Share this Digg Del.icio.us Reddit StumbleUpon Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Googlize this Blinklist Facebook Wikio Print E-mail

It has often been said that 11:00 a.m. on Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America. How has a pluralistic nation, the land of immigrants once known as a melting pot, come to a state of such racial segregation in the church? Americans work together, shop together, and play together, but they do not worship together. If we are at our core spiritual, then the fact that we seem unable and unwilling to relate to one another elbow-to-elbow in the pews of the local congregation reveals how fragile the integrity of the church is.

While "one nation under God" is the articulated ideal, it is perhaps more accurate to say that we are many religio-ethnic ghettos under God. How good is the "Good News" if it extends only to those in one's cultural, racial-ethnic enclave? How powerful is the Gospel if it cannot break down the walls of racial separation? How authentic is our evangelistic witness if it is proclaimed only to those in one's socio-economic circle?

How good is the Good News if it extends only to those in ones cultural, racial-ethnic enclave?

According to the U.S. Census 2000, 37 percent of the popu-lation is non-White, and yet most mainline denominations are overwhelmingly White. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), for example, is 94 percent White as of 1999, and the other denominations, whether mainline or conservative, share similar statistics. Slavery and then the impact of the Jim Crow laws prevented an integrated church, but what excuse does the church have now for continued segregation? One could argue that in a free country, people are free to worship and associate with whomever they choose. Fair enough, but the question remains: Why do Christians choose to worship separately? This truism merely covers a deeper, uglier truth of the church's failure to embody the Gospel in its original splendor, power, and scope. To borrow a phrase from J. B. Phillips, the God of the dominant church is too small to include the various cultures and ethnicities of the increasingly diverse American demographic. The church's failure is in remaining monocultural while society has become multicultural.

A clear distinction must be made between a multiracial church and a multicultural church. A White church with a spattering of minorities is nominally a multiracial church, because the membership consists of people from more than one race. It is not a multicultural church, however, if there is room for only one dominant culture and all others are marginalized.

My colleagues lament, "We open the door and welcome the minorities in our community, and they will visit, but they will not stay." They don't realize that most congregations exude an "understanding" that there is one dominant culture operative in that congregation, the White culture, and all non-Whites are expected to check their cultural assumptions at the door. This is no less true for an African American church or other ethnic churches. In a Korean congregation, for example, a few White, Black, or Hispanic members may be scattered in the pews, but everyone understands that the prevailing culture is Korean, the dominant language is Korean, the leadership is Korean, and most impacting of all, the Gospel will be interpreted through the lens of the Korean experience. Most multiracial churches are, in fact, monocultural.

Our race, ethnicity, and culture are integral to who we are; more than that, they are God's gift to God's people. If a White believer must check his "whiteness" at the door of a Black church, or if a Mexican Christian must check her "Mexicanness" at the door of a White church, or even if a Korean adoptee must check his unique adoptee culture at the door of a Korean church, then the price of admission is grossly distorted. Incorporation into a church should depend solely on a person's willingness to be changed spiritually by the liberating Word and Sacraments of the God of boundless grace. The natural consequence of an insistently monocultural church is a monoracial membership. The problem of racial segregation in the church is persistent because it is so insidious. No external factors compel a congregation to be of one color, but the unspoken insistence that the "identity," "tradition," and "heritage" of a congregation be preserved becomes the justification for remaining a monocultural church. We American Christians often forget that the first church described in Acts was a multiracial, multilingual, and multicultural church. That is our identity, tradition, and heritage.

A new way to think church

The first church consisted of people from all over the world, of diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds.

The church of the twenty-first century must be completely reoriented from one that sees itself primarily as a fellowship of believers, to one where the mission of God is preeminent, a mission that forges a new and unexpected fellowship of diverse believers committed to a common goal. When we examine the origin of the church at Pentecost, we witness people who naturally had little in common--Jews, proselyte-Gentiles, Cretans and Arabs--filled with and overwhelmed by the one Holy Spirit, speaking of the mighty deeds of God (Acts 2:10-11).

The first church consisted of people from all over the world, of diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds. In fact, they prophesied in a bewildering number of languages, so that some passers-by thought them to be drunk, but all the prophecies witnessed to the glory of the one true God. Pentecost becomes the undoing of the curse of Babel: People still speak different languages, but they all praise one God!

The church of Pentecost does not begin as we might expect. We are apt to be more familiar with churches that get their start when like-minded people gather with those of similar background in order to find spiritual comfort and fellowship. There appears to be nothing wrong with this on the surface, except that there is a subtle but powerful understanding that the church will inevitably reflect the norms, mores, and aspirations of the foundational leadership who are, by and large, monocultural.

However, Darrell Guder argues "… no particular culture … may now be regarded as normative for the gospel community." He adds, "All cultural formations of Christian discipleship are both authentic and sinful. They are shaped by God's grace and deformed by our desire to control that grace." It is not necessary or desirable to rid the church of culture. The church, however, must be on guard so that no one culture becomes an idolatrous substitute for the gospel.

The degree to which a typical congregation acts as a culturally captive organism becomes evident when a neighborhood changes but the congregation does not. The inner-city landscape is littered with these ecclesiastical corpses dying when the prevailing culture dies in that congregation. Sometimes, the few remaining members will magnanimously "hand over" the church to an ethnic or immigrant group with few resources but a lot of spirit, which is known as "redevelopment." Rarely does such a declining congregation reinvent itself, its identity and its mission, so that the church has a new purpose for being, becoming a vital force in the community. This phenomenon is so rare that when it hap-pens, a book or article will be written about it.

By contrast, the Pentecostal church in Jerusalem was a church of many races, cultures, and tongues. Its unity came from the Holy Spirit, who gave all the different believers one purpose: to witness to the mighty deeds of God (Acts 2:11). Things went downhill from there. For two thousand years we have been going backward, not forward, in realizing this Pentecostal vision. A church that began as a multicultural, multilingual, multinational church has become in America a Black church, a White church, a Korean church, a Coptic church, in a dizzying array of denominations.

What happened to the American church?

It is true that in most countries, one finds a relatively monocultural, monoethnic demographic. In Korea, my country of origin, the demographic is approximately 99 percent Korean, if counting permanent residents. In such a context, one cannot expect a multiethnic/multicultural church.

The churchs mission is not fellowship; rather, Christian fellowship is a gift from God to give us strength for the journey in doing the mission of God

There was a time when the United States was comprised mostly of White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (excluding slaves). In such a context, one expects the churches to reflect that culture. Thus the legacy of slavery's impact is critical to understanding the persistent monocultural nature of the modern church in America. The White masters were all too pleased to see their slaves converted to Christianity, but the slaves would be relegated to a sort of minor-league Christianity with no chance of making it to the majors. Imagine a White-only NBA without players like Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neil, or Kobe Bryant. The smartest thing that sports did was to desegregate. Because this failed to happen much in the church, Black Christians created their own church, which has become a major power in the social, economic, political, and religious landscape of America, not to mention the influence it wields in African American society.

In the same way that White abolitionists applied enormous pressure to end slavery, White Christians could have led the charge in integrating society by integrating their churches. Could the incorporation of Black spirituality, liminal theology, dynamic preaching, and the unique charisms of the African American Christian community have brought about a revival of the church? How is it that every area of society has been immeasurably enriched by the integration of African Americans--from arts to sports to academia to politics to entertainment--except the church?

The historic, mainline PC(USA) is in the midst of a precipitous decline in membership, influence, and relevance. Could this trend have been averted if Black and other racial-ethnic Christians were treated as more than a colorful garnish to adorn the White "meat and potatoes" church? Both the White church and the Black church are impoverished because of self-imposed segregation.

Evangelism is the answer

The way out of this ecclesial mess is for churches to take seriously the task of evangelism, defined through the prism of Acts 2:1-11 as the act of proclaiming the good news of God's deeds of power. That includes the power to overcome human barriers and alienation, in multiple tongues to people of all cultures and nationalities. Indeed, as James Brownson states in Guder's The Continuing Conversion of the Church, "God's presence is irreducibly multicultural" (p. 87).

The American church, despite its past failures, is still blessed to have the opportunity to become a truly multicultural church, as at Pentecost. This goal is more attainable than ever, as no community in America remains untouched by vast demographic shifts. Demographers predict that people of color will become the majority by 2050, and this is already the case in California.

Countless churches in the cities and suburbs, and increasingly in rural areas, are located in the midst of diverse racial-ethnic constituencies. This can be seen either as danger or opportunity: danger if the church sees itself primarily as a fellowship (longstanding members with no idea how to incorporate "those people" into the existing monocultural fellowship); or opportunity if the church sees itself as a missional community (existing members become excited by new prospects for ministry). A new attitude could emerge among the old members: "We ministered in one language to one culture, because that was what our neighborhood looked like then. Now we will minister in multiple languages to multiple cultures, because that is what our neighborhood looks like today."

The Christian church is enriched because we have four testimonies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, four different evangelists representing various cultural and theological perspectives. The church today also can enjoy that richness if we include multicultural perspectives when witnessing to the mighty deeds of God.

Can our American churches reflect Pentecost?

A church can become like the church at Pentecost only if it relinquishes its cultural identity rooted in social fellowship and adopts the missio Dei (God's mission) emanating from the Trinity as its reason for being. The great missiological writer David Bosch states, "The classical doctrine on the missio Dei as God the Father sending the Son, and God the Father and the Son sending the Spirit was expanded to include yet another 'movement': Father, Son and Holy Spirit sending the church into the world." The church's mission is not fellowship; rather, Christian fellowship is a gift from God to give us strength for the journey in doing the mission of God.

Fellowship is genuine only when engaged for the purpose of mission. In a time when the fissures are turning into fractures between Christians and Muslims, Muslims and Hindus, Jews and Palestinians, East and West, it is good news indeed that God calls all peoples, nationalities, and tongues to proclaim the wonderful deeds of God's power.

As a demographic microcosm of the world, the American church can take advantage of this marvelous opportunity to become a Pentecost church. America in the twenty-first century is much like the Palestine of the first century: cosmopolitan, mercantile, multiethnic, multilingual, multicultural, a political, social, and economic crossroads for the world.

Palestine connected three continents, but even more continents converge on the streets of Atlanta, Seattle, and Minneapolis. The church was born in that exciting context and took full advantage of the richness of that diversity. The early church continued to break down barriers between clean and unclean, circumcised and uncircumcised, Jew and Greek, male and female, slave and free. Is our task any less urgent, and the vision of God's Kingdom any less glorious? Pursuing the vision of the Pentecost church is essential for the authentic renewal of the church in America, a matter of our ecclesial life and death.