I could write pages and pages on this…
photo by dasasaki
We know that the Asian American population is growing… particularly the American born Asian population. But where are Asian Americans headed? Which church will minister to them? Will it be bilingual churches? Will it be Asian American churches? Or will it be multi-ethnic churches?
Due to the huge surge in population (look at the charts in my last post) Asian American churches will grow in all forms. I believe English ministries will grow larger and more robust, Asian American churches will grow both in number of churches and the size of the churches themselves, and so will multi-ethnic churches. But I believe that Asian American churches will capture the largest portion of this population increase. Second generation Asian Americans are going to be choosing their own churches for the first time in large numbers, and they will overwhelmingly choose Asian American churches.
Churches are primarily built to support a single culture. Whether or not this is biblical is debatable, but the fact is that only 5% of churches in America are racially integrated. Pastor Ken brings up the homophily principle in his video presentation. African-Americans have historically attended African-American churches. Hispanic-Americans have attended Hispanic-American churches. Thus it follows that Asian Americans will attend Asian American churches. Again, this is not a matter of whether or not this is desirable. This is just plain what happens. It’s very difficult to argue against the fact that Asian Americans will naturally want to be with other Asian Americans. They feel more comfortable. They know you understand them on certain levels.
For the first time EVER, Asian Americans are developing a distinct ethnic culture that is all their own. Church attendance will reflect that culture. For the first time we are seeing distinctly Asian American cultural icons. Anime, boba, asian yogurt places, none of these things existed when I was in high school. Especially in California, Asian American culture is finally defining itself. The reason? The biggest reason is that for the first time there are enough Asian Americans to create their own culture separate from their parents culture and separate from mainstream American culture. They will therefore have a church that is separate from their parents and also separate from mainstream America.
Why not bilingual churches with English ministries?
I am sure English ministries in Asian churches will thrive like they have never thrived before, but many will find discontentment in English ministries. Why? Because that is not their native culture. We have already witnessed the big struggles between generations and those struggles have been well documented. English ministries will grow, but it will continue to be very difficult. It is my own personal observation that while some English ministries are doing well, these English ministries are few and far between and require a very unique mix of leadership. On top of that, the thriving English ministries are chock full of people who do not rock the boat. These English ministries have been around for awhile, and have not been able to reach a significant number of non-Christian Asian Americans. The percentage of Asian Americans that attend Asian churches is very low. This speaks volumes about the current system that is trying to minister to them.
Why not multi-ethnic churches?
While I believe multi-ethnic churches will grow and many Asian Americans will go to multi-ethnic churches, they will not be the largest segment of growth. Why? Because of the homophily principle. It’s just too difficult. We are talking about real people here rather than lofty ideals. Real people have a tendency to hang out with people who are like them. The majority of multi-ethnic churches are actually single ethnicity churches that “wannabe” multi-ethnic. That is the way it will be in the future. Perhaps a lot of the new Asian American churches will call themselves multi-ethnic, but they will actually be AA in ethnicity.
I would not be surprised to see the number of Asian American churches to grow tenfold in the next 10-15 years. The only question now is, who will lead them?
Next post: Why are Asian American church leaders obsessed with the idea of multi-ethnic churches?
Powered by FireStats
8 Comments, Comment or Ping
Wayne Park
randplaty: I think u r a great writer. (found u via Eugene’s blog) - but I can tell that you are kind of against the idea of the multiethnic phenomenon. The homiphily principle is one I agree with. People should worship in settings where affinity happens the most. However I think you draw this conclusion out a little too far.
There will always be the ethnic church, and multi- pundits are not trying to change that. We should celebrate our kimchee and our xanga and etc. But there comes a point where one gets tired of it and asks if this represents the vision of the kingdom.
In other words, multi-ethnic churches are not for all. But it is for those who are more missionally-minded. I spent my entire life in the Korean church and it became a coffin. I tore myself away because mission wasn’t happening, and culture became an obstacle to mission. To extol the virtues of single-ethnicity churches as a rubric is to make the same mistake the Judaizers made.
Don’t get me wrong. My folks will never darken the doorstep of a multi-ethnic church. I don’t expect them to. But their English-speaking children / grandchildren damn better be able to relate to society at large and not just their ethnic circles. I think the kingdom expects more of us than that.
But like I said, reading some of your stuff tells me youre a thoughtful writer and I respect where youre coming from. I think perhaps we might even play pundits via our blogs sometime, somehow.
Aug 7th, 2008
Cindy
“I spent my entire life in the Korean church and it became a coffin. I tore myself away because mission wasn’t happening, and culture became an obstacle to mission.”
I wonder how much of that has to do with your church being culturally homogeneous and how much of that has to do with the fact that your old church is not missional, period.
My old chinese church was very mission minded. They reached Chinese people and people of other ethnicities. I’m not sure one can conclude that multi-ethnic churches are more missional than ethnic churches.
Aug 8th, 2008
ecsupa
Wayne, I don’t think Daniel is advocating a complete separation of ethnic groups in churches. Nor is he advocating an over-idealized view multi-ethnic churches. He is merely stating fact: the future of Asian ethnic churches is found in Asian-American churches.
While Daniel argues for the homophily principle, I would like to take that a little further. I believe Asian-American churches will be prominent and matured in the near future because 2nd-wave Asian-Americans face a similar racial reality which is inherited from 1st wave Asian immigrants. Racial oppression, while not as visible, still exists today through the media, public institutions, foreign policy and other various forms of “invisible” discrimination. Not only do we like hanging out with people similar to us, we are marginalized by dominant Anglo society in our schools, communities and public institutions. This gives Asian-Americans a common ground in which we can relate and a context in which we can understand our relationship with Jesus more profoundly.
You cited the example Judaizers (perhaps in the context of Galatians?) as proof that single-ethnic churches are unbiblical. Firstly, I don’t think Daniel is advocating single-ethnicity in church, because being Asian-Americans is not a uniform ethnicity (at least not for now) and we all come from diverse backgrounds. Secondly, while I understand your argument (that Jewish Christians wanted to preserve the false doctrines of Mosaic law and circumcision as avenues of salvation), you must understand that Paul was (probably) writing to Gentile Christians who were being influenced by Judaizers on the grounds of sin and lack of faith–NOT false ethnic practices. There is a difference between practicing our faith through specific cultural practices and false doctrine. Judaizers were not merely perpetuating a false ethnic practice, instead they were proposing a wrong theology–that works should take precedence over faith in our relationship with Christ Jesus–that our relationship with Christ is merely contractual rather than covenantal. It wasn’t a matter of ethnicity–it was purely theological.
Like in your case, I wouldn’t say that it is wrong that Christianity is so normalized in Korean culture. I think it can be a negative affect sometimes because social acceptability is put in precedence over a relationship with Christ. However, I think the Korean value of religion as a normalized way of life can lead to transformation of many, many lives through the message of the Gospel. The biggest church in the world is found in Korea. Is this a good or bad thing? I don’t know people’s hearts, but I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt.
To understand the importance of cultural practices and ethnic churches let us look at black and white churches in America:
Black churches often perpetuate the notion of victory and liberation over death. In their culture, victory and liberation is such a powerful theme because they come from a reality of slavery and inequality. Blacks have been marginalized and oppressed nearly since the creation of this nation. This nation’s success in the world today is due to the subjugation of blacks in history. Naturally, the cultural expression of victory and liberation in their music, sermons and worship style is highly appropriate.
This is contrasted from the white American experience. White worship music is solemn and reflective and often self-critical–Chris Tomlin, David Crowder, Matt Redman…The music focuses on the abnegation of self and desires because white Americans come from a privileged reality. They desire an alternative reality from which they come from. This is a cultural expression that stems from a particular reality and cannot be replaced by other forms of expression.
God can be glorified in our cultural practices and our life circumstances that are unique to our people.
Multi-ethnicity is interesting and ideal in some ways. But in reality, it is merely a fantasy that needs to be reevaluated in the context of Biblical notions of ethnicity and theology.
Aug 8th, 2008
Wayne Park
thanx all for the chance to dialogue. It’s been enlightening..
I would contend the notion that for Paul it wasn’t a matter of ethnicity–it was purely theological. In his thinking it would seem to me that Paul drew out the forgone conclusion that circumcision was of the heart not of the flesh. I think the question of ethnicity as far as culture is concerned was a foremost rubric in his mind, although he may not have realized it at the time. He wasn’t setting out to build a “theology of liberation” or even a theology grounded on the a priori of ethnic identity but his understanding of orthodoxy was indelibly intertwined with the question of ethnic identity.
In other words, I think one cannot separate Pauline theology from Pauline sociology. In his theology of sola gratia I think it is implicit that grace alone is not about being Jewish.
Which means the gospel is supracultural and shouldn’t be strapped down (permanently) to any cultural forms, lest it hinder the dynamism of culture-jumping people movements. If we subscribe to monoethnic churches (I’m playing devils advocate because I believe in the necessity of such churches) aren’t we asking folks who are of a different ethnicity to subscribe to our cultural norms in order to attend our churches? I think that is an unnecessary barrier for faith. Agreed, multiethnic churches aren’t necessarily coming up with the best solutions for this problem, but you have to admit, at least it’s headed in the right direction: unleashing the faith from cultural baggages, norms, and practices that might seem foreign to the outsider (i.e. circumcision).
Perhaps we are saying the same thing ecsupa.
I like what you are saying about racialization, however, that multi-ethnicity is a washing over of true diversity and contributes to color blindness and tokenisms. I would normally agree with that statement however, don’t you think monoethnic churches would be running away from the problem rather than solving it?
@ Cindy, yes my church was those things. No wonder it is not growing anymore but steadily on the decline. But by virtue of a church being called “Chinese church” or “Korean church” don’t you think it’s already disqualified its ability to speak to larger culture? It may have great outreach programs but I think the problem is precisely this, a monoethnic cultural church presents more (unnecessary) barriers for people to come to Christ. I’m guessing u disagree?
Cheers all. Great dialogue.
Aug 8th, 2008
Cindy
I agree that multi-ethnic church can reach a broader population of people that ethnic churches cannot. Likewise, I believe that ethnic churches can reach a specific group of people that multi-ethnic churches would not be able to. That is why we send out indigenous missionaries to the mission fields. My dad pastors a church in the heart of San Francisco China town, reaching Chinese immigrants who can barely speak English. Will those people ever consider going to a multi-ethnic church?
Each church has its own assignment from God. And every church has its own gifts, talents and limitations. It is together with all type of churches that we can reach all people groups in the face of this earth.
Aug 8th, 2008
Reply to “I could write pages and pages on this…”