I’ve often heard this said as proof of our multiculturalism. It’s usually easy to connect the idea of diversity with the existence of difference without looking deeper at the meaning of that difference. In the church, I believe ethnic diversity has to mean something more than simply looking at it from afar, the same way we sometimes think about our Greektowns, Chinatowns, Koreatowns and Little Italies—that is, in my own time, on my own terms and according to my mood. The New Testament accounts of early Christian churches tell of a remarkable degree of diversity within these faith communities. However, far from painting these as ideal situations, the apostle Paul’s letters clearly indicate they were fraught with social inequity and factionalism as well as cultural prejudice and conflict. (See especially Romans 10 – 15; 1 Corinthians 1 – 14; Galatians 2 – 4; Colossians 3 – 4.) It is against this backdrop of bona fide diversity of class, gender, race and culture that Paul implores Christians towards “unity in Christ” and to strive to become the “body of Christ.” These words were spoken for the sake of their survival and spiritual integrity since they touched upon the very heart of Christian faith and fellowship. Achieving unity in diversity was without doubt the ideal.
It is clear that attaining and managing church integration was very difficult. And so, surely, if it was so difficult for them back then, even with Paul’s guidance, we shouldn’t expect anything different today! It is not an easy thing to do even if we might think we have done it. In fact, for some self – described “multi – ethnic” congregations, there are those who would doubt such labelling is even justified—if what we call ethnic diversity means just a modest spattering of colour in the pews, but it is not evident in the church leadership or doesn’t bear out in the church culture and ethos. As a crude comparison, we wouldn’t call a traditionally black church multi – ethnic just because there are a few white folks in the service! In the same way, an organization can’t be said to profess gender equality when the corporate culture and leadership are still predominantly male. The road to achieving authentic diversity and equality of any kind often begins with stubborn honesty, serious intentionality and collective struggle.
Where multiculturalism is visibly ‘succeeding’ in the church is in the growth of ethnic – specific congregations. If we look at situations such as the Korean, Ghanaian and Chinese churches we can see a general trend of increase in both their congregational membership as well as number of congregations. (Recently the Presbytery of West Toronto approved the establishment of a Nigerian church – plant, the first for the Presbyterian Church). This corresponds with the overall trend not only in North America but also around the world—that while churches in general are experiencing a decline, ethnic churches are in fact growing. Asia, Africa and Latin America are quickly becoming the new spiritual home.
In our context then, the multicultural project seems to be quite successful; it has made minority groups feel validated and created in them a sense of rightful belonging in a nation which loudly and clearly promotes these social and political conditions. They were encouraged to express who they were in their social organizations and in maintaining their cherished customs. In essence, by the strength of their own cultural cohesion, many ethnic groups flourished under these conditions. But in many ways this success was self – contained—by that I mean these groups blossomed so much so that their involvement, whether in business, finance or religion, need not extend beyond their own communities. The result is less interaction and integration of diverse groups of people because of healthier self – identity and clearer cultural lines of demarcation. This can create in some of us a feeling of greater distance between people – groups, even with those who make up our church. For the average person in the pew, how many of us have interacted with Hungarians? How many Ghanaians? First Nations? Portuguese – speaking? Arabic – speaking? Spanish – speaking? Koreans or Chinese (except when we go to convenience stores and restaurants)? These are all cultural groups represented in our denomination but who have their own congregations and can worship in the languages, styles and manners in which they derive spiritual comfort. (A Korean friend of mine recently said to me that although he is functionally bilingual, he prefers to worship in the Korean language because “it sounds more proper and meaningful.”)
To take it one step further, as we know, for the past decade the Korean churches, with the endorsement of General Assembly, have functioned as two autonomous, culture – specific presbyteries: Han – Ca East and West. Let there be little doubt that the ability to worship in one’s own language and cultural milieu is both emotionally empowering and faith affirming.So does the success of multiculturalism depend on empowerment of ethnic group identities to have their own worship communities according to their respective customs and practices? Or is it seen more authentically as people coming together as an integrated body irrespective of culture or ethnicity? Which end is multiculturalism designed to serve? Depending on one’s vantage point, we will understand a healthy, diverse Presbyterian Church to mean either more multi – ethnic groups worshipping under one roof, or the fostering of more ethnic – specific congregations. Of course we can, and do, have both but as we will see later there are aspects of each side that are seemingly in direct conflict.
If it is true that we the church are so segmented, then what is the gain for the larger church other than the smug knowledge that various ethnic congregations exist among us? There might even be some in these very congregations—members as well as ministers—who feel detached and insulated from the larger church body. If there is no meaningful personal interaction across these cultural lines, then how can we claim ourselves to be the body of Christ? Perhaps we have been so occupied with extolling the virtues of multiculturalism over meals of souvlaki, roti, spaghetti and kimchee that we have failed to ask the hard question: is multiculturalism bad for the church?
As the church I think it’s important for us to ask, what is our lived experience in terms of our Christian attitude, approach and response to multiculturalism, which has been Canada’s official policy since the early 1970s? At that time, the view was that promotion of ethnic/cultural diversity was key to cultivating a healthy society. Some would understand this to mean greater assimilation and less separation in order to have a robust democracy; on the other hand, others might argue for greater respect for cultural differences and endorsement for group autonomy in a just society. So can we say that multiculturalism is a good thing primarily because it allows us to be drawn closer together by blurring cultural lines and thereby fostering mutual recognition and more meaningful relationships? Or is it good primarily because under the law the cultural lines are made clearer, thereby fostering mutual recognition and more meaningful relationships? I want to provoke honest discussion on this unavoidable topic both as Presbyterians and Canadians so we will be able to address what kind of church we will choose to become in our ever – diversifying denomination and world. In Part Two, I will expand on the meaning of this article’s title and offer some thoughts as to how this conversation can continue.
