who moved my church - usa / canada region · my church? new curves to ... form our world! it...

“From one man [God] made every nation ofmen, that they should inhabit the earth; and[God] determined the times set for them and

the exact places where they should live. God didthis so that men would seek [God] and perhaps

reach out for [God] and find [God], though [God]is not far from each one of us”

(Acts 17:26-27).

WHO MOVED

MY CHURCH?

New Curves to AddressDemographic Changes

Oliver R. Phillips, director—Mission Strategy USA/Canada

250736 Who Moved Church 2/4/09 7:00 AM

As Christ’s followers we celebrate the new birthand sing a new song as part of a new Kingdom!We need not fear the new!� Our Lord gave us “a new command . . . Love

one another” (John 13:34).� Jesus instituted the “new covenant in my

blood, which is poured out for you” (Luke22:20).

� The resurrected Lord commanded, “Go . . .and tell the people the full message of thisnew life” (Acts 5:20).

� The apostle Paul reiterated: “If anyone is inChrist, he is a new creation; the old has gone,the new has come” (2 Cor 5:17)!

� The new can be uncomfortable, like a newpair of shoes.

� The new can be wonderful, like a new baby. � The new can be dangerous, like strange new

doctrines.� The new can be invigorating, like a new in-

sight from God’s word.

The truth is we live in a new world, particularlyin the new USA/Canada demographic reality.Who moved our Church and who changed ourcommunity?

Oliver Phillips offers us an encouraging vista ofnew potential for Kingdom advance in this new

Preface

Jerry D. Porter, General Superintendent

3


4

mission field. We are invited to launch culturallysensitive bold new missional ventures to trans-form our world!

It matters not who moved the Church. We justknow that our creative God will not allow theChurch to become an irrelevant extinct dinosaur!Led by the Holy Spirit, we will courageously en-ter this new promise land of missional opportuni-ty with new effectiveness and fruitfulness!


5

In Who Moved My Cheese?, Spencer Johnsonused a simple parable to demonstrate the variousways in which human beings can react to suddenand unexpected change. The theme of this 96-page book is that people see change either as acurse or a blessing.

The book is about four characters who live in amaze. Sniff and Scurry are nonanalytical andnonjudgmental mice who simply want cheeseand are willing to do whatever it takes to get it.They don’t spend a lot of time questioning wherethe cheese went when it runs out or moves; theyjust sniff and scurry about finding new cheese.Hem and Haw, on the other hand, agonize overwhat might have happened to the cheese andwhere it might have gone and rationalize why itshould still be there, not somewhere else. Thepoint of the story is that we must be attentive tochanges in the cheese (or whatever it is wewant), and be prepared to run in search of newsources of cheese when the cheese we have runsout or moves. The author affirms that change oc-curs whether we like it or not, and that it is ourreaction to change that determines whether wehave a future that is rife with new possibilities orone that is defined by the absence of something.

In the life of congregations, the cheese hasmoved, and one wonders whether we should ex-ist without cheese, search for new cheese, createour own cheese or—perhaps most frightening—

Introduction


change our diet and find substitutes for thecheese. This last option involves changing ourdemographics because congregations that onceministered to a particular group because of his-torical and family allegiances now discover thatthe surrounding community is no longer what itused to be. The cheese—the people it mustserve—has moved. The Church, if it is to remainthe same in meaningful ways, must change infinding new cheese and addressing new demo-graphic curves!

The environment around the physical edificeswhere we “do church” is changing before ourvery eyes, and it has created a combustible mix-ture of uncertainty about the future of some con-gregations. Communities that were once homog-enous have witnessed an influx of newimmigrants searching for the American dream ofa better life. We are surely in the throes of some-thing new, something strange, and somethingamazingly filled with possibilities for evangelismand revival in congregations.

Truth be told, there is much good news thatemerges from our changing demographic land-scape: The dramatic changes have made it possi-ble to liberate God and the Church from anydominant cultural bondage. Congregations cannow engage in multicultural worship in a mannerthat we may never have imagined. However, thechallenges of cultural pluralism are real. Even so,they must not be sacrificed on the altars of com-fort and ease in Zion.

Any congregation that yearns to be on the cuttingedge of evangelism will seriously consider thechallenges posed by changing neighborhoods.The inclination toward encouraging homogeneityin our congregations or toward the preservationof cultural comfort zones may very well be an in-dictment against what we claim to be. H. Kor-tright Davis, professor of theology at Howard

6


University School of Divinity, wrote, “In our in-creasingly pluralistic society, it is incumbent onthe people of God to check and recheck all theirprejudices at the doors of their churches, so thatthe strange census of the first Pentecost experi-ence . . . does not become for our modern-dayChristianity a source of social contradiction,rather than a bastion of religious conviction.”1

I am writing this booklet as a reminder of thechanges that are taking place and as a guide tohelp congregations to become energized to re-spond to the changes in ways that will bringabout a testimony of Kingdom witness.

The Opportunity for MissionThe Lost Boys of Sudan were a group of thou-sands of child refugees from Christian SouthernSudan who walked hundreds of miles through awar zone to find safety at the Kakuma refugeecamp in Kenya. They spent their childhoodsthere, staying for more than ten years until theywere resettled overseas or returned to theirhomes. In 2001, about 3,800 Lost Boys arrived inthe United States, where they were scattered to38 cities, averaging about 100 per city. The com-passionate act of the citizens of the United Statesin taking the boys into their homes was hailed asunprecedented in our history.

However, with the 9/11 attack on these shores,the mood about immigrants changed. Rage andrecrimination overwhelmed American citizens asnever in the history of the nation had such a vio-lent act been perpetrated on American soil. Thelingering result of 9/11 has been the ratchetingup of a sullen suspicion of the burgeoning immi-grant population. Almost overnight, the prevail-ing sentiment about the presence of immigrantchanged. Lost in this rage were not only our hu-manitarian tendencies but the more practical factthat “our country’s large immigrant population

7


8

brings many positives. Immigrants keep ourworkforce numbers up, which means economicgrowth and more payroll tax contributions to So-cial Security and Medicare. Immigration assuresthe United States a young, productive laborforce.”2

Similarly, congregations of the faithful fast be-came aware that their communities were beingtransformed demographically by the emergingnewcomers, a veritable mission field, maybepeople from the very lands to which they hadsent missionaries. The paradox here is that mis-sions had come to us.

Unfortunately, America has failed to come togrips with the stark reality of this increased immi-gration. Forrest Gump was right: “Life is like abox of chocolates; you never know what you’regoing to get.” More to the point, the Americanchurch has not come to grips with what opportu-nities and challenges are presented by this giantshift in cultural demographics, guided wittinglyby God’s hands. The wrapping comes off the boxof chocolates and surprises abound.

Feelings vary about this new phenomenon. Whatmost Americans are not willing to admit or un-derstand is that immigration is the key not only tocurrent economic growth but also to futuregrowth because the children of immigrants todayare the labor force and the consumers of tomor-row.3 Immigration might also be the key to sus-tained membership growth in U.S. congrega-tions. Research has shown that in mydenomination, the Church of the Nazarene, from1993 to 2003, 820 new churches were started.Of that number, 429 (52.3%) were begun prima-rily by ethnic groups, mainly immigrants, and218 (50.8%) of those ethnic-specific congrega-tions were Hispanic. Any growth is an encourag-ing sign, but it should be accepted with an ap-preciation for the new windows of evangelistic


9

opportunity provided by the coming of immi-grants to these shores.

The advent of this surge of evangelistic prospectshas touched states that were previously immuneto such explosions of immigrants. According to aNew York Times reporter, in 2006, Indiana saw a34% increase in the number of immigrants,South Dakota saw a 44% rise, Delaware 32%,Missouri 31%, Colorado 28%, and New Hamp-shire 26%. Overall, immigrants now make up12.4% of the nation’s population, up from 11.2%in 2000. That amounts to an estimated 4.9 mil-lion additional immigrants from 2000 to 2006,for a total of 35.7 million immigrants, a contin-gent larger than the population of California.4

No other topic will consume the minds of sociol-ogists and anthropologists in the 21st centurymore than the implications of increased immigra-tion. At the time of this writing, Congress is em-broiled in rancorous debate about the manner inwhich this country should solve the problem ofundocumented immigrants. At the same time, westruggle to understand those immigrants whohave made America home through legal chan-nels and processes. Millions have earned perma-nent residency and have become naturalized citi-zens in this land of hope and opportunity, andAmerica is faced with the demanding task ofdefining the assimilation matrix that has emergedas a result.

This scenario suggests that we revisit the Ameri-can image provided by English playwright IsraelZangwill in his signature work, The Melting Pot.The play, written at the beginning of the 20thcentury and endorsed by many Americans, pre-sented a Utopian vision of America as a cruciblethat blended all peoples into a new nation, in-terethnic and interracial, who would build “theRepublic of Man” and “the Kingdom of God.”For decades thereafter, this play was the social


10

mantra for an America faced with a rapidly in-creasing immigrant population. In 1908, whenthe play opened in Washington, the United Stateswas in the middle of absorbing the largest influxof immigrants in its history–Irish and Germans,followed by Italians and East Europeans,Catholics and Jews–some 18 million new citizensbetween 1890 and 1920.

It was not until 1963, when Nathan Glazer andDaniel P. Moynihan published the volume Be-yond the Melting Pot challenging the assumptionthat there ever was a melting pot, that Americadared review this vision of an ethnic Utopia. Thepublication raised the ire of some who idealizedthe melting pot metaphor as a godly goal to beaggressively sought. Many felt betrayed by thepotential loss of this iconic image of America.

Then, in 1972, Michael Novak published TheRise of the Unmeltable Ethnics. In a review of thebook, Bayard Rustin, a prominent African-Ameri-can scholar, claimed that “there never was amelting pot; there is not now a melting pot; therenever will be a melting pot; and if there ever wasit would be such a tasteless soup that we wouldhave to go back and start all over again.”

As if to add fuel to fire, in the height of the CivilRights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr. remind-ed America that 11:00 on Sunday morning wasthe most segregated hour in America. Thispoignant observation mobilized some Evangeli-cals to join a crusade to reverse this reality by ad-vocating for a heterogeneous worship experiencethat would blend cultural groups together.

Today, the church community must again grapplewith the question of what is the proper expres-sion of a multicultural society. “Multicultural-ism,” some say, has become the new civil reli-gion of the United States, yet it is unclear what ismeant by “multiculturalism.” Welcomed enthusi-


astically by some, deplored by others, and ma-ligned by many as an overused and tired buzzword, multiculturalism and the issues that sur-round it continue to pose a significant challengeto American society in general and to evangeli-cals specifically.

Before one attempts to offer relevant ideas, how-ever, the gravity of the immigration crisis, whichreaches into every corner of society, must be ac-knowledged. Consider for a moment these facts:� Asian-American students comprise one-sixth

of the student body at Yale, one-fifth of that atHarvard, and one-fifth of all students enrolledin medical schools in the United States.

� By 2050 the Hispanic population will doubleto 24% of the US population, while the major-ity of non-Hispanic whites will drop to 52%.

� In New York, Koreans own 70% of the inde-pendent groceries, 80% of the nail salons, and60% of the dry cleaners.

� According to the US Census Bureau, between2005 and 2010, the white population willgrow by only 3.2%, while the Hispanic popu-lation will grow at a rate of 14.4%, AsianAmericans/Pacific Islanders at 15.4%, andAfrican-Americans at 6.3%. The growth ratefor the overall population during that time-frame will be 4.2%.

� According to the 2000 Census, there wereover 30 million immigrants in the U.S., repre-senting 11% of the total population.5

� One in five children in the U.S. is the native-born or foreign-born child of an immigrant.

� Eighty-five percent of immigrant families withchildren are mixed-status families (families inwhich at least one parent is a non-US citizenand one child is a U.S. citizen).

� Between 1970 and 2000, the naturalized citi-zen population increased by 71%.6

Taken together, these factors reflect a dramatically

11


12

changing society that demands a new way ofthinking, as well as an innovative way of doingevangelism. The tasks of understanding the multi-cultural mosaic and designing the approach thatthe community of faith must take to it are fraughtwith difficulties caused by outmoded suppositions.

Three premises that have found prominence indiscussions of evangelism and church growthcould potentially undermine an effective ecclesi-ology. The first assumption is that immigrantscome to these shores tabula rasa, with a cultural“blank slate,” eager to absorb and acquire ourculture as their own. Many ignore the deep cul-tural roots that are imbedded in the worldview ofimmigrants. One is naïve to attempt to assimilatenew arrivals into the cycle of mainstream Ameri-can church life and expect them to shed all pastallegiances.

The second assumption is that the attitudinal por-tal into which immigrants come to America hasbeen unchanged over the past century. This hasresulted in misguided notions of assimilation,which, unfortunately, have become the founda-tional impetus for church-planting strategies. TheAmerica to which immigrants have come in theearly years of the 21st century differs greatly fromearly 20th-century America.

Third, because of these first two assumptions,evangelism has taken on a sort of “one size fitsall” approach. Granted, the claims of the Gospelare universal in their core ingredients; However,effective evangelism takes place only whenthoughtful consideration is given to cultural par-ticularity. The Donald McGavran (eminentfounder of the Church growth movement) adagethat people like to become Christians withoutcrossing racial, linguistic or class barriers—al-though it may be a pragmatic sociological obser-vation—may be a deficient prescription for evan-gelism.


13

The cheese has moved. If one believes that Godis still in control, it is safe to assume that it is thisGod who has shifted the locus of mission in themidst of changing communities. The solution tothe challenge might very well be found in newcurves to address these demographic changes.

The Urgency and Timing for Change—the Sigmoid CurveIn preparation for a canceled Pastors’ ConferenceI came across some of the thinking of CharlesHandy wherein he uses the idea that life cycles(for businesses and for individuals) follow an S-shaped curve—a sigmoid curve, which looks likean S turned on its side—where there is an initialdip followed by growth and, finally, decline. Thislife cycle has a base building/introduction phase,followed by a growth phase, then a flat comfortphase, and, finally, a declining phase. Accordingto Handy’s viewpoint, all organizations, persons,relationships, living organisms, and congrega-tions experience such phases. The curve repre-sents the ways in which you got to where you areand illustrates that those are seldom the thingsthat keep you there. It implies the inevitability ofchange and the necessity for changing whenthings are good, not when they start to go bad. Itis the story of the life cycle of most congregationsamidst communities.

Handy asserts that the organizations that surviveare those that understand the necessity for creat-ing new curves. The organism must experimentwith new ways and new ideas, and not all ofthem will work, but it must always be experi-menting with new curves if it is to survive. Thechallenge of the second curve is to find a way tostart that curve while still building upon the suc-cess, learning and maturity gained from the firstcurve.

A cursory look at the diagrams below will reveal


14

some significant guidelines. When standing atPoint A, one is presented with two confusing andopposing vistas. The view looking back along thesigmoid curve shows success, growth and satis-faction, but a look in the other direction and overthe horizon of the curve shows the fall towardsPoint B. The opportunity is to openly look at whatPoint B tells you—to see the trends that can leadfrom A to B—but then to use this information todesign a pathway from the current Point A to thePoint A on the next sigmoid curve, a pathway ofuninterrupted success.

As a philosopher and organizational change spe-cialist, Handy proposes that the second sigmoidcurve be started before the first curve hasreached its peak, when growth is still occurring,in order to minimize the impact of the eventualdecline. But he also affirms that it is human na-ture to start the second curve on the decliningpart of the curve, when failure is imminent, notthe rising part of the curve, where uninterruptedsuccess might be achieved.

Successful churches are those that constantlyseek ways to reinvent themselves, even whenthings are going well. The only path that any or-ganization can chart for ongoing success is con-stant reinvention. The sigmoid, or S-shaped,curve charts the trajectory of every successful hu-man system. There is always a first period of ex-perimentation and learning, which is followed bya time of growth and development. Ultimately,however, every curve turns downward. The onlything that varies is the length and duration ofeach part of the curve. This concept relates di-

Curve A

Curve B

Curve C

Path of GrowthThe Sigmoid Curve

A B


15

rectly to the case for a congregation’s need to ad-just to a changing community.

Corporate America seems to have learned the im-portance of this paradigm in dealing with theconstantly changing marketplace. While thespeed of the curve may vary from one organiza-tion to the other, to keep pace, the successful in-dustry, organization, and individual, must devel-op a second curve out of the first. The new curve,however, must start before the first one peaks, atPoint A, when all the evidence says that there isno need for change because, after all, everythingis going so well. But the secret of constantgrowth is to start a new curve before the first onepeters out. The right place to start is at pointA–when things are going well, when there istime, as well as the resources and the energy, toget the new curve through its initial explorationsand floundering before the first curve begins todip downwards. But at point A, all the signalssuggest that everything is going fine, that it wouldbe folly to change when things are going so well.Often change only comes at point B, when itmay be too late. It is often easier to move onfrom disasters than from successes.

The discipline of the second curve keeps oneskeptical, curious and inventive–the best route todiscovery of effective future practices. Second-curve thinking suggests that past practice is notnecessarily the best guide to future practice inthe face of changing circumstances. There are noperfect answers in a changing world. We must beforever searching.

A 2004 documentary directed and produced byMorgan Spurlock, Super-Size Me, almost broughtMcDonald’s to an abrupt stop. Spurlock exploredthe fast food industry’s corporate influence, in-cluding how it encourages poor nutrition for itsown profit. McDonald’s survived this event bydiscontinuing the Super Mac and by introducing


16

sweeping new curves such as Apple Dippers,Fruit ‘n Yogurt Parfait, and Fruit & Walnut Salad.McDonald’s ability to continue is based on itscommitment to initiating new market curves.Churches in changing neighbors can learn muchfrom such business practices.

The challenge for most congregations is startingnew curves at the appropriate time. Most congre-gations arrive at a decision to address the need fora new curve when it is really too late; by then, theleaders have lost credibility, resources are deplet-ed and the energy for creative thinking is low.

The message of the Sigmoid Curve is that weneed the foresight to start making changes evenwhen it is not yet obvious that change is neces-sary, and the courage to switch from one curve tothe next when the time is right.7

Power to start new curvesThe challenge for congregations will be to har-ness its energies to initiate new curves withalacrity and timing. The one ingredient that is in-herent in every congregation—though it oftenlies dormant—is its power to start a new curve.When communities change, if congregationsdon’t recognize this power, they are helpless.What is power? According to Bob Linthicum, ahighly recognized urbanologist, “Change cannotoccur in any city, neighborhood, family, church,tribe or nation unless the people and their institu-tions have developed their capacity, ability andwillingness to act.”8 So power is the capacity,ability and willingness to act!

Every word in this definition is important. Poweris the capacity to act. Capacity means the re-sources the congregation has at its disposal in or-der to exercise power. Search out persons in thecommunity and in the congregation who under-stand the dynamics of cultural and community


exegesis and make them part of your capacity.Power is the ability to act. That is, the congrega-tion should have the ability—the skill and compe-tence—to grapple with the complexities that ac-company the attempt at a new curve. Essential tothis task is a small group of members who canspearhead change. Power is the willingness to act.The congregation must be willing to risk failureby doing whatever is necessary to effect change.

Starting new curves means a radical departurefrom the past. Ministry becomes uncertain andunpredictable and offers no security or familiarity.Ministry of this sort is analogous to the parable ofthe sower and his seeds: We move forward withreckless abandon, knowing quite well that the ter-rain might not be as friendly ahead as it has beenbehind. However, we proceed and invest with theassurance that, as we risk failure, we also areplanting seeds of hope for a transformed commu-nity, one in which the yardstick with which wemeasure success might be drastically different.

The Options for New Curves toAddress Demographic ChangesNazarene Multicultural Ministries is committedto helping our denomination become a raciallyjust, culturally diverse, spiritually vibrant andgrowing church in the US and Canada, a churchthat gives expression to the richness of its faith,heritage and experiences. It is a ministry that em-braces the challenge of including all Nazarenesas partners in ministry at all levels of its corporatestructure. It is our prayer that changes may beseen as an opportunity to become the churchthat God intended.

Who Moved My Church? is more than a booklet.It is a ministry opportunity. It is more than an ac-ademic exercise in missional church-growth se-mantics. It is a ministry opportunity in the midstof a God-ordained demographic kaleidoscope.

17


18

The population of the Western world is the onlymajor segment of the world’s population inwhich Christianity is not growing,9 yet we oftencontinue to “do church” as usual. Of the 300million people in the US today, only 40% of theadults say they went to church in the past week.According to researcher George Barna, the num-ber of unchurched adults is increasing. One inthree U.S. adults is unchurched, which translatesto 90 to 100 million people. George Hunter, aleading authority on the Church’s impact and ef-fectiveness, says the situation is far worse: “InAmerica, there are 120 to 140 million functional-ly secular people, many of whom are nominalmembers of our churches.”10

While we lament those facts, it takes the com-bined efforts of 85 Christians working over an en-tire year to produce one convert in Americatoday.11 The church-to-population ratio has de-creased in the last one hundred years from 27churches for every 10,000 people in the US in1900 to 12 churches per 10,000 people in 1990.12

Much more startling than those statistics, howev-er, are the changes brought about by the rapid in-crease of immigrants to the U.S. Ethnic groupslike African-Americans and Native Americans,coupled with immigrants, present the Churchwith a burgeoning mission field that is unprece-dented by any other period in U.S. history.

Changes


The Changing Face of the USToday, America stands on the brink of a culturaland ethnic revolution. No longer is it the landwhere differences in race and culture can be ig-nored or even de-accentuated. Every village, com-munity, school, town, institution, and place of em-ployment brings one face-to-face with the realitythat America has become a tossed salad of ethnicgroups, languages, and cultures. Some reports in-dicate that two-thirds of the world’s immigrants arefinding a new home in America. God has broughtthe world’s mission field to the United States.

One of the Church’s greatest opportunities in thenew millennium lies in its ability to harness theassets of our cultural and racial diversity. For theChurch of the Nazarene to remain true to theGreat Commission, it must reach out to the na-tion’s historic minorities and to the millions ofimmigrants who have made America their home.

The changing face of America in the 21st centuryhas resulted in its being composed of significantlydifferent factors than it was in the period 1860-1930, which brought the highest rate of increasein church membership in American history. Thesewere the years of rapid population and economicgrowth, of territorial expansion that provided op-portunities for the recruitment of members and ofthe development of stable communities that facil-itated church-building.13 When the Hart-CellarImmigration Act of 1965, which resulted in majorchanges in immigration patterns to the US, fos-tered a flow of immigrants that was much moreethnically diverse and less European than the im-migrant population had been. Whereas three-quarters of the immigrants between 1900 and1968 (when the reforms of 1965 took effect) werefrom Europe, almost two-thirds of those arrivingsince that date have been drawn from Latin Amer-ica or Asia. As this new wave of immigrants gath-ered strength, it was inevitable that Nazarenes

19


20

were among them, for Nazarenes were well rep-resented among the population of many LatinAmerican and Asian countries.

The most conservative predictors estimate that,by the year 2050, the English-speaking white ma-jority will be only one of a sizable number of mi-nority groups that will collectively constitute thepopulation of the United States. As a denomina-tion, the Church of the Nazarene needs an inten-tional strategy designed to ensure our ability tocapitalize on the opportunities God is providing.To do less would be poor stewardship.

Consider the following statistics that seem to sup-port these observations:� More Jews live in America than in Israel.� More people of African descent live in Ameri-

ca than in any other country except Nigeria.� More Samoans live in America than in Samoa.� More Hispanics live in America than in any

other country except Mexico or Spain.� More Hispanics live in America than the total

population of Canada.� More Cubans live in Miami than in any other

city except for Havana.� More Armenians live in Los Angeles than any

other city.� In the 1990s in the US, the Asian population

grew by 107%, Hispanics by 53%, and NativeAmericans by 38%, while the general popula-tion grew by 6%.

These amazing demographics should awaken usto the challenge of becoming the New Testamentchurch in this new century. Bill Sullivan, formerdirector of USA/Canada Mission-Evangelism,succinctly warns, “The Church of the Nazarenewill rise to the challenge, or it will falter, floun-der, fail, and fade.”

How has immigration affected us and the way we


do ministry? It has brought astounding hetero-geneity. The 1990 census showed seven Asiannationalities and ten Hispanic nationalities withpopulations over twenty thousand in the Los An-geles metropolitan area. In the New York Citymetropolitan area, there were five Asian national-ities and eleven Hispanic nationalities with pop-ulations over twenty thousand. The Hispanic andAsian populations grew in New York City, eventhough the overall population declined.14

Though it may surprise us, the challenge of multi-culturalism is nothing new to the Church of the21st century. Cheryl Sanders, professor of churchethics at Howard University School of Divinityand pastor of the historic Third Street Church ofGod in Washington, DC., stated at the Multicul-tural Ministries Conference held at Bethany, Ok-lahoma, in 1998, “So how is it that the Church isjust now becoming multicultural, if the Bible saysit was born multicultural? Because of Pentecost,we should divest ourselves of the idea that an in-clusive, multicultural Church is something new,or something we should pride ourselves forthinking up at the close of the twentiethcentury.”15

The Present Opportunity andObligationIt is possible that the Church of the 21st centurywill closely resemble the Pentecostal crowd ofActs 2, where worshippers came from the pres-ent-day countries of Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon,Cyprus, Malta, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, SaudiArabia, Turkey, Greece, Albania, Italy and partsof Asia. The present immigration phenomenon israpidly moving the United States from merely arepository for European offshoots to a multicul-tural world nation with cultural ties to virtuallyevery race and region in the world. By divineprovidence, the stage has been set for a 21st-cen-tury church-growth revival. The cheese has

21


moved, and the question becomes, “How do wepractice church midst this new ecclesiastical cli-mate?” Immigrants have rezoned the Church’sneighborhood. How can the Church respond ef-fectively?

To be a truly missional church means to be intouch with the need to reach out to the newneighbors who merge into our communities.How? By starting new curves. The Great Com-mission remains the rallying cry for the Church,but the practice of ministry does not take place ina vacuum. The relevant question for the Churchtoday is how to implement effective evangelismin the midst of this flourishing pluralism in socie-ty and community. How does a predominantlywhite denomination become missionally evan-gelistic within a multicultural nation?

It was with forceful perception that Tom Nees,former director of USA/Canada Mission Evange-lism Department for the Church of the Nazarene,observed the church’s dilemma: “I fear that if wecontinue to do nothing different than we are do-ing, in the near future, when and where there isno majority group, this denomination will bemarginalized as a predominantly English-speak-ing white fellowship in a sea of diversity.”16 Nees’warning precludes the objective of simply start-ing more culturally specific churches. Embracingthe demographic changes and their accompany-ing opportunities for evangelism should be partof a more comprehensive strategy to ensure thatall churches display the welcome mat for all peo-ple.

That challenge creates a dilemma for both thepredominant white church as well as culturallyspecific churches. While we need to start cultur-ally specific churches that cater to the needs ofpeople who find themselves comfortable in aparticular cultural setting, a basic sociologicalprinciple proffers that people prefer to be with

22


people like themselves. According to the 1998National Congregations Study, about 90% ofAmerican congregations are 90% people of thesame race.17 However, we need be careful not toattribute this congregational homogeneity toprejudice alone. If groups maintain their strengthby providing meaning and belonging, the partic-ularizing force of similarity must be acknowl-edged.

God works in the language and culture of thoseto whom salvation is offered; it is not necessaryto surrender one’s cultural identity in order to bea Christian. God uses ancestral identities as legit-imate gifts, as well as a means of revealing love,peace and justice to the world. Churches that re-flect culturally distinct ministries are being usedby God to reach unchurched people. Thesechurches must never exclude people of othercultures, but because of their context and/or theircalling, they are oriented to a particular cultural,language or geographical settings. As our sur-roundings become increasingly multi-cultural,especially in the urban neighborhoods, it is rightthat the people of those neighborhoods be giventhe opportunity of affiliating with a congregationthat reflects their cultural heritage and meetstheir particular needs. Still, it is within the con-text of religious groups that a healthy social fab-ric is most naturally nourished, thereby establish-ing social solidarity—churches exist to providemeaning, belonging, and security—so it is herethat multiculturalism must be most encouraged,most welcomed, most nurtured.

The Significance of EthnicConsciousnessMany well meaning evangelicals struggle withthe seeming prominence given to ethnicity andcultural consciousness. This is, of course, under-standable: for persons who have not been ex-posed to the complexities and historical en-

23


trenchment of culture, an appreciation of variouscultures becomes a rather difficult task.

Let’s take a moment to break this down into bite-sized portions. It is only natural that new immi-grants choose to be with those who tell the sametypes of stories in the same language, who eatthe same foods and celebrate the same festivals,and who may be helpful in the search for a job.To do otherwise would be unusual. However, thefuture for these immigrants could go in one oftwo directions.

Assimilation: The children and grandchildren—the second and third generations—will have aneasy time letting go of some of their ethnic iden-tities because they have been schooled in theirnew home. They are not like their parents; theyhave advanced educationally and economicallyand have mixed with the majority to the pointthat there are very few visible differences be-tween the immigrant and the majority. This is evi-dent in some of the congregations in the MetroNew York district, where Afro-Caribbeans havemigrated in significant numbers and have founda home in Nazarene congregations.

Pluralism: Many groups have great difficulty as-similating a new culture and cling to their ethnic-ity, which provides a safe haven as repositories ofhistory and culture. It is unfortunate that govern-ment and big businesses have united to developan economically stratified society along ethniclines, which can easily lead to discriminationand marginalization. These groups should haveequal access to and opportunities in employ-ment, education, and overall economic well-be-ing.xviii

24


25

In 1992, the Congregations in Changing Commu-nities Project, a research effort funded by the Lil-ly Endowment and based at Emory University, re-searched the manner in which congregationsresponded to the changes that were taking placein their neighborhoods19 and found several pat-terns:� Many congregations simply attempt to hold

their own, doing what they have always done,with a slowly dwindling membership. Some ofthese eventually close their doors or mergewith other congregations.

� Some congregations move; after looking at thepossibilities for ministry in their current loca-tion, they opt for friendlier territory. They as-sess the needs of their neighborhood and whatthey have to offer and conclude that their giftscan be best used elsewhere.

� A few congregations determine they will notgo under. They experience resurrection, oftenunder the leadership of a transformational pas-tor who helps them start all over again by de-veloping new ministries and new styles ofworship.

� A few farsighted and courageous congrega-tions undertake the hard work of re-rootingthemselves, planning for new ministries andintegrating newcomers into their midst evenbefore the situation becomes critical.

CongregationalResponse toChange


26

� Some congregations seek their new identitiesin a set of ministries less tied to a particularplace and more tied to the gifts, connections,and passions of its members. They find a nichewithin the large array of congregations andministries available in a metropolitan region.

� More common than any other response tochange is the founding of new congregations.The survey discovered that 21% of the congre-gations in the neighborhoods studied in theearly 90s had been founded since 1980. Alarge survey five years later that covered fiverepresentative large urban regions, found that14% of the congregations had been foundedsince 1985.

� Some congregations merge. By choosing tojoin forces with another existing congregation,these churches experience changes that spanall the other alternatives. As with businesses,there are elements of both birth and death inmerging, and some mergers are successfulwhile others fail. Congregations that do it suc-cessfully have to create a new congregationalculture in ways that are not unlike the tasksfacing congregations that re-root or create anew niche for themselves. Many merged con-gregations also move. While merging is a dis-tinct pattern of change, its many variations cre-ate challenges characteristic of nearly all theother patterns, combined and compounded.

Look Before Crossing the Street!Misunderstanding often comes when we fail toanalyze carefully enough the ramifications inher-ent in seizing new opportunities. Countless ini-tiatives, though well intended, fall on the ashheap because the time was not taken to assesswith precision the challenges that they wouldpresent. Our parents’ admonition still holds true:“Look both ways before you cross the street”. . .or be crushed by oncoming vehicles on their


27

path to legitimate destinations. It is vital to pre-pare a congregation for the changes that will oc-cur when a church transitions from monoculturalto multicultural.

As examples of the importance of looking beforeleaping, here are some noteworthy observationsabout immigrant groups:� Today, people tend to have longer-lasting ties

to their homeland. Ease of travel and internetcommunication allows immigrants to maintaincontact with their homelands—unless, ofcourse, they are political refugees. Whereasearlier immigrant groups usually said goodbyeto their countries of origin forever when theycame to the United States, that is frequently nolonger the case. As a result, immigrants maybe less likely to assimilate as quickly into thedominant culture in the United States.

� More than twenty countries are representedamong Spanish-speaking immigrants; althoughthey all speak more or less the same language,the cultural differences are often considerable.

� The nature of new immigrant groups in themulticultural mix is of a somewhat differentcharacter than was the case in earlier waves ofimmigration. It is not uncommon for Mexicanimmigrants, for example, to send their childrenback to Mexico during summer vacation in or-der to get to know their relatives and the cus-toms of that country and keep up their lan-guage skills. There is always some level ofassimilation, especially beginning with thesecond generation, but the decidedly slowerpace of assimilation, or even outright resist-ance to assimilation, is bolstered by the factthat access to the country of origin is main-tained, at least through the first generation.

� While there may be a distinguishable “LittleSaigon” in Orange Country or a “Little Ha-vana” in Miami, immigrant populations tendto be more mobile than in the past. They can


28

move frequently and quickly as they followeconomic opportunities, or they may be con-stantly moving to better housing as their finan-cial resources improve, which makes ministryto a group more difficult if the people—andsometimes even the culture—change rapidly.

Four Possible Curves to Respond toNew DemographicsIf we are to seize this moment, we must not berelegated to a “one size fits all” recipe but beopen to a variety of approaches. I recommendthat we choose among four curves that couldhelp the church reinvent itself.

1. Start churches that are neighborhood-oriented.

Congregations should reflect the makeup of theneighborhood. The sociological DNA of anygroup of gathered Christians will determine thestructures and boundaries of their existence andtheir raison d’être. The geographical parametersof a local congregation, although becoming lessof a factor than other indicators, are still the sin-gle most important ingredient in the structures ofsocialization.

In medieval Europe and in the early history ofAmerican religion, individuals were driven to aparticular denomination or congregation by as-cription, a blind allegiance to the faith of theirparents. Today, people select among options tosatisfy their personal preferences in search ofmeaning and belonging. It is a basic sociologicalprinciple that the human drives for meaning andbelonging are realized through interaction withothers, and the community of faith remains thedominant force for neighborhood gatherings.

High levels of solidarity are usually found inneighborhood churches, so churches that reflectthe neighborhood should be started. People liketo be with people like themselves and prefer to


29

belong to an organization that provides the re-sultant stable relationships. Although this realitymay create entities that are homogeneous in na-ture, to the extent that they are a reflection of thesocio-demographic characteristics of the neigh-borhood, they should be allowed to be a viablecurrency of ecclesiastical engagement. Thesechurches, reflecting the makeup of the neighbor-hood, make a unique contribution to the socialspace of the neighborhood.

However, neighborhoods that have a growingconcentration of African-Americans create differ-ent challenges than neighborhoods that are expe-riencing an increasing influx of other immigrants.African-Americans are more difficult to attract tothe dominant-culture congregations because theytend to be more residentially segregated thanother groups, are less likely to marry people ofother races, and have had a more difficult timegaining acceptance in the majority society.20 Re-search in a Lilly study suggests that if African-Americans are to be attracted to predominantlywhite congregations, those congregations mustconcentrate on two areas: finding African-Ameri-can clergy or lay leadership and encouraging dis-cussions on racial issues.

It is unlikely that a church in an African-Ameri-can neighborhood would succeed with noAfrican-American leadership. In the Lilly data,the highest percentage of African-Americans thatattended a church with no African-Americanclergy was 33 percent, while the highest percent-age of whites and Hispanics who were willing toattend churches without members of their owngroup in leadership was 50 percent. The Lillystudy also revealed that churches that spend timediscussing racial concerns attract more African-Americans than do other churches. Since alien-ation between African-Americans and the rest ofsociety is greater than that usually felt by otherethnic groups, discussions of racial issues may be


30

necessary for African-Americans to vent some ofthe frustration they experience21 and to feel thattheir concerns are respected. We cannot contin-ue to hide racial issues behind the guise of “col-orblindness.”

2. Start churches that are immigrant-specific.

Since 1994, Nazarenes have started 820 newcongregations. Of that number, the congregationsof 422 (52 percent) are other than English-speak-ing whites; 218 of these have been Hispanic, 48Haitian, 36 African-American, and 30 Korean.The future of ethnic-specific churches is deeplyembedded in NewStart initiatives.

It was once assumed that groups of immigrantscoming to America formed the proverbial “melt-ing pot,” where everyone blended together intoone homogenous whole. However, what we ac-tually have is more of a “tossed salad” where weare all in the same bowl making up a single dish,but we are not blended and our uniqueness andintegrity remains. Today’s immigrants bring withthem their belief systems, worldviews, culturalvalues, and ritual practices—including worship.They bring their “liturgical homelands”—sights,sounds, smells and depth of belief. In the turmoilof coming to a new land, it may be that culturaland faith familiarity is crucial for survival andgrowth.

God works within the language and culture ofthose to whom salvation is offered. God usesone’s tribal, cultural, racial, or ancestral identityas legitimate gifts. It is not necessary to surrenderone’s cultural identity in order to be a Christian.All Christians, regardless of color, class, size, orgender are chosen people. They are saved, trans-formed into communities of praise, and sent forthto share the good news of God’s love with peo-ple of all nations.

As revealed in the Book of Acts (2:5-8), God uses


31

ethnic churches with culturally distinct ministriesto help reach unchurched people. Today, thissame kind of multicultural environment is evi-dent in many neighborhoods that exhibit thesame kind of multiracial identity as the churchesportrayed in Acts. The churches of these neigh-borhoods are not closed to other cultures but,because of their context and/or their calling, theyare oriented to particular cultural settings.

The nation is becoming increasingly multicultur-al, especially in its urban neighborhoods. There-fore, it is only right that the people of thoseneighborhoods be given the opportunity, if theywish to take it, to affiliate with a congregationthat presents the gospel within their cultural her-itage, assuming that approach meets their partic-ular needs. We can neither ignore nor avoid re-sponding to this growing national diversity. Thechallenge to all Christians is to learn how toshare the gospel in an increasingly diverse cul-ture, a culture that features a rich variety of lan-guages, music, styles, and modes of worship,ministries, and witness.

The Case for Ethnic-Specific Churches� Pragmatic reasons—If people want to worship

with others who share their ethnic culture andbackground, then ethnic-specific churchesprovide the pragmatic solution. Donald Mc-Gavran has maintained that most people donot want to cross the lines of race or culture togo to church and that ethnic-specific churchesare the most successful approach for the de-velopment of growing vibrant churches. Manymembers of first-generation immigrant congre-gations are converts and would never havebeen evangelized without such places of fel-lowship. These new converts were attracted tothe church primarily because of the ethniccharacter of the congregation.

� Theological reasons—The history of racialalienation and supremacy contributed to the


formation of separate churches based on raceand ethnicity. However, despite the apparentintentions of those who advocated for separa-tion, ethnic groups found dignity and self-affir-mation in these congregations. A person’s cul-ture and faith interpretation should be upheldand enhanced in the faith community, and thiselement is not easily duplicated in a multicul-tural experience.

� Activist reasons—It is important that, in faithcommunities of color, there be opportunitiesto express the struggle against injustice and in-equality. Particularly in the African-Americanchurch, social and political leaders haveemerged to champion civil and human rights.

� Cultural reasons—Unless multicultural anddominant-culture churches learn how to affirmand acknowledge other cultures, the uniqueways that ethnic groups understand and wor-ship God can be lost.

� Sociological reasons—The ethnic churchserves as a place of refuge and community de-velopment. They “are places where people areembraced for who they are, valued for theircultural particularities, free to communicatethrough shared experiences, and not pressuredto change their ethnic ways so as to gain ac-ceptance. These congregations celebrate, safe-guard, and pass on to the next generation cul-tural practices and traditions.”22

3. Start multicultural churches.

A multicultural church, in the true sense of theterm, is a church designed to serve the needs ofvarious ethnicities, cultures, ages, genders, etc.However, for the purposes of this booklet, we’lllimit the discussion to ethnicity.

A purposeful and intentional decision must bemade to start churches that are multicultural, thatis, churches that are composed of various ethnicgroups and with the styles of worship geared to a

32


multi-faceted inclusiveness. Because of humanresistance to change, it is much easier for congre-gations started in this manner to continue to bemulticultural in their life cycle than it is formono-cultural churches to change, but that doesnot mean such change is impossible. In fact, onecould make a strong argument for the necessityof undertaking change in order to remain vibrantand relevant.

In his booklet “A Guide for Starting MulticulturalChurches,” Russell Begaye states:

In most ministry settings, any available, faithful,and teachable believer can be used greatly ofGod. In a multicultural church, the challenge lev-el increases, especially for the lead pastor. There-fore, the following background and qualities arevaluable for anyone in a leadership role in anychurch, but especially for the lead pastor of amulticultural church. One well suited for multi-cultural church leadership has:� A commitment to the authority of Scripture,

especially principles of reconciliation and uni-ty.

� A commitment to missions.� A commitment to include people of all ethnic,

cultural, and socioeconomic backgrounds.� A commitment to prayer.� A servant’s heart.� A sense of humor.� An ability to enjoy and compromise with dif-

ferent cultural preferences.� An ability to handle criticism and rejection.� Strong leadership and pastoral gifts.� A strong training in theology and in the social

sciences.23

Multicultural congregations require time, ener-gy, and focus that could be used elsewhere.But neither the ease nor difficulty of the tasknor its simplicity or complexity are the issues

33


34

on which to focus. We are called as Christiansto live, work, serve, and be together, forgingcommunity that can occur only with God’shelp.24

Designing a multicultural church is the result ofhard work by the leaders and laity. Even in thefew instances in which this pluralism is the resultof neighborhood dynamics, it takes a concertedeffort to maintain this unique approach.

4. Help mono-cultural churches become multi-cultural.

A recent report by the Congregation Project ofthe Lily Endowment discovered that:� A multiracial congregation is defined as one in

which no one racial group is 80 percent ormore of the congregation.

� Only about 7 percent of all American congre-gations are multiracial.

� Only about 15 percent of Catholic churchesare multiracial.

� Only about 5 percent of Protestant churchesare multiracial.

� Non-Christian congregations are more likely tobe racially mixed than are Christian congrega-tions.

� The most common type of racially mixed con-gregation is comprised of Anglos and Hispan-ics or Asians.

Motivations for Churches to BecomeCulturally Conscious� Full utilization of a large facility—The congre-

gation is strong but it has a large building andwelcomes another congregation to share.

� Financial struggles—Smaller congregationsthat are struggling financially rent space to an-other congregation to pay the bills.

� Changing neighborhood—A church in achanging neighborhood is losing members and


realizes that, if they don’t open their doors topersons of other cultures, the church mayclose.

� No motivation/Serendipitous—Sometimes cul-tural consciousness is a part of the natural evo-lution of a church as when, for example, a Fil-ipino attends, likes what he hears and feels,and brings others from his ethnic community.

Motivations for Individuals to Attenda Culturally Conscious Church � Integration—African-Americans join a Euro-

pean-American church specifically to integrateit.

� Assimilation—Immigrants join European-American congregations so they can polishtheir English skills and learn the cultural normsof their new country.

� Denominational loyalty—Immigrants join de-nominations they attended in their homecountry.

� Linguistic or racial bonds—Persons who speakthe same language group but are from differentcultures choose to worship together, or per-sons from the same culture but who speak dif-ferent languages (e.g., Native Americans)choose to worship together.

� Acceptance—People seek a church that willaccept them and make them feel comfortable(e.g., divorced persons, persons with disabili-ties, homosexuals, ex-prisoners).

� Making a difference—People who choose acongregation because they can fill a needthrough that church.

� Multicultural background—People who havegrown up in multiethnic schools, work in mul-tiethnic environments, exercise in multiethnicgyms, etc., or people from a biracial familychoose a particular church that reflects theirexperiences.

� Justice oriented—People join a multicultural

35


church because they appreciate and benefitfrom the richness of diversity and believe thatstriving for justice and peace on earth requirespeople to cross boundaries, to negotiate differ-ences, and to work for a sense of well beingfor all.

� Geographical proximity—Some people choosea church only because of its physical proximi-ty and, if it happens to be multicultural, so beit.

36


37

There is an increasing number of buildings withdwindling memberships that can be the catalystsfor district initiatives and church sponsorships.With gradual shifts in urban populations, move-ments of people, and exploding immigrant groups,there is often a new opportunity to use existingbuildings to house culture-specific congregations.

Rev. Ian Fitzpatrick has been involved in multi-congregational initiatives for a considerablelength of time, with great success. As pastor ofthe Emmanuel Church of the Nazarene in Toron-to, Canada, he has developed a missional modelfor using the church building for the nurturing ofethnic congregations. His observations about thechecks and balances that should be put in placeoffer valuable insights for those planning multi-cultural congregations:

As the pastor, you have a unique opportunityto expand the ministry field of your localchurch. As with any ministry opportunity, youwill probably be the one to “make it fly” or“see it die”. If you are thinking of pursuing amulti-congregational ministry, there are a fewthings I would suggest.

DO have a personal passion for it to happen.DON’T surrender your conviction to a com-mittee just yet.

Multi-congregationalOpportunities


38

DO pray and ask God to confirm that this isindeed a conviction and not just another fad.DON’T move any further in the process untilthis is confirmed.

DO formulate a vision in your mind consistentwith the community in which you minister.DON’T try to duplicate what someone elsehas done in another part of the country.

DO shape and construct your vision into aplan that can be understood by your hearers.DON’T be vague or uncertain about yourplan.

DO make a Biblical, reasonable and visionarypresentation of your plan to the church board. DON’T ignore objections or concerns thatmembers of your board might have.

DO pursue a positive response to the plan andinvolve key leaders in the implementation ofit.DON’T go it alone.

DO look for key lay people who can be instru-mental in carving out a non-English speakingministry group.DON’T try to lead a non-English speakinggroup if your only language is English.

DO provide as much as you can to the groupso that they can concentrate on “ministry”(free space, use of equipment, etc.).DON’T inhibit the success of their reason toexist (to seek the lost) by imposing secondaryrules and regulations that would seriously im-pede their efforts. (There will come a timewhen shared costs are appropriate but not yet.)

DO publicly promote the ministry of the new“congregation” in a very natural way; this iswhat the Kingdom is all about.


39

DON’T make excuses for why we had to go inthis direction; this is our calling!

DO your very best to promote a climate ofequality from the very beginning.DON’T try to establish equality when you arealready way down the road; this will be inter-preted as “tokenism”.

(For pastors and boards who already havemore than one congregation meeting in ashared space facility).

DO make it a priority to eliminate a landlord-tenant arrangement.DON’T maintain or try to establish an “author-ity” congregation.

DO meet with all pastors regularly.DON’T assume that all is well simply becauseyou haven’t heard otherwise. You can only bein tune with what is happening if you are inregular consultation with your “peers”.

DO create an atmosphere of equality, not onlyamong the congregations but also among thepastors.DON’T abuse the privilege of your position asa catalyst.

DO establish a contractual, working agree-ment.DON’T assume that everyone involved willsimply understand the system.

DO meet and pray with the entirepastoral/leadership team on a regular basis.DON’T allow issues to go unresolved.25


41

LEADERSHIP AND THE URBANCHURCH

Much has been written about church leadershipin general, but very little about context-appropri-ate training for urban ministry. The danger weface is that we assume that, since scriptural prin-ciples are universal, they fit anywhere withoutthe need for contextualization. Most evangelicaldenominations have their congregational epicen-ter in the non-urban areas and are not really pre-pared for leadership in urban areas. We need aredirection.

Conn and Ortiz distinguish three kinds of lead-ers: relocated leaders, indigenous leaders andmultiethnic leaders. Relocated leaders are select-ed from outside the community, usually from arural or suburban setting. These individuals arefrom a totally different homogeneous environ-ment, respond to a call from the Lord, and areaware of urgently spiritual needs within the com-munity. Because it represents a different socioe-conomic culture, they often view the urban mixas awkward and oppressive. Indigenous leadershave grown up in the city and belong to a partic-ular culture, so they are the greatest asset to anydenomination. They are the contextualizers inthe community and are filled with the Spirit of

Addendum A


God. There are reasons why indigenous leadersare a natural fit for starting urban churches.� They see the city as their home.� Their commitment to the city is long-term.� They embody an urban lifestyle and know the

boundaries for survival.� They know the hardships of the city and have

learned to live with them.� They understand the temporality of property

and possessions.� They find high density or living in close prox-

imity comfortable.26

Multiethnic leaders are often found among con-gregations with a multicultural mix and in areasclose to the center of our cities. We are witness-ing an increasing number of individuals whowant to plant a church among diverse groups inthe community and embrace the racial strugglethat this kind of pluralism presents in the city.These leaders are interested in showing that Godis interested in reconciliation and harmonyamong God’s people.27

If we can harness the energies of these threegroups, the difference could be a harvest of soulsthrough a variety of loving approaches to the city.

42


43

Focus Areas, Goals, and Objectivesfor Transition to a MulticulturalChurch

Accountability and ResponsibilityGoal 1: Pastors and staff will be held accountablefor creating an environment that fosters diversityand the acceptance of all cultural, racial, andethnic groups.Goal 2: All members will be responsible for un-derstanding and promoting diversity.

Education and TrainingGoal 3: Everyone in the church will be providedappropriate training in diversity.Goal 4: Church members will participate in com-munity outreach programs to reach and preparethe culturally diverse for church membership.

Path of Christian MinistryGoal 5: The pastor will ensure that every churchmember, regardless of ethnicity, has access totraining and mentoring for Christian ministry in amulticultural environment.

Leadership PolicyGoal 6: The church will review and updatechurch policies to ensure that a culture of diversi-ty is practiced in every aspect of church life.Goal 7: The issues of diversity will be reviewed

Addendum B


when planning and conducting conferences andother special meetings within the church.

CommunityGoal 8: Enhanced community relations and me-dia advertising will be used to increase positiveperception of the church’s commitment to diver-sity.Goal 9: Church members will actively participatein local events, youth activities, youth mentoring,and other outreach programs among all ethnicgroups in the community to establish and en-hance community relationships and partnerships.

Outreach and DiscipleshipGoal 10: The church will establish a five-yearmarketing and communication plan that address-es the church’s openness to racially, culturally,and ethnically diverse people.Goal 11: The church members involved in out-reach and discipleship programs will reflect thediversity of the minority and ethnic groups in thecommunity.Goal 12: The church will establish a highly visi-ble outreach and service presence in minorityand ethnic communities.

MeasurementGoal 13: The church will develop, deploy, andperiodically review an effective system to meas-ure and communicate progress on the goals ofdiversity.

FundingGoal 14: The church will provide funding in sup-port of the programs and efforts of diversitythroughout the church.28

44


45

This booklet encourages two efforts at the sametime. On the one hand, it embraces the initiativesto start change curves that cater to the culturalneeds of a particular people. On the other hand,there is the encouragement to start multiculturalchange curves. These are not antithetical promo-tions, but are meant to complement each other.The choice should never be either/or, but both/and.

The apostle Paul, when faced with similar chal-lenges, never promoted a theology of oneness thatencouraged the loss of one’s own culture of originor the assimilation into another group’s culture.Jewish Christians were not asked to become Gen-tiles, nor were Gentile Christians asked to becomeJews. The theologian William Campbell writes thatPaul did not “discourage Jewish Christians from fol-lowing a Jewish lifestyle after they had becomeChristians. . . . The two positions, i.e., Jewish Chris-tians continuing to follow a Jewish pattern of life,and Gentile Christians continuing to follow a Gen-tile pattern of life, are not mutually exclusive.”29

The Church has moved, and what is unimportantis who is responsible for moving it and how itcan maintain a status quo. What is important isthe active and positive to change in order tomove from peak to peak in successive curves ofimprovement. This booklet is intended to addresssome options for renewing our commitment tobe a Kingdom-builder for God.

Epilogue


47

Notes1. Kortright Davis, Serving with Power (New York: Paulist Press,1999), p. 16.2. The Brookings Institute Paper (November 2008), Immigration, Mi-gration, U.S. Economy, Community Development, Audrey Singer,Senior Fellow, Metropolitan Policy Program.3. Pia M. Orrenius (2003), “U.S. Immigration and EconomicGrowth: Putting Policy on Hold,” Federal Reserve Bank of DallasSouthwest Economy, Issue 6 (November/December). 4. Rick Lyman, “Census Shows Growth of Immigrants,” New YorkTimes, August 15, 2006.5. Michael Fix, Wendy Zimmerman, and Jeffrey Passell, The Integra-tion of Immigrant Families in the United States (Urban Institute, July2001).6. U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in theUnited States: 2000 (U.S. Department of Commerce, December2001).7. Adapted from Handy, C. (1994), The Empty Raincoat, London:Random House.8. Robert C. Linthicum, Workshop—The Nehemiah Curriculum,2005.9. Verified by personal e-mail July 10, 2000, from Eddie Gibbs,Donald McGavran Professor of Church Growth, School of WorldMission, Fuller Theological Seminary. 10. George Hunter, in a presentation entitled “The Church’s Missionto Secular People” given in Chicago, Illinois, on October 17, 2000,Beeson Institute for Advanced Church Leadership.11. Thomas S. Rainer, The Formerly Unchurched (Grand Rapids,MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2001).12. The Almanac of the Christian World, 1993-1994 edition(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992), 485.13. N. J. Demerath et al., Sacred Companies: Organizational As-pects of Religion and Religious Aspects of Organizations (New York:Oxford University Press, 1998).14. Harvie M. Conn & Manuel Ortiz, Urban Ministry: The King-dom, the City & the People of God (Downers Grove, IL: IntervarsityPress, 2001) p. 319.15. Sanders, Cheryl J. Unpublished document, Bridging the Divide:The Changing Face of the Church in the Light of the Scriptures,1998.16. Tom Nees, Unpublished document, Building an InclusiveChurch in a Multicultural Society, 19—.17. Mark Chaves, National Congregations Study. Machine-readablefile. Department of Sociology, University of Arizona, 1999.18. Conn & Ortiz, pp. 322-23.19. Nancy T. Ammerman, Congregation and Community (NewBrunswick, NJ.: Rutgers University Press, 1997).20. George Yancy, Who is White? Latinos, Asians and the NewBlack/NonBlack Society (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2003).21. George Yancey, One Body One Spirit (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-varsity Press, 2003).


22. Curtiss Paul DeYoung et al, United By Faith (New York, NY: Ox-ford University Press, 2003).23. Russell Begaye, A Guide for Planting Multicultural Churches,(Alpharetta, GA: North American Mission Board, 1999).24. Curtiss Paul DeYoung et al, United By Faith (New York, NY: Ox-ford University Press, 2003) 25. Ian Fitzpatrick, Unpublished document, Multi-congregationalPastors, July 31, 2002.26. Conn & Ortiz, pp. 379-80.27. Ibid.28. Guidelines adopted by Joseph Henriques from the Air NationalGuard’s Objectives for Managing Diversity.29. William S. Campbell, Paul’s Gospel in an Intercultural Context:Jew and Gentile in Letter to the Romans (Frankfurt am Main, Ger-many: Peter Lang, 1992).

48


who moved my church - usa / canada region · my church? new curves to ... form our world! it...

Documents