Comments on: What I Love About the Covenant: Part II – IMMIGRANT HISTORY

By: elderj

elderj — Fri, 14 May 2010 01:59:16 +0000

I agree. Ethnic White churches should disperse for the sake of mission because it seems clear to me that White racial solidarity is hindering their ability to accept and minister to the non-White other.

By: John

John — Fri, 14 May 2010 00:04:35 +0000

Hi Wayne, when you put in the missional perspective, who can argue? But it will not be easy. But what mission is?

By: Wayne

Wayne — Thu, 13 May 2010 05:00:52 +0000

I feel I should qualify my statements for you, my esteemed fellows, but also for any larger Korean readership who may walk away feeling I am anti-my-own-race. I am not.

To re-state, I don’t feel Korean churches should disperse for the goal of assimilation (into mainstream ethnic society), but disperse for the goal of mission. Now that’s a high goal, mind you, and dispersal is not always ideal. But when race inhibits mission – I wonder about that.

The challenge for me is to lead communities not so much into assimilation into the dominant culture as much as it is to shepherd the ethnic congregation towards the cross-cultural encounter with the ethnic / sociological / generational Other. It is this tension I’m after.

By: John

John — Thu, 13 May 2010 03:28:20 +0000

Hi Wayne, I go back and forth on this issue. I hear what you are saying, but like elderj stated race is an important consideration. Perhaps another way to look at it is whether non-Asians (our Caucasian brothers and sisters) would be willing to join predominantly Asian churches. I see that the willingness usually only goes one way. Surely, there are exceptions, but exceptions are exactly that. For example, my church is open to all races, in my opinion, but most non-Asians do not feel comfortable. Also we do talk about race and the importance of reconciliation. Our second church even merged with an Indian church. So, if the willingness is usually only unidirectional, what should second generation churches do? In my opinion, they can: (a) integrate, but do so knowing what they are doing so for the sake of Christ and try to build bridges, (b) continue to stay mostly mono-cultural, since our society may not be as open as we think, even churches (c) take small steps and seek pan-Asian churches and expand slowly and organically.

By: elderj

elderj — Wed, 12 May 2010 23:34:11 +0000

Good point Wayne, but the chief difference is that Swedes are white, and race has always trumped other considerations when it comes to these issues. As you well know, it matters not that there are as many as 10th generation Chinese Americans in the US who are regularly asked, “Where are you from,” or “How did you learn to speak English so well?” A Swede, (or Pole, or German, or Frenchman, etc) won’t be asked that question and won’t be treated as an immigrant even if they literally just stepped off the boat. As long as this is the dominant racial reality in the United States, questions of “whither the ethnic Asian church” will continue to be asked and have challenging and complex answers.

It seems one very real way this issue is resolving itself is the far out-sized rate at which Asian women attach themselves to White men and give scant attention to passing on any cultural or ethnic values — essentially raising them as Whites. So for Asian-Americans, the questions is whether they want to be White.