Response To the 1999 Race Summit Apology

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:52:35 -0800

Before I begin I would like to applaud the North American Division of Seventh-day Adventist Church for seeing the need to improve its race relations in the church. Upon completion of the 1999 Race Summit they came up with some wonderful proposals to improve race relations.

But I would like to try to help the conversation and possibly point the conversation in a different direction. I believe that Elder A.C. McClure apology and proposal to improve race relations was an honest attempt to address the issues but I believe he missed the mark.

“But I am persuaded that change cannot be mandated because it takes people to will to change. It cannot happen by mission statement because only people can transform print to life. And it cannot happen by a strategy, for the most beautiful and comprehensive document voted by the most enthusiastic committee has to be implemented by people.”

The shortfall in his apology is the heavy emphasis on the individual. What Elder A.C McClure is blind to is that individual prejudices are largely formed by social structures. But instead of addressing the institutional or social structures we shift blame to the individual. What we must begin to realize is that much of our race problem here in America and even in our churches is located in people groups. In the book, Divided by Faith, the authors state that the race problem is rooted in intergroup conflict over resources and ways of life, the institutionalization of race-based practices, inequality and stratification, and the defense of group position.

What this tells us is that institutions and social structures contribute largely to the shaping of the individual prejudice. If we look at America and it’s policies and laws that have contributed to keep the majority group separate from the rest of the population through discriminatory housing laws (now called “steering”), education, media and employment we can see how they all contributed largely to our race relations dilemma in America and our “church.”

It is our “institutional” and “social structures” that have produced laws and policies that have kept “individuals” separate and also that have perpetuated negative stereotypes that the majority group has towards the minority groups. Research shows that 75-80% of secular and religious whites together believe in some sort of black deficiency. How was this formed? I propose, in large, institutions and social structures formed it. Can I remind ourselves of this provocative Ellen G. White quote?

“…no men who have had greater advantages than they have had, have taught them immorality, both by precept and example. Debasing practices have been forced upon them, and they have received low conceptions of life, and even their conceptions of the Christian life are of a depraved order. But the people who have been more favorably situated [privileged] who have had light and liberty, who have had an opportunity to know God, and Jesus Christ who He has sent, are responsible for the moral darkness that enshrouds their colored brethren.” The Southern Work pg. 31

By quoting this text I don’t want to suggest that all African American today represent this condition but my emphasis is that whatever condition we whites think that African Americans are in and then point the finger and telling them to pull themselves up by their “boot straps” lets remember who put them there and according to EGW of a responsibility to grab a hold of one of those boot straps.

If the church wants to improve race relations in the church it must focus on its own structure and how it perpetuates the racial divide. If the church wants to influence the individual in a positive way, as the president proposed, how is it going to do it? Well A.C. McClure says you can’t mandate it. I say, if you can mandate it in a negative way through structures then we mandate it in a positive way through structures.

I have a proposal. Since integrating conferences at this point seems to be impossible lets at least begin to integrate our churches in our own respective conferences. We must learn to integrate each other’s cultures into the life of the body of Christ. I am not calling for “forced” integration like bussing people 30 miles away just for the sake of diversity but where our population is diverse lets begin to join together. I can also imagine the economy of such mergers could boost local financial situations that would benefit both the church and communities in which it serves.

"There is no person, no nation that is perfect in every habit and thought. One must learn of another. Therefore God wants the different nationalities to mingle together, to be one in judgment, one in purpose. Then the union that there is in Christ will be exemplified."

I also propose that the “Church” begin to get more involved in social justice and equality. Many of Seventh-day Adventist hold many influential position outside the church structure so let’s help train members their responsibility to pursue justices and equality. They can do this by promoting minorities where they are misrepresented, oppose color-blind policies that perpetuate inequality, begin to hire more minorities in supervisor and director positions in their companies etc. These are just a few ways where we all can contribute to race relations.

If we truly wait on the individual to change we might me waiting a long time and in another ten years still scratching our head wondering why things have not changed. We do need individual education. My proposal is to get to the root of the problem and that is to educate people on how we have formed our negative stereotypes. As Martin L. King wrote in his letter from the Birmingham Jail, “…I am sure that each of you (a letter to 8 LIBERAL Alabama clergy) would want to go beyond the superficial social analysts who looks merely at effects, and does not grapple with underlying causes.”

In conclusion, I believe our church had begun a good work. Elder A.C. McClure wanted “this ship [ship of race relations] to sail so far out it cannot reverse its course. It seems that the ship has lost its wind in the middle of the sea. So lets all grab some riggings lift them sails turn the ship the wind can catch some wind and begin on a new journey.

I believe we can do a marvelous work both for the church and the individual. Not only will the pursuit of social justice, equality and reconciliation bring cleansing to individuals and to the Church and it will show the world that the Christian Church truly represents Christ and the unity he prays for.

Multiracial Churches and Growth By: Dr. George Yancey www.unityinchristmagazine.com

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:15:31 -0800

The homogenous unit principle (HUP) states that the fastest and most efficient way to grow churches is to focus on a single cultural group. First, Donald McGavran and later Peter Wagner championed this principle as a way to facilitate church growth. Since racial identity is tied to cultural understanding an important, but by no means only, implication of this principle is that churches should focus on reaching a single racial group. Multiracial churches are envisioned as creating too many barriers to growth.
Empirical support for HUP is based on observing missions to underdeveloped areas in the world. These areas tend to be dominated by cultural divides that exacerbated the problem of bringing cultural groups together. For example, much of McGavran’s work was done as he observed evangelical efforts with the Indian caste system. Indian society heavily sanctions individuals to cross caste barriers and efforts to create missions inclusive of different caste members were met with heavy resistance.
In our modern culturally pluralistic society we have to ask whether the monoracial emphasis found in HUP is still relevant for church growth? The answer from the data I used in writing my book “One Body, One Spirit” is no. That data indicated that multiracial churches, defined as churches in which no single racial group is more than eighty percent of the population, are more likely to grow than churches that are not racially diverse. Furthermore, work by Scott Thurman on megachurches, defined as churches that have at least 2,000 people in attendance on a weekly basis, indicate that megachurches are 3-4 times more likely to be multiracial than other churches. We still have racial barriers in the United States but, especially in an age of Obama, those barriers do not have the power to strife church growth and indeed racial diversity may help churches to expand.
Why may racial diversity help churches to grow? It may be that in a racially diverse society more individuals have developed relationships with individuals of other races. Therefore they are more comfortable in situations that are racially mixed than those that are racially homogenous. Michael Emerson discusses such individuals in his latest book “People of the Dream.” If he is correct then younger individuals are more likely to possess such a multiracial comfort than older individuals. Churches of the future will have to become racially diverse just to survive in the changing racial climate. In my mind this is the best explanation for why multiracial churches possess a greater opportunity for growth than monoracial churches.
Regardless of the reason why, empirical evidence indicates that racial diversity provides a church with a better chance to grow. Given this reality, contemporary churches have to begin planning now for moving into our multiracial culture. Those making necessary changes now will not be caught off guard when living in a multiracial atmosphere becomes the norm for most individuals in the United States.

Why I believe in Multicultural Ministry By: Eugene Cho www.urbanfaith.com/2009/04/why-i-do-multicultural-ministr.html

Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:00:00 -0700

Ministry has its up and downs. Such is life. But one of the joys of planting and pastoring Quest Church is that it's one of the most unique and diverse communities I have ever been a part of.
This isn't meant to be a slam against homogeneous churches. In fact, I believe that every community is multicultural on some level (hint: think beyond race). While I very much miss the uniqueness of my experiences in Korean American churches -- food, generations, languages, etc. (and still am involved in Korean American/Asian communities) -- I now understand why God called my wife, Minhee, and I to venture out from our homogeneous suburban church into the city to plant Quest and Q Cafe.
While we have a long way to go, we're thankful that Quest Church is growing as a multicultural, multigenerational, and urban faith community -- with a desire to be an incarnational presence both in the city of Seattle and the larger world -- teaching and living out the gospel of Christ.
Question: What are ways that you encourage your community to grow in diversity, community, and uniqueness?
These are my encouragements to fellow leaders and pastors:
• Know the diversity of your community. Simply, do you know your people's stories? They may "look" the same but they represent different "cultures" -- if not ethnicities. We all have diverse stories. And if you know their stories, are you making them known? For what it's worth, this is my story.
• Nevertheless, have a vision of the larger kingdom and the "future church" and consider what it looks like to take "one step closer..." Even if your church community isn't ethnically diverse, how are you personally building friendships and encouraging your congregants to live in friendship with neighbors and the larger community? How is your church serving "other" churches and communities -- especially those that don't look like yours? You don't have to put all your eggs in one basket and think that "worshipping together" is the only expression. Think outside of Sundays and outside the building box.
• Be committed to the truth that each person is uniquely created in the image of God. Consider the lessons learned from the story of Susan Boyle of Britain's Got Talent (whose inspiring performance has become a phenonmenon on YouTube) and meditate on this quote from C. S. Lewis in The Weight of Glory:
"There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations -- these are mortal , and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit -- immortal horrors or everlasting splendors. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn. We must play. But our merriment must be of the kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously -- no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner -- no mere tolerance, or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment. Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses. If he is your Christian neighbor, he is holy in almost the same way, for in him also Christ vere latitat -- the glorifier and the glorified, Glory Himself, is truly hidden."
Why did God call us to plant Quest Church? It's hard to put into words, but the images below illustrate some reasons why. We do ministry in hopes of loving and serving people so that we may all be drawn to the Gospel of Christ.
I'm thankful for the beauty of diversity, community, and uniqueness of each person because they give me a glimpse of a larger, deeper, and fuller God and Kingdom. When I exclusively hang with those that look, think, and view the world just like me, I'm prone to live with blind spots ... In short, I see what I see and what I want to see. This is why I need others and, yes, why others need me.

Who has the burden of responsilbility

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:40:46 -0700

In the quest of racial reconciliation…oh wait I said, “quest” that implies that someone or groups of people are on an arduous journey seeking for something. So, are there people or groups on the quest for racial reconciliation?

In my experience it has been largely a lopsided quest in search for reconciliation. Largely, the search comes mainly from the minority people groups. Very rarely do you see the majority group seeking any type of reconciliation. When it comes to fair and equal treatment and justice the arms of the majority have always been twisted.

I believe both parties are responsible to take an active role to seek reconciliation but I believe the burden of responsibility for reconciliation is on the shoulder of the majority group. If the majority group does not take the initiative to seek reconciliation it will likely not happen.

The only way I can explain this is through the illustration of a broken marriage. In this country we cannot dismiss there is a broken relationship between White America and Black America. In many broken marital relationship there is the offender and the offended. In this case it is White America as the offender and Black America as the offended.

When the relationship is going bad or is broken often times it is the offended party who is constantly communicating to the spouse what is wrong. After a while the offending spouse begins to blame the other spouse and tells them to stop whining and complaining when in all actuality its the offending spouses attitude, treatment, lack of understanding, selfishness and ultimately the unwillingness to look in the mirror to see what they have done that has contributed to the failing marriage.

If and when the offending spouse comes to their senses and sees their own shortcomings the natural thing to do is one, ask for forgiveness and two, begin to seek counseling to restore the relationship. Consequentially, during the reconciliation process the offending party loses some of its privilege. If it is a fidelity issue they may not be able to go to some places they use to go, passwords for Internet accounts may need to be given up and whereabouts will always have to be known. If it is a financial issue, the offending party may have to give up the checkbook and spending maybe done only through an allowance system. So until trust can be reestablished the offending party may have to endure a probationary time until all privileges and trust can be restored.

White America bears most of the burden of responsibility for reconciliation because we are the offender and we must be the initiator to restore the broken relationship and may have to give up some of our privileges to get there. So, let’s stop telling the offended to stop whining and complaining about what’s wrong with our relationship and let’s start taking the time to sit down, listen and seek help.

The diversity dilemma

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:40:41 -0700

It is my experience and observation that our diversity initiatives by in large are not fulfilling the gospel truth of unity and equality that we articulate from own initiatives and teachings. Some conferences pride themselves on being diverse because they have a diverse congregation or diverse homogenous congregation within their conferences, yet in my observation and experience, they do not fulfill the purpose of diversity. Our diverse homogenous churches (black church, white church or Hispanic church) which are predominately in regional churches (Black administered) and diverse congregational churches, predominately in non-regional churches (White administered) are not exemplifying gospel unity that God has called us to.
Why have we been educating ourselves having seminars on diversity? Isn’t so that we can learn about each other and understand each other so we can worship, work and play as one worshipping community? If not, then what has been the urgency? Diversity in our institutions and places of worship is meant to embrace different ethnicities and cultures and not to treat them as exotic guests but as living organisms that contribute their cultures to the life of the church. Diversity is not to make others assimilate into the dominant culture, which I see predominately done in “diverse” churches.
Any church, conference and union can be diverse, but that doesn’t mean it has unity and equality. For example, you can have several cultures in your congregations or diverse homogenous churches in your conferences but in my experience I haven’t sensed any genuine unity or equality within its diversity. We have camp meetings that are segregated and separated camp meetings for different ethnicities at a different time than the hosting conference.
Ellen White suggested that different nationalities should worship together so that we can learn from each other and enjoy our different cultures, but how can we do that if we are never together?
"There is no person, no nation that is perfect in every habit and thought. One must learn of another. Therefore God wants the different nationalities to mingle together, to be one in judgment, one in purpose. Then the union that there is in Christ will be exemplified."[1]
In his book, Luminous Darkness: A Personal Interpretation of the Anatomy of Segregation and the Ground of Hope, Howard Thurman states;
The other aspect of the issue has to do with the mood, state of mind out of which discrimination and the response to discrimination come in the first instance. The issue is a moral and spiritual one and falls within the broad and specific scope of morality and religion.”[2]
In essence, Thurman is saying ending racism and equality in society needs to begin in the church.
What we have now are two models in our conferences. We have diverse homogenous congregations in Regional Conferences that have minimal or no diverse membership within a congregation, with the exception of immigrant blacks from other nations. And in Non-regional conferences, we have a diverse membership or attendance in local churches in addition to diverse homogenous churches. This is 2008. What have we done structurally to improve our race and ethnic relations? Certainly our current structure and what we are currently doing is not facilitating it. All we have done is perpetuated and promoted segregation. We are just mirroring society, you know, acting “worldly.” It seems we are not really concerned about it, either; it has almost been a decade since the 1999 NAD race summit and was stated that there would be subsequent meeting yet it has not happened and a matter a fact the issue of race and culture dialogue has shifted from the NAD to the Unions.
It is more difficult for a Regional church to become multicultural because whites in general will not go to black churches because they think black churches are “for blacks.” Yet they [whites] think their churches are open to everyone and inclusive, when the fact is that their churches are as white as black churches are black. How can I say that, when I say Non-regional conferences have many diverse congregations? Because even though they may be diverse ethnically, the church “culture” is white.
So, what is the answer? Well, diversity is not the answer; multiculturalism is. What’s the difference? A big difference! As you have seen above, you can be diverse but have no unity or equality. In a multicultural church, racial and ethnic unity and equality are the goals. True unity is manifested when different ethnic groups begin to socialize together in and outside the church.
What does a multicultural church look like? Well, you can’t tell what culture is dominant. For one thing; the power structure is diverse. Its worship, dress, music, language and liturgy are all inclusive. No one is made to assimilate.
We must begin--slowly, of course--dismantling our mentality. Let's begin, at least within our own conferences, to integrate our homogenous churches that speak a common language together or invest in equipment that we can translate languages during worship.
The fact is, hardly any of our administrators, pastors and staff--Black, White, Hispanic or any other ethnicity--have not been trained in multiculturalism (I am not talking about are nicety diversity seminars whre we all smile in each other faces) I admit it is difficult, and that’s why we give up and minister to our own kind. Many administrators, pastors, and staff are shooting from the hip when it comes to diversity and multiculturalism.
When there have been initiatives to be multicultural, historically we have not taken the time to study, provide resources and strategize to do the job effectively. The congregations have not been prepared or owned the vision. We've just placed a “white” pastor in a black church or placed a black pastor in an increasingly diverse church and thought that was the answer. Creating a genuinely multicultural church is an art, and not everyone is willing to do te hard work it needs to be successful.
I am suggesting that we need to train pastors professionally specifically in “multicultural ministries” so they can smartly transform a diverse church into a multicultural church.
If we want healthy, multicultural churches and racial reconciliation, we need to do some hard work. If we don’t, we will continue to look at the big pink elephant in the room, talk and work around the elephant, and not make any progress. Black, Hispanic, Korean and White need to work at this. My experience is that whites don’t’ see the need and don’t want to go through it. Minorities are more willing, but are hesitant because of many broken “treaties” in the past.
“…That all of them may be one.” John 17:20 TNIV
[1] Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol 2 p. 1029 (Takoma Park, MD: Review & Herald Publishing Association).
[2] Howard Thurman, Luminous Darkness; A Personal Interpretation of the Anatomy of Segregation and the Ground of Hope (New York: Harper &Row,).

Race, Politics and Unity

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:00:00 -0700