be allowed to choose what sort of leadership it wants. For instance a denomination should not impose a Hispanic pastor on a Hispanic church but should rather let that church seek its own pastoral candidate.

Such exceptions aside, indigenous leadership needs to be strongly encouraged and the training of indigenous pastors for cross-cultural work within the USA is a much-neglected priority. Such pastors generally go through English speaking, majority-culture seminaries that further alienate them culturally and theologically from their constituencies. The curriculum in most such seminaries is often ignorant of or insensitive to the relevant cultural issues involved. There probably needs to be recognized specialized seminaries supplying pastors of certain ethnic groups to a wide range of denominations e.g. training Korean pastors for Korean churches. The African - American church has had such seminaries for many years and it is very much part of their strength as a movement.

Indigenous leadership can also be extremely sensitive to the issues of racial injustice and disempowerment that some cultural groups sense in America. They feel the pain of their people in a similar manner to the way Moses felt the pain of his people prior to the Exodus. This communal experience of suffering is part of life for minorities in America as they may experience overt discrimination at school or work. This is often not shared with members of the majority culture. The indigenous pastor can be an important guide through the issues of justice, forgiveness and reconciliation.

22
Conclusion Issues of culture and contextualization fill the pages of the New Testament: Jewish-Samaritan relationships, Jewish-Gentile relationships and issues of food and drink, idols and immorality abound on almost every page. The application of the Jewish Law to the life of the Spirit-filled believer fills most of Acts and engages entire epistles. There is no monolithic holy culture that all must conform to. The Jews need not be Hellenized and the Greeks do not need to be circumcised. We are fundamentally citizens of Heaven and Heaven is culture inclusive. Failure to tolerate other cultures is not seen as a sign that we all need a common human standard, but rather as a failure, as a lack of love, for agape love is the holiest and highest standard in the Kingdom. However some cultural problems have theological implications such as circumcision, eating meat offered to idols or going back to the pagan astrological world-view of holy days. These are worked through by having a clear understanding of Christ and what He has accomplished and by listening to the voice of the Holy Spirit as he speaks in the local context e.g. hat-wearing at Corinth.

A church that is deeply Christ-centered will solve many of its cultural issues almost automatically as the work of Christ, once understood sheds so much light on them and demands Christian unity build upon a loving forgiving response to grace. On the other hand a church that is organization centered or membership centered will often abound in such issues as organizations demand standardization of doctrine and practice and memberships tend to want a club-like atmosphere. Thus in the end, pastoring cross-culturally is centered around preaching Christ and the cross, living in love, and following the leading and wisdom of the Holy Spirit.

23
References: Barna Research Group (August 10, 2004) Ethnic Groups Differ Substantially On Matters of Faith, Retrieved October 5th 2004 from: http://www.barna.org/ Barna Research Group (August 10, 2004) Demographics, Retrieved October 5th 2004 from: http://www.barna.org/ Choung, James Multi-ethnicity: An Asian-American Christian Perspective(PowerPoint slides) Retrieved October 5th 2004 from: http:// regions.ivcf.org/cm/getversion/4120/ Multiethnicity,%20As-Am%20Perspective%20Slides%20(July%202001).ppt Cole, Harry Shelton Summary - Church planting by ethnicity or culture? Retreived October 5th 2004 from: http://www.baptistchurchplanting.com/bcparchive/SummaryCPbyculture.html Edmiston John, (2001) Biblical EQ A Christian handbook For Emotional Transformation Manila, Asian Internet Bible Institute Hiebert, Paul G. The Church and Ethnicity Retrieved October 5th 2004 from http://www.gospelcom.net/lcwe/wemag/9403ethni.html Kraft, Charles H. The Contextualization of Theology Evangelical Missions Quarterly, Jan 01, 1978, 14 (1), 31-38. Retrieved from www.strategicnetwork.org on January 24th 2005 Ldemann, Gerd Opposition to Paul in Jewish Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989) cited in Akers Keith, Literature on the Ebionites retrieved December 2004 from www.compassionatespirit.com McGavran, Donald. "Loose the Churches. Let Them Go!." Missiology: An International Review 1:2 (1973): 81-94. Retrieved from www.strategicnetwork.org on January 24th 2005 Jenkins, P. (2002) The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Maccoby, Hyam The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity,. New York: Harper & Row, 1987 Parshall, Phil Danger, New Directions In Contextualization, Evangelical Missions Quarterly, Oct 01, 1998, 34(4), 404-417. Retrieved from www.strategicnetwork.org on January 24th 2005 THE EDITOR, Clues to Mission Missiology: An International Review, Jul 01, 1977, 5(3), 259264 Retrieved from www.strategicnetwork.org on January 24th 2005 Van Gelder, Craig Defining the Center- Finding the Boundaries: The Challenge of Re-Visioning the Church in North America for the Twenty-First Century Missiology: An International Review, Jul 01, 1994, 22(3), 317-337. Retrieved from www.strategicnetwork.org on January 24th 2005 Wein, Rabbi Jerusalem Post online edition (23rd December 2004) Wilkie, William, (1987) Understanding Psychiatry Melbourne, Hill of Content Publishing

You might also like