The Process of the Gospel

The Process of the Gospel

A Relational Foundation for Doing God's Work God's Way

by Doug Hall

It is an inestimable privilege for me to “do God’s work” and to be a “fellow worker” (1 Cor 3:9) with God.[1] This high calling makes me very nervous, however, because I take doing God’s work very seriously, and I have always carried within me a deep fear of being counterproductive.

Over the years, I have come to see that this fear has been beneficial, because it has motivated me to seek God more, and has allowed me to become involved in very fruitful, multiply productive ministry.

One way of being hugely counterproductive is to do ministry in a programmatic manner. I am very convinced that ministry must not be carried out programmatically but rather through genuine relationships.  The Process of the Gospel is not a program but a relational tool for doing God’s work. It creates a relational foundation for very effective ministry that will be multiply productive rather than counterproductive.

Earlier this summer, we took students from our Doctor of Ministry class on a tour of ministries in Greater Boston.[2] We picked ministries that we felt demonstrated integrity, long-term practice, fruitfulness, and cooperative participation across the Body of Christ. On our visits, I heard each ministry leader cite relationships as the most critical factor in their overall success.

Indeed, working through relationships is one of the primary ways God goes about his work. The Bible tells about one relationship after another that God established with individuals, families, cities, and nations. God’s work of redemption requires that his message be planted among us, understood by us, and that it grow and bear fruit. This all comes through relationship.

We know this is true, but I want to understand how God does it.

• What actions does he use to create relationships with his fallen children?

• How does he introduce, communicate, and affirm his message?

• And then, how does he go about planting his message in our hearts and nurturing that message to maturity?

I believe that if we can get a handle on how God does his work, maybe we can learn to do our work in the same way. And if we learn to do things the way he does, I believe there is a stronger likelihood that our work as ministers of the Gospel will bear the fruit God desires to see.

Process of the Gospel in the Bible

Consider what Jesus did during his ministry on earth and how he communicated the Father’s message to us. In other words, what is the process he used to bring us the Gospel?

I identify six stages of the Process of the Gospel:

1. Observation

2. Positive Appreciation

3. Relevant Communication

4. Meeting Perceived Needs

5. Meeting Basic Needs

6. Multiplication

Here is what God did:

• God observed his fallen creation. Our sin condemned us to death. We were eternally lost without him.

• Because he knows us and loves us (positive appreciation) he sent his Son who communicated relevantly through his life, his parables, and teaching.

• When Jesus walked among us, he identified and met our perceived needs with miracles, as he meets our needs today, and then he met our basic, core need through the atoning work of his death and resurrection.

• Finally, he prepared his disciples for his leaving, laying the groundwork for the multiplication of his Kingdom through his church, made possible through the coming of the Holy Spirit.

These stages describe a pattern that God has designed to allow the power of redemption, working in and through living systems, to grow his Kingdom.

By definition, a living system is an orderly, highly complex, and highly interrelated arrangement of living components that work together to accomplish a high-level goal when in proper relationship to each other.[3] When people come together, living systems like families, churches, cities, and nations are formed.

Because the Process of the Gospel helps us to align with and engage God’s living systems, it can be used not only for ministry with individuals, but with larger social systems, such as a local church or an entire city.

This cycle can be repeated many times in ever-widening realms of influence, from an individual person to a neighborhood or a local community of faithful people, to the community of faith in an entire city, to many cities working together. It works in one-on-one relationships, in ministry development, in cross-cultural missions, in church planting, and in community organizing. With it, one can reach the poor and the rich. It can work in both sacred and secular settings. It can and has transformed entire cities and has allowed Christianity to grow throughout the world.

I call this six-stage pattern an archetype because these elements work together as a unit, an entire process that follows an enduring, stable pattern or model that transcends time and space across all human history.

For almost five decades through our work in Boston with the Emmanuel Gospel Center,[4] we have found countless opportunities to use this approach, and it has helped us to avoid counterproductivity while consistently producing long-lasting fruit for the Kingdom of God.

The fruit we have seen God bring during this time is not insignificant. We have been privileged to experience an incredible revival in Boston that we call the Quiet Revival. In four decades, the number of churches in Boston has nearly doubled, from approximately 300 in 1970 to 575 in 2010. Also, the estimated percentage of the city’s population in churches has increased from about 3% to about 14% and has demonstrated many of the characteristics of healthy growth, including increased unity and prayer, trained leadership, and effective ministry that produces significant social change. [5]

It is an exciting place to be at work in God’s Kingdom, and it is from this context of vibrant and sustained growth of Christianity that I write today. Let me first share with you how I stumbled across this pattern.

Discovery

The Process of the Gospel evolved out of suggestions originally intended for short-term student participants in urban ministry. To guide the students in properly relating to people in the community, I reflected on what had worked well for Judy and me in the past.

Several basic characteristics of our relationships with our neighbors surfaced over and over again and I wrote a short teaching paper to help my students navigate relationships with our urban neighbors. It eventually became evident that the relational approach we suggested to these students was the pattern Jesus had followed in his ministry. Therefore, in using it, we would be doing what Jesus did. The “Process of the Gospel” was born as I realized that what I had originally penned as “steps to short-term involvement” was really something deeper.

Because living systems are at issue, readers must resist the temptation to take the easy way out, to try to make the Process of the Gospel into a program, rather than allow it to become an integral part of who they are. Those who make it into a program will be missing the point entirely, and missing the opportunity for fruitfulness, which is the goal.

Defining “Process”

A simple definition of process would be “a series of actions directed to some end.” Although that captures the heart of it, I see it as so much more. It is important to make the distinction between process and procedure as we are not talking about a new procedure for ministry, but an age-old process.

I view procedures as isolated steps we need to do in order to complete a task in a systematic, orderly way. Process is different. The goal of process is not merely to complete some isolated task but to see transformation or change in something, to move toward a desired outcome that is much bigger than ourselves and is beyond our control.

While procedures are people-driven, processes are driven by the larger living systems we engage. For example, to grow tomatoes, we work within the rules and powerful forces that already exist in the environment, including the weather, the presence or absence of pests or diseases, the need for nutrients in the soil, and so on. We might follow certain procedures for growing tomatoes, but the actual process is very complex, and the result of all we do is really up to God.[6]

The same holds true for the Process of the Gospel. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians, “I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow” (1 Cor 3:6). So it is never about how well we follow the steps and do the task. Rather, it is about how well we work with the complex and interrelated processes God has already put in place. He is the Author of all life and the Lord of all living systems. In the end, he will get all the glory for all he has done.

Stage One: OBSERVATION

I love the city. I love to be in an inner-city neighborhood with all the people sitting on their stoops, the children in the playground, the youth playing baseball, the neighborhoods that seem filled with baby carriages, poor people, or elderly folk. My city has a pulse, and I feel it beating.

The highest levels of observation are required to perceive social systems, large or small, as living realities. When we are able to do this, we do not simply see streets and buildings, but a complex social organism called Boston, Philadelphia, or New York, for example.  

The Old Testament prophets addressed entire cities and countries as though they had the characteristics of a living person. New Testament writers wrote to cities as though each city, represented by its one church, were persons who could receive a letter.[7] They understood the “body of Christ” and the “Kingdom of God” as living systems.

God himself models this skill of observation for us. Moses wrote, “God looked on the Israelites and was concerned about them” (Exod 2:25). God’s compassionate observation of the children of Israel in slavery under Pharaoh moved him to action.

“Observation is a humble skill. Anyone can do it. No college degrees are needed. But it challenges the greatest intellect to assimilate and make sense of what one sees.”

God's observation is very thorough. Is there anything about us he does not see? The writer of Hebrews says no. “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Heb 4:13). He knows every intimate detail about us. “And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered” (Matt 10:30). He knows what we are thinking now and what we are going to think later. “Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely” (Psalm 139:4).

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem, a full thirty years went by before he began his ministry. What was he doing for thirty years? We know little about those days, but we can be sure he was observing and learning about the people who lived in Nazareth and the surrounding region. Most of Jesus’ earthly life was lived in the critical observation stage, through which his Father was preparing him for the day when he would begin to proclaim the Kingdom of God.

Observation is a humble skill. Anyone can do it. No college degrees are needed. But it challenges the greatest intellect to assimilate and make sense of what one sees. We study the situation. We try to see real people in the way they really operate. We pray, “Lord, give us eyes to see!” And here, of course, we are not merely asking for physical eyes but for deep insights, revelations, intuitive understanding, and subconscious vision.

Since the mid-1970s, the Emmanuel Gospel Center has had a full-time researcher on staff. Over these many years, Rudy Mitchell has gathered information on Boston’s neighborhoods and churches to help us see and understand what God is doing in our city. Not only has our research informed our own ministry decisions, but we share what we learn with others to help them make wise decisions about their ministry objectives.

Today, a lot of our research incorporates team learning. By engaging others in the learning process, we work with the community to deepen everyone’s understanding of the issues, obtain new information, clearly articulate the issues, and assist those affected to develop and implement an appropriate response.[8]

The conversations that emerge from this observation and research process lead everyone involved to deeper understandings and positive appreciation of the people and issues involved. This paves the way for practical responses that make sense both to those seeking to serve and those being served.

No matter where you find yourself in ministry, become a learner. Humble yourself to be open to what God will teach you as you look around. We do not start by doing. We start by observing. Take the time to do the research.

The deep understanding we gain from keen observation will naturally flow into the next stage of the Process of the Gospel, a positive appreciation of the people around us and their unique environment.

Stage Two: POSITIVE APPRECIATION

The second stage, positive appreciation, means making room in our hearts to respect honestly and actively and care about people and their potentially foreign cultural context.

There is a marked difference between respecting people for who they are and helping people merely because they have needs. In fact, if you jump in to help people because they have needs, without respecting and loving them first, you may be accomplishing nothing at all. Is that not what the Apostle Paul meant when he wrote, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Cor 13:3)?

If our relationship with someone is not based on affection that emerges from esteem, but is only built on our ability to give some service or thing to the receiver, there is danger that the relationship is paternalistic and dehumanizing. That kind of relationship produces short-term results or dependency or both, but not spiritual fruit.

So, the rule of thumb is this: until you can first honestly appreciate people, do not try to reach them with your message or your acts of service.

Our model for positive appreciation is God himself. God’s unthinkably huge sacrifice, the selfless death of Jesus on our behalf, flows from his perfect love for us. Jesus expressed immense positive appreciation of people. He wept over them as “sheep without a shepherd” (Matt 9:36). John said of the Cross, “Having loved his own, he showed them the full extent of his love” (John 13:1).

The person or group we want to engage may not be willing to engage, either because of fear, hostility, ignorance, brokenness, lack of self esteem, or some other obstacle. Positive appreciation is not necessarily reciprocal at this point, nor does it need to be. Jesus loved us and died for us while we were yet sinners (1 John 4:19). His giving did not depend on our positive response to him.

If we really care about people, they will sense that, and even when we make mistakes—for we will make them—they will forgive us because they know we care about them. We will offend and be offended; we will misunderstand; we will act defensively, prejudicially, or chauvinistically. But most people will eventually forgive us if they know we have a genuine love for them. As the Apostle Peter says, “Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8).

Positive appreciation may not come easily. But the more we practice it, the more it is going to be perfected in us, though there will always be a huge gap between the way God loves and the way we love. This gap is a reality, not a problem. This is what the fallen world is about.

As we walk through the stages of the Process of the Gospel, we must always keep in mind that we are in a redemptive process, we are always confessing sin and always submitting to God, who will show us what to do.

Stage Three: RELEVANT COMMUNICATION

I think the real goal of relevant communication is congruence—that what you think you are saying is what the other person is actually understanding you to be saying; and that what you are hearing is what the other person is really intending for you to hear.

Relevant communication creates a deep connection between people. Your words will connect first to the matter at hand, but also to the heart of the listener. What you say will be practical and applicable. Your listener will have a sense of inner satisfaction that he or she is being heard, because what you say is congruent with their needs, their interests, their requests, and their worldview. At the same time, we carefully listen, hear, and receive from them.

God communicates through his “Word,” Jesus Christ. The writer of Hebrews makes this point clearly: “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Heb 1:1-2). God spoke all of creation into being, and Job says, “God’s voice thunders” (Job 37:5a). When God spoke to Elijah, however, he spoke in a “still small voice” (1 Kings 19:12). Our God is a God who speaks! And he is also a God who hears our cry, who is closer than a brother, whose Spirit intercedes and groans inexpressible words within us (Rom 8:26,27).

From the beginning of our time in Boston, we would often have people living with us, whether they were people from the streets, ministry students, or fellow workers. The street people who lived with us taught us to be clear in what we said, because they were looking for honest love, and if we said something we did not mean from our hearts, they would pick it up immediately.

They were our textbooks on developing integrity and transparency. If we said we would do something we really did not plan to do, we would see their hopes crushed, and distrust would creep back into their eyes. Many of the people we met had been injured in multiple ways, and trust was not easy for them.

Relevant communication goes beyond words. It goes into the depths of who we really are and how we are communicating who we are. Communication also involves nonverbal cues such as hand gestures and a listening posture. Relevant communication means knowing what people are saying and, to a degree, what they are thinking, and then carefully using stories and other ways to communicate clearly.

Are we listening well enough so that what we hear is really what people are intending to say? Are we speaking carefully, so that what we are saying is really what we intend to say, and our listeners are hearing what we intend them to hear?

Stage Four: MEETING PERCEIVED NEEDS

The Gospels are full of stories about Jesus meeting the perceived needs of the people around him.

You know the story of blind Bartimaeus. When at last he stood before Jesus, the Lord did something very unexpected. He looked at him and asked what seemed to be an odd question: “What do you want me to do for you?” The man was obviously blind! But it was important for Bartimaeus to verbalize his own perceived need. Jesus waited for relevant communication that revealed the man’s own perceived need before he took action.

Bartimaeus was very clear about what he wanted. “Rabbi, I want to see,” he said.

“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road” (Mark 10:46-52).

Jesus came to provide the answer for our most basic need, that we would be redeemed from sin and death, but on his three-year journey to the Cross he responded to many, many perceived needs that people were concerned about. The Gospel is not only what Jesus said, it is what he did.

God has created us to help others. Paul says, “For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Eph 2:10).

Why does Paul say we are created to do good works? Surely it is not to earn our place in heaven. That work has been accomplished on the Cross. Jesus said, “Let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matt 5:16).

In a very real way, our good deeds, prompted by love, are the Gospel message, without words. We do the Gospel. At the same time, of course, we preach the Gospel using words. God has given us his special revelation, and he wants everyone to hear and know what he has to say to us.

The point is, we want the way we live to speak as loudly as our words. Meeting felt needs is an important step, because it is incarnational ministry. For the recipient, it is spiritual reality experienced through practicality.

“Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (James 2:15). James makes it clear that our words are not enough, and actions, including helping to meet perceived needs, spring from faith.

Those of us in ministry are always faced with the immensity of human need all around us. There is no escape from the press of need, and knowing that Jesus is the answer to all our problems, we want to help in his name.

When Judy and I first came to Boston, we felt our lives were coming apart because of the craziness of trying to respond to the needs around us. Judy clearly remembers how busy we would be meeting the needs of just one person: taking her to the outpatient clinic, to the grocery store, to the social security office, to apply for food stamps and fuel assistance, to the welfare office, typing up forms and applications for her, and helping her deal with her addiction and relational problems. And that was just one of scores of people at our door every day of the week.

Here are a few things we learned along the way:

1. Be realistic.

After carefully listening to what the person or group say they need, it is best to choose a need that can actually be met. For especially those people who have lost hope many times, we cannot afford to make promises we cannot keep.

Choose something you have every reason to believe you may be able to accomplish with and through their participation, and then pull out all the stops to make sure it happens.

2. Be collaborative.

Make room for the person or group to fully participate in meeting the need. This should not be a giveaway program. Their participation in the process will build their confidence and ownership of the solution.

Change must come from within, not from without. It is through helping to address a felt need that hope is built in people, and that hope will help them begin to surface their more basic, core needs.

Stage Five: MEETING BASIC NEEDS

When we move from meeting perceived needs to meeting basic needs, you may think that this is no big deal—that we just go from a focus on surface needs to deeper needs. But in reality, a seismic shift takes place as we move between these two.

If you miss the importance of this transition, you will miss the power that comes from the Process of the Gospel. Your ministry may very well stay on the surface, and you may not see the abundant life you want to see take root and grow in the life of your friend.

Here is the best way to tell the difference. Perceived needs are identified by tangible solutions where the meeting of the need is finite. The solution does not internally transform the person, though it certainly brings a measure of hope and relief. The change is additive.

But on the other hand, you know basic needs are met when the solution brings an ever-widening range of other needs also being met simultaneously and spontaneously. There is an explosion of life as one door after another opens in the person’s life. The change is multiplicative.

When, for example, a long-term alcoholic becomes sober, a whole series of needs begins to be met at the same time. These may be physical needs, employment, family issues, a sense of self-worth and value, and gaining a purposeful life.

In meeting basic needs, the transaction is between God and the individual, and unless the individual participates with God in his or her restoration through willingness, obedience, and depending on God, nothing of any lasting significance happens.

We cannot force this. We cannot make it happen. God must do the heavy lifting. “Unless the Lord builds the house, the builders labor in vain,” Solomon wrote (Psalm 127:1). My role is to support and nurture the individual, and make sure he or she is connecting to the broader body of Christ as God is at work doing things I cannot do, and as he brings redemption and restoration.

The basic need is only fully met when my new believer friend is nurtured within a new family of supportive believers that is part of the larger extended family of the body of Christ. Nurturing these family relationships is a good way to “engage God’s living systems” and is the heart of Living System Ministry.

There are some basic needs common to all humankind that have arisen because of the Fall, such as sinfulness, our fallen human nature, separation from God, and rebellion against him. Paul puts this matter very strongly. “Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior” (Col 1:21). Our most universal, core spiritual need, then, is for reconciliation with our Creator and the subsequent transformation of our sin nature.

We might think that the end goal of the Process of the Gospel is to see someone come to faith in Christ. But there is one more step beyond that. The sixth stage of the Process of the Gospel is multiplication.

Stage Six: MULTIPLICATION        

Living systems thrive on their own as they receive the sustenance they need.

Judy remembers that when our baby daughter was just two months old, a friend said to her, “Rebecca seems to be thriving!” Judy was beaming, very proud to be a new, successfully nursing mother. “And you probably did not have a thing to do with it!” he concluded, with a laugh.

This took the wind out of her sails, until she realized our friend was really saying that our daughter was experiencing the natural tendency of living things to thrive when they receive normal care and sustenance. Naturally, there came a time when Rebecca moved out to be on her own and a time when our son, Ken, left home to start a family of his own.

This is a normal part of nurturing a living system. We expect to release maturing systems to grow apart from us. Multiplication in an organic system requires that we let go.

Must I empty myself of short-term goals and focus on long-term goals? Must I release the future into the hands of other people when it is easier to organize and do it myself with my group in my way? These things are hard to do but they are necessary. We must empty ourselves of the short-term goals and individualism, both of which will hinder multiplication.

In multiplication, we want to envision those we have walked beside to do the “greater things” that Jesus talks about in John 14. “Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father” (John 14:12).

A goal in this is leaving in such a way that life flows from the people that we are working with, so they start reaching people we could never reach. Then we have been a part of a birthing process. We want to make disciples who will make disciples.

As we follow the Process of the Gospel, we will, indeed, participate with God in the way he builds his Kingdom. We experience what it means to be a co-laborer with God!

Completing the Circle

We started out wondering how God goes about creating relationships with us, planting the message of the Gospel in our hearts and nurturing it to fruitfulness. Now, as we have come full circle, the effective engagement we sought for is complete. “The fruit that remains” is the goal, and multiplication is the fruit. The recipient now becomes the giver.

The point of Jesus’ death and resurrection was to redeem a lost people who will then actually and zealously join him in his work. This is the Gospel: “Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (Titus 2:14).  Yet, even now, multiplication points us back to where we started.

Because the Gospel is alive, this living cycle of redemption starts up again in ever-widening circles.

From multiplication to system-wide balance

The Process of the Gospel restores relational balance to society. Rather than drawing from flawed or self-serving institutions which rely on technological, financial, intellectual, or organizational capital, the Process of the Gospel both draws from and builds up what I call “relational capital.”

While the Process of the Gospel effectively meets real human needs on every level, this process is not needs-based, but asset-driven,[9] because

• it works out from a positive appreciation of everyone involved

• liberally uses the assets that flow from healthy living systems

• throughout the process, develops reservoirs of internal relational capital that nurture the growth and development of living systems

This article was previously published in Missio Dei: A Journal of Missional Theology and Praxis 3, no. 2 (August 2012).

REFERENCES

[1] Scripture quotations in this paper, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 Biblica. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.

[2] This course is offered through Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary: http://www.gordonconwell.edu/doctor-ministry/Urban-Ministry.cfm

[3] We introduce the idea of living system ministry in our book, The Cat and the Toaster. Hall, Douglas, Judy Hall, and Steve Daman. The Cat and the Toaster: Living System Ministry in a Technological Age. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010.

[4] For more on the Emmanuel Gospel Center (EGC), visit www.egc.org. Judy and I started serving at EGC in 1964.

[5] Based on analysis of data gathered by the Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston.

[6] Isaiah 26:12 says, “Lord, you establish peace for us; all that we have accomplished you have done for us.” (italics mine)

[7] For example, see 1 Co 1:2, “To the church of God in Corinth…”; Eph 1:1, “To the saints in Ephesus…”; Gal 3:1, “You foolish Galatians!” (here referring to a group identified by a geographical region).

[8] Learn more about EGC’s applied research

[9] For more on asset-based community development as compared to needs-based efforts, see, for example, the Asset-Based Community Development Institute. http://www.abcdinstitute.org/

Developing Safe Environments for Learning and Transformation

Resources for the urban pastor and community leader published by Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston

Emmanuel Research Review reprint
Issue No. 80 — July 2012

by Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler, Director, Intercultural Ministries, EGC

I would like to address a question that we have been asked over and over again by Christian leaders and organizations that we have consulted and collaborated with in our work. It goes something like this: How does our organization (or church, denomination, school, etc.) develop a safe environment where our capacity to see personal and corporate transformation in and through our organization (church, denomination, school, etc.) is greatly enhanced? Or to put it another way, how can we experience transformation in our organization so that we have greater capacity to be an agent of transformation in our world?

A Model for Personal and Organizational Transformation

Over the past decade, we have with consulted many organizations on the topic of organizational change. In this process, I have often shared a model—or archetype¹ — that describes the elements necessary for personal and organizational transformation. I say “personal and organizational” transformation because it is impossible to have one without the other. In our context, we often apply these principles to intercultural work but they are transferable to any desired change.

The elements involved can be illustrated in the following Venn diagram:

Figure 1: Model for Transformation

A brief definition of each element follows:

1. Prophetic Vision is seeing God’s intention for a given situation and seeing the present reality as it really is. Our primary source for prophetic vision is the Word of God, but there are other sources that are also important: the community of faith, the leading and illumination of the Holy Spirit, and social/systems analysis. This prophetic seeing will always reveal a “gap” representing the distance between God’s high calling and where we are in relationship to that high calling. This prophetic seeing must be done with humility, recognizing that as humans we “know in part and prophesy in part.” Hence, prophetic vision is best done in community where others are permitted to share their perspective to help the learning organization fill in the picture as completely as possible and to arrive at “shared vision.”
   

2. Prophetic Voice is declaring what we believe God would have us do at this point in time and space. Like prophetic vision, prophetic voice must also be shared and affirmed by a particular Christian community/organization for it to have any traction. While prophetic vision and prophetic voice can arise from anyone within a given Christian community/organization, it must be embraced and endorsed by the “authorizing voice” of that community/organization for it to gain legitimacy and traction.
   

3. A Functional Infrastructure must be put in place to carry out the prophetic vision and voice. The core of this infrastructure is an aligned functional team and the necessary support structures to do the work.
   

4. A Safe Environment is the necessary context for any and all three of the elements above to work and, hence, is perhaps the most important of the four elements. It is also, in my experience, the element most missing in Christian ministry, and the one that most often derails personal and organizational transformation. A safe environment is necessary for a community/organization to come together to understand prophetic vision, agree on prophetic voice, and build and maintain a functional infrastructure. A safe environment involves establishing, honoring and maintaining honest and loving relationships that have the capacity to sustain and learn from the inevitable conflicts that always arise in the journey of transformation.

Reflections on How To Develop a Safe Environment

The main question of this paper deals with this fourth element: a safe environment. Time and time again in our consulting practice, we hear our clients say something like this: “We clearly see the necessity of creating a safe environment for learning and transformation but we have one question, how exactly do we develop a safe environment?” What follow is a first step in attempting to answer that question.

What a Safe Environment Is and Is Not

Before answering that question, however, let’s first describe what a safe environment is and is not.

When I am consulting with a Christian group, I often get the group to reflect on this question by taking them to what I call “the most unpracticed verse of the Bible”—James 5:16. I read to them the verse from the New International Version: Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. Or, my preferred rendering of this verse from the Message paraphrase: Make this your common practice: Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you can live together whole and healed.

I then ask them a series of questions: Do we really “do” this verse in the church? Is it our “common practice”? The answer, “No, not so much.”

Then I follow with, “Why don’t we practice it?” The reply: “Because people don’t feel safe enough to do it.”

I then ask, “What would it take to make it safe enough to actually do it, to make this our common practice? What are the qualities that describe a safe environment?” The lists of qualities are always very similar, things such as:

• Trust

• Confidentiality

• Being a good listener

• Not judging others

• Patience and longsuffering

• Considering the best in one another

• Not looking down on those who confess their sins/temptations/weakness

• Not “defining” others by "freeze-framing” their identity by the sins/temptations they confess

• Avoiding “cross-talk” (being too quick to give unsolicited advice to others)

• Focusing on our own “stuff” rather than on others' “stuff”

• Gaining trust and asking permission before attempting to speak into someone else’s life

• A commitment to one another’s growth

It is also important to explicitly state what a safe environment is NOT. Many people identify the elements above but still misconstrue what a safe environment is because they do not understand the subtler elements of what a safe environment is not.

A safe environment is NOT:

• A pain-free environment (growth is often painful)

• Only about “me” feeling safe (it is also about helping “others” feel safe)

• Uniformity of opinion (a truly safe environment welcomes different perspectives)

• A permission slip for being obstinate, unyielding, and unwilling to work for the common good

• A “free-for-all” for expressing raw emotions without considering the effect this sharing will have on others

Steps To Developing a Safe Environment

After describing what a safe environment is and is not, the next issue is how to get there. It is one thing to be able to describe a safe environment, it is another thing altogether to be able to create and nurture it. The following diagram describes the process I have observed in creating, nurturing and reproducing safe environments.

Figure 2: The Process of Creating & Reproducing a Safe Environment

Let’s now describe each of the stages of the cycle in more detail.

1. Willingness: A Community/Organization That Desires to Create a Safe Environment

The first step required to enter this journey is “willingness.” As the common quip goes, “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.” Not many high-level organizational leaders will say that they do not want a safe environment within their organizational culture, but many simply have never experienced a safe environment themselves to the degree that they can provide the necessary leadership to cultivate it within their organization.

So the first step, plain and simple, is to find an organization or a community or (more likely) a subset within an organization/community that is willing to pursue a greater intellectual and experiential understanding of what a safe environment really is. In some cases—in a highly dysfunctional organization, for instance—the starting point may necessitate seeking out a safe environment outside of the organization.

2. Skilled Leadership to Guide in Nurturing a Safe Environment

The importance of skilled leadership cannot be overstated. This leadership may come from within the community or from outside it. The real issue here is the quality of leadership. There are certain prerequisites that a leader must have in order to serve as a guide to others in a journey toward a safe environment.

The first and foremost indispensable quality is that the leader must have already experienced the power of a transformational safe environment herself. It is impossible to reproduce and to guide others in what we ourselves have not experienced. The best guides are those who have tasted deeply of the refreshing waters of a safe environment for themselves.

The second quality is that the leader must be whole enough.² “Whole enough” to have a healthy self-awareness, to appropriately share their journey with others, and to assist others in their journey. The term “whole enough” means that the leader is self-aware of her own brokenness and has already taken significant steps in her own healing journey. Some of the characteristics of a “whole enough” leader are as follows:

• The whole enough leader is one who knows and can articulate her own self-identity in all of her complexity—good, bad and ugly. This self-awareness is demonstrated in her ability to see that she is (as we all are) “wonderful, wounded and wicked” and that God has taken this total package and has begun a process of healing and transformation. As such, the whole enough person can freely acknowledge her brokenness while at the same time seeing her goodness as a beloved child of God made in his image.
  

• The whole enough leader is one who has learned how to appropriately share his own healing journey as a gift to others. As the whole enough one is secure in the love of God, he is able to share not only his strengths with others but also his weaknesses. As weaknesses are shared, others are called out of darkness and hiding into a place of safety, light and healing.
  

• The whole enough person has been exposed to a safe environment to a sufficient degree that she understands the structural and spiritual elements necessary for nurturing a safe environment for others. In other words, the whole enough person is familiar enough with the air of a safe environment to recognize what it feels like and is skilled enough to know how to foster such an environment for others.

3. Group Learning About the Qualities of a Safe Environment

It is not enough for a leader to merely embody a safe environment; he must also lead a group of willing souls to consider together what a safe environment is and is not, what it looks like and feels like.

The aforementioned exercise (Group Reflection on James 5:16: confessing our sins to one another) is one of the most effective means I have found for leading a group into a better shared understanding of the qualities that comprise a safe environment.

Another technique is to get members of the group to consider the safest environments they have every encountered in their lives—places where personal and corporate transformation was made possible—and to get them to describe the qualities that were present in those environments.

4. Skilled Leadership that will Model & Maintain a Safe Environment

Once the group has reflected together and has a shared vision of what a safe environment looks like, the leader must lead the way by modeling a willingness to be vulnerable in sharing his own journey. The leader must be willing to share personal testimony that is authentic, transparent and bears witness to the power of transformation within a safe community. Not only must the leader model this, he must remind the group of the qualities of a safe environment and establish some basic ground rules that can help maintain it.³

It is also important to add here that creating and maintaining a safe environment is not like taking a straight-line stroll to the top of a mountain, but is more like a circuitous path of hills and valleys. It is often hard work because it involves fallen creatures that sometimes rub one another the wrong way. In truth, a journey toward a safe environment is not for the fainthearted; it requires ample supplies of humility, long-suffering, repentance, grace, and growth. It is important for participants to understand that this is the nature of the journey and that this reality, in fact, is part of what makes it transformational.

5. Reality Check: A Community/Org that is willing to be Honest About Where They are in the Journey

As a group reflects together on what a safe environment looks and feels like, and as the leader models and seeks to nurture a safe environment, the group will naturally begin to reflect on whether their group and their larger organization/community is a safe place. This sober assessment needs to be encouraged. If a community or organization is unwilling to honestly evaluate where they are in the journey, there will be little hope to see progress within the larger community. In many cases, safe environments must first take hold in smaller subsets of a community/organization before the larger community can be affected to any significant degree.

6. Continued Practice Through “Action-Reflection” Learning

The task of creating and nurturing a safe environment is not a destination but a continuous journey of “action-reflection.” Action-Reflection learning means that there is continuous effort given to putting into practice the qualities of a safe environment and continuous commitment to reflection, learning and evaluation throughout the journey. We learn how to be a safe community by practicing.

7. Reproduction: Members of the Community/Organization Reproduce Safe Environments in their Spheres of Influence

As members of a community/organization taste of the transforming power of a safe learning environment, they will naturally be drawn to bring its influence into their spheres of influence. In fact, I have found that people who have tasted of a safe environment will have a thirst for more and will want to bring it to others within their community/organization and beyond. This point goes back to the Genesis design that God’s creatures “reproduce after their own kind.”⁴ People who have experienced a safe environment, making personal and corporate transformation possible, will naturally seek out other willing souls and begin the cyclical process described in this paper over again.

Conclusion: Make this your common practice

When the three elements described in the Transformation Model (Figure 1) are practiced within the context of a safe environment, personal and corporate transformation is made possible. Examples of this transformation abound in both the personal and corporate spheres. I have experienced this in my own life, in our own work in Intercultural Ministries, and in our consulting with other organizations. A familiar example—on the personal level—that many people in our society would recognize is Alcoholics Anonymous, but there are many others.⁵

FOOTNOTES

¹ In the discipline of Systems Thinking, a systems archetype is a structure that exhibits a distinct behavior over time and has a very recurring nature across multiple disciplines of science. The foundational text that Systems Thinkers often refer to is The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, by Peter Senge (Currency Doubleday: New York: 1990).

² I learned the term “whole enough” as a participant in a healing ministry called Living Waters. Living Waters is one of the most effective programs I am aware of in nurturing a safe healing environment, especially for those who have experienced relational and/or sexual brokenness. To learn more about Living Waters, visit http://desertstream.org.

³ These qualities and ground rules were mentioned previously in this article under the subheading “What A Safe Environment Is & Is Not.”

⁴ Genesis 1:11-12

⁵ For copies of these case studies please contact the author.

---

Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler is the Director of Intercultural Ministries at Emmanuel Gospel Center. The mission of Intercultural Ministries is “to connect the Body of Christ across cultural lines…for the purpose of expressing and advancing the Kingdom of God… in Boston, New England, and around the world.” Gregg works with a wide cross-section of leaders from over 100 ethno-linguistic groups. His ministry largely involves applied research, training, consulting, networking, and collaboration, especially related to intercultural ministry development.

Prior to joining the staff of EGC in 2001, Gregg served for 13 years as a church planter and pastor of a multicultural church in Boston and was elected as the overseeing Presbyter for the Northeast Massachusetts Section of the Assemblies of God. He served for five years as the Pastor of Missions & Diaspora Ministry at Mount Hope Christian Center in Burlington, Massachusetts. He earned his Doctor of Ministry in Urban Ministry in 2001 from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Ministry in Complex Urban Settings. His thesis, Nurturing Diaspora Ministry and Missions in and through a Euro-American Majority Congregation, has provided much of the direction of his ministry in recent years. Raised in Kansas, Gregg graduated from Evangel University and the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary in Springfield, Missouri. Gregg and his wife, Rita, live in the Boston area and have three children.

Click to Learn more about EGC's Intercultural Ministries.

Shared Worship Space - An Urban Challenge and a Kingdom Opportunity

Resources for the urban pastor and community leader published by Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston

Emmanuel Research Review reprint
Issue No. 74 — January 2012

Introduced by Brian Corcoran, Managing Editor, Emmanuel Research Review

One body, one building? Being neighbors is one thing, but when churches gather under the same roof, much deeper and intricate conditions emerge that remind us of the character, nature, calling and Kingdom purpose of the Church in a diverse urban environment. Dr. Bianca Duemling, Assistant Director of EGC’s Intercultural Ministries, outlines the challenges and opportunities that present themselves when multiple congregations consider sharing the buildings they use for worship.Employing a biblical, intercultural, and practical perspective, Bianca, along with local leaders and her research colleagues, “hope that this article enhances the understanding of the dynamics and challenges of sharing worship space and helps congregations to develop healthy and supportive relationships with each other to manifest the unity of the body of Christ across ethnic lines.”

Shared Worship Space - An Urban Challenge and a Kingdom Opportunity

by Bianca Duemling, with the research assistance of Cynthia Elias and Grace Han

Contents

• Factors Contributing to the Need of Shared Worship Space - an Introduction

• Biblical Perspectives on Sharing Worship Space

• Cultural Differences and Power Imbalance

• Aspects of Sharing Worship Space

• Advice from Sharing Worship Space - Experts

• Conclusion: Sharing Worship Space - a Long-Term Solution?

• Resources

Section One: Factors Contributing to the Need of Shared Worship Space - an Introduction

Sharing worship space is a reality in the urban context as space is very expensive and limited in availability. During the “white flight” in the 1960s, many congregations moved to the suburbs. Consequently, the number of majority-culture¹ churches in many North American cities declined. At the same time the “Quiet Revival”² unfolded and spiritual vitality flourished among immigrants in Boston. On every corner, new immigrant congregations emerged, often as house churches or in former storefront shops. Additionally, there is a new wave of young church planters who intentionally moved into the city to plant churches.³

As congregations grow and need more space, they look for alternatives. Some rent space in office buildings, hotels or schools⁴, but most of them reach out to congregations owning buildings to share space. Lack of space and lack of financial means makes it very difficult to find appropriate worship space in the city.

Facts about sharing space in Boston, Cambridge, and Brookline:⁵

• 32% of all congregations share worship space, in total 214 congregations

• 73.6 % of these congregations share with one other congregation

• 16.1% of these congregations share with two other congregations

• 10.3% of these congregations share with four or more congregation

• 82.8% of these congregations share with congregations of a different denomination

• 17.2% of these congregations with congregations of the same denomination

• 95% of these congregations share with congregation other than their own ethnic background.

Different Shared Worship Space Arrangements

The most common way of sharing worship space is having two or more independent congregations under one roof. One of them owns of the building and others are invited in. This article will mainly focus on their situation. However, there are other ways to share worship space. One example is the multi-congregational model. Different language groups are gathered under a joint leadership and board of elders. This includes a joint ownership of the building. Grace Fellowship in Nashua is such an example. Two of the Associate Pastors are also pastors of the Brazilian Church and the Russian/Ukrainian Church.⁶ Another rare arrangement is a joint ownership, when independent congregations build or buy a church building together.

Background and Structure of this Article

After Intercultural Ministries at EGC had been approached for advice on this matter several times, we started this research project to learn from the experience of different congregations about sharing worship space. Moreover, we found out that little has been written about sharing worship space well; even denominations have not addressed that issue or developed guidelines for their member congregations.⁷ In this article, I draw from inspiring conversations with many pastors.⁸ I thank all of them taking the time to honestly share their story and struggles with me!

The proximity of diverse congregations when sharing worship space offers a great potential to connect with each other across ethnic lines and witness the beauty of unity in diversity to the neighborhood. The reality, however, shows that sharing worship space is very challenging. It often causes much frustration for the congregations involved.

I hope that this article enhances the understanding of the dynamics and challenges of sharing worship space and helps congregations to develop healthy and supportive relationships with each other to manifest the unity of the body of Christ across ethnic lines. Making shared worship space work needs investment and commitment; there is no magic bullet to solve the challenges, and every situation differs from another.

First, I will unfold the reasons and importance for sharing worship space from a biblical perspective. Second, I will address cultural differences and how the power imbalance in our society impacts sharing worship space. After that, I will talk about how to share worship space and which different aspects need to be factored in. Also included will be advice from those I interviewed for those intending to share worship space. Moreover, in the appendix you will find some resources on sharing worship space.

Section Two: A Biblical Perspective on Sharing Worship Space

The Bible gives us many examples why sharing worship space is essential for the Body of Christ and closely connected with who Jesus wants his disciples and his Church to be. In this section I want to briefly address five biblical aspects⁹ to consider in this context which are interconnected. Some of the aspects might refer more to the situation of the owner of the church buildings, whereas others are important for both parties.

The Body of Christ – a Loving Relationship

The two most meaningful passages in this context are the image of the Body of Christ and the new commandment.

In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul describes the church as one interconnected Body of Christ. In verses 24-26, he especially mentions the nature of the relationship: “But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that parts should have equally concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.”

In line with this image is Jesus’ new commandment to love one another (John 13:34-35). Love is always more than words. Love implies consequences as described in 1 Corinthians 13. Love also means to humbly serve one another, as stated in Galatians 5:13.

Moreover, sharing housing, food, and economic resources is characteristic of the early Church, as described in Acts 4. The reference is often made to become like them again. Sharing worship space is a great opportunity to pick up the characteristics of the early church and set them into practice. Through that the unity in diversity of the Body of Christ is manifested.

Missional Impact

Another aspect is the missional impact of unity. Jesus emphasized in John 17:21 shortly before he died: “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” There is a close connection between being one and the aspect that the “world may believe.” In my understanding, this verse states very clearly that unity is a key to renewal and revival. Moreover, sharing worship space, especially across ethnic lines, is a witness to the community that Jesus is relevant today. He bridges the gap of segregation and brings peace and reconciliation.

Opportunity of Spiritual Growth

Sharing worship space might not increase a church’s growth numerically, but surely can enhance spiritual growth and maturity. It is very easy to talk about a Christlike life from one's own comfort zone. But sharing worship space and stepping out of the comfort zone gives the opportunity to set the Gospel in practice. It shows how seriously a congregation lives the fruits of the spirit as mentioned in Galatians 5:22-23. Hence, sharing worship space is an opportunity of manifesting a deeper kind of unity that surpasses the state of being kind to each other.

The interaction with Christians from all over the world challenges the cultural elements of our Christian practices and leads the focus on the essential Christian faith. Mutual mentoring and encouragement as well as learning from each other's strength help us to mature in Christ. It is an excellent practice to embrace our poverty.¹⁰

Additionally, understanding of the global Kingdom of God increases, as well as affection for other parts of the world, through the immigrant group sharing space. Thus, leaders and members can develop intercultural competency, which is a much needed skill in our diversifying society.

Good Stewardship

In the parable of the talents, God has entrusted men with bags of gold to use wisely for the Kingdom of God (Matthew 25:14-30). In 1 Peter 4:10 it is even more explicitly expressed that “each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms.” A church building, for example, can be seen as such a bag of gold that should be used wisely for the sake of people’s life and the building of the Kingdom of God.

Growing the Kingdom of God

One of the great challenges of the Body of Christ is to develop a Kingdom perspective beyond the walls of a congregation’s own activities. In assisting church planting through sharing worship space or incorporating an immigrant congregation as a part of one's own mission, we are involved in advancing the Kingdom of God.

Church planting and the growth of a congregation is something that God is doing by using us. Nurturing vitality through sharing space means aligning with God’s plan.

These Scripture passages and many more indicate that sharing worship space is not just a business deal between two independent parties, but also an undertaking within the one Body of Christ. The source of consideration should be the advancement of the Kingdom of God. If growth occurs because a congregation has opened their space for a church plant, it is as important as if the same congregation would add new believers to their flock. In either case it is for the advancement of the Kingdom of God and the Glory to God.

Congregations need to shift their mental models. If one congregation is not able to send out church planters, they can still be involved in church planting by sharing worship space. It needs to be understood that helping other congregations fulfill their calling is a valid Kingdom mission and ministry.

New mental models generate different questions. It is not to ask: “How do I (or does my congregation) get the job done?”, but: “How does the job get done?” — no matter how God uses me and my congregation.¹¹

Having emphasized the necessity and opportunity of sharing worship space, I also want to clarify that it might be not possible for every congregation.

Section Three: Cultural Differences and Power Imbalance

As I mentioned above, more than 95% of all the congregations that are sharing worship space do share with a congregation of another ethnic background. There is always a potential of conflict in every inter-congregational interaction, but its potential increases in a crosscultural setting. Cultural misunderstandings and conflicts are inevitable in the context of intercultural encounter. Everyone needs to engage in the process of intercultural learning to increase intercultural competency. It is crucial to realize and accept that in addition to our fallen human condition, our behavior is further impacted by cultural bias. Different approaches to cleanliness, time and property do not exist to intentionally try to cause problems for the other congregation, but are part of cultural differences. Therefore, there is a need to learn about patterns of foreign cultures without judging them, as well as identifying one's own cultural standards and estimating its impact on someone from a different culture. In the context of Living System Ministries at EGC we talk about primary and secondary culture as one way of better understand cultural differences. Most immigrants from the Southern hemisphere are relational or primary cultures, whereas Western cultures can be described as secondary cultures. Here are some of the contrasts:¹²

The Bible gives us many examples why sharing worship space is essential for the Body of Christ and closely connected with who Jesus wants his disciples and his Church to be. In this section I want to briefly address five biblical aspects¹³ to consider in this context which are interconnected. Some of the aspects might refer more to the situation of the owner of the church buildings, whereas others are important for both parties.

These contrasts create challenges. It is a learning process to find ways how to work best together and how to profit from each other’s strength.

I cannot go into more details about cultural differences, but two helpful resources to explore the impact of cultural differences more deeply are: Foreign to Familiar: A Guide to Understanding Hot- and Cold-Climate Cultures from Sarah A. Lanier and Many Colors: Cultural Intelligence for a Changing Church from Soong-Chan Rah.

Closely related to cultural challenges is the dynamic of majority-minority relations.¹³ Sharing worship space is embedded in the power imbalance, systemic discrimination and racism of our society, which in the context of the U.S. is rooted in the colonization of the Native Americans, the history of slavery and the lack of equal opportunities for immigrants. There is a lot of mistrust and broken relationships between the members of majority and minority culture. This historical baggage deeply influences the relationships between congregations sharing space. It is especially sensitive, as the owners of the church buildings mostly belong to the majority culture. The power imbalance might not be seen at first glance, but it subtly penetrates the atmosphere.

Section Four: Aspects of Sharing Worship Space

Sharing worship space is a very complex issue containing many challenges. Before dealing with practical details, our mental models need to be identified and some important questions are to be asked:

• What is the motive to share worship space?

• Which attitude/mental model is driving the decision?

During my research I observed that pastors who generally had good relationships, emphasized that the financial aspect should never be the driving motive. In some cases a financial contribution is necessary for sharing space to maintain the building. Even so, others admit that when counting all the costs there is no financial net gain. One way to not allow the financial aspect to dominate the process is to intentionally refrain from creating a landlord-tenant relationship, as the host congregation sets the tone of the shared worship space experience.

One way of doing that is the choice of language:

• Am I sharing or renting worship space?

• Is it a business relationship or among brothers and sisters?

Although the host pastor sets the tone, the guest congregation carries the same responsibility to make it work and not take advantage of their hospitality.

Sharing space is a learning process for everyone. The involved congregations need to be educated and develop a shared vision that the overall purpose is the Kingdom of God and not where the cups are, which is nevertheless important!

In my observation, a business mentality, where the financial aspects is the only or driving motive, often becomes counterproductive. Unresolved misunderstandings and cultural conflicts can easily turn into destructive relationships and damage the Body of Christ.

Therefore, the aim of this section is to help you consider various elements of sharing worship space. I will firstly address the importance of relationships, then the possible challenges. After that I deal with aspects of the practical arrangements and ideas of intercultural encounters and joint events.

Relationship is everything

Sharing worship space has similar aspects to living in community. In order to live well together it is good to know each other’s stories, vision and passion, hopes and challenges. Building relationships is a timely investment and is not done with one meeting to discuss practical details. However, over a long run the initial investment to start on good terms is worth its time as it helps to navigate through challenges. Therefore, transparent relationships, good communication, mutual respect and support, and responsiveness to each other needs are crucial.

One way to build relationships is regular meetings for prayer and fellowship between the pastors or point persons. The research revealed that most pastors meet only if conflicts arise. It is not a good basis for relationships to only see each other when something goes wrong.

Especially if sharing with several congregations, a quarterly inter-church council that includes all groups sharing a facility, has proven very beneficial.

Be Prepared for Challenges

Despite good relationships challenges arise from time to time. As mentioned in section three, they are closely connected to cultural differences. In this section I list some of the challenges that frequently appear, so that everyone can be prepared for them and think ahead of measures to avoid conflicts.

Different Worship Styles and Sound Levels. Traditional worship styles often differ in their instruments and sound level from more contemporary styles. Different cultural and denominational backgrounds include crying out loud to God, weeping, dancing, and clapping is an integral component of worship. This can create a challenge if both congregations are in the building at the same time or if the building is close to neighbors, who complain about the sound level.

Growing Congregations. Congregations can grow numerically at different paces. New immigrant churches have a tendency to be more vital and grow faster. Consequently, they need more space and have more frequent meeting times. This growth dynamic can be seen as a threat to the host congregation. Feelings that the other congregation is taking over can develop as members of the guest congregation are increasingly present in the facility.

Historical and Personal Baggage. Every person and every congregation brings their baggage to the table, such as bad experiences with former shared worship space arrangement, suspicion, or discrimination experiences.

Language Barriers. The lack of English abilities of one party creates challenges in clearly communicating expectations and navigating constructively through conflicts.

Communication. Miscommunication is the root of many conflicts. Although in the Western culture, emails are often seen as an appropriate way to communicate, in many oral cultures this is not always the case. Unanswered emails are not necessarily a sign of disinterest, but an unsuitable way to start a conversation. In such cases, a telephone call or a face-to-face meeting is much more efficient. Developing clear and healthy communication patterns can be a major step in building stable relationships.

Different standards related to time. There are two challenges relating the issue of time. The first one is the different cultural understanding of starting or ending on time. The second one is the perceived "tension" between the Holy Spirit and time. In many Pentecostal congregations, there is a deep expectation that the Holy Spirit moves during the service. So the question arises, whether time restriction is a valid reason to stop the moving of the Holy Spirit?

Different standards related to cleanliness. In every home or shared living situation the discussion about cleanliness occurs; it is the same within congregations. People have a different need for cleanliness to feel comfortable and have also different standards for what is considered a clean floor or clean kitchen.

Food. Food is one of the most tangible cultural expressions. In some congregations shared meals are an integral component of the worship and fellowship experience. However, people have a different comfort level regarding the smell of food in a church building.

Supervision of Children. Not every congregation has Sunday school for children during the service. Children can become disinterested from their parent’s worship service and wander off to other areas in the building. Unsupervised children can not only hurt themselves but also severely damage the building, its walls and equipment.

Building issues. A church building is a complex issue. The focus should always be on the people, but as good stewards it is understood to use physical resources careful that they last as long as possible.¹⁴ This includes being sure that everything is locked, the lights are out, and the heat/air conditioning use is not messed up. It may cost the host congregation hundreds and thousands of dollars if these issues have not been taken care of thoroughly. This needs to be understood by those using the facilities.

Unauthorized use of supplies and equipment. It happens again and again, that a congregation uses supplies or equipment of the other congregation. Not necessarily to take advantage of the other, but because they forgot something or run out of it.

Violation of the agreement. The basis of shared worship space arrangements is an agreement how and when to use the space. There is always a chance that this agreement is violated or the agreed upon financial contribution is not made.

Commitment to the neighborhood. In many cases, the host congregation feels a commitment to their neighborhood and wants to reach and serve their community. Thus, they try not to upset the community through poor parking or high sound levels. The focus of the guest congregations often is a specific target group and not the community. This may be especially true, if they have no office space, come just for the worship service from all over the city, and see sharing worship space only as a short term option.

My intention to list these challenges is not to overwhelm the reader. If the question arises why to share worship space in the first place, please read section two again!

Being aware of the challenges can prevent the shared worship space experience to become counterproductive. The obvious question is, how to avoid or to address these challenges. As I said before, there is no simple answer or magic bullet to it. Some of the challenges might be solved more easily, such as paying a cleaner together or having a translator for conversations. But most of these challenges mean a lot of work and need the right attitude and willingness to make it work. The congregations need to be educated and involved. Conflicts need to be addressed with grace and love. Honesty and transparency are key in the communication. Good relationships help to navigate through these challenges.

Practical Arrangements

So far I have addressed the reasons to share worship space and its challenges, but what practical arrangements need to be set in place?

Every situation is different, therefore shared worship arrangements differ from each other. In this section I will present different ways to deal with the practical arrangements, as suggested by the congregations we interviewed.

Agreement. Shared worship space arrangements are mainly crosscultural, thus often they are encounters between oral or written cultures that have different ways to come to an agreement. In any negotiation this has to be taken into account. As mentioned above, the attitude regarding sharing worship space is expressed through language, hence it is recommended not to use business language such as “renting” or “contract.” In most cases it is helpful to have the arrangement in a written form as a basis that can be revisited when there are misunderstandings. The “agreement” or “covenant” should be developed together and only contain the most basic information. Avoid creating a “catalog of rules,” which implies distrust, reduces mental flexibility, and is less relational. Working together towards an agreement gives a chance to clearly communicate each other’s expectations. A common practice is to renew the agreement every year and see it as an opportunity to reflect on the experiences and adapt changes if necessary.

I also strongly suggest getting to know each other before you talk about details and share the stories of the congregations and the personal journeys in ministry.

Basic Elements of an agreement:

• Contact details of pastor or point person

• Description of use (time and space)

• Shared cost

• Condition of use

• Basic building rules

• Insurance

• Supervision of Children

• Use of kitchen

• Cleaning instructions

• Termination procedure

Sharing of expenses. There are different ways of sharing expenses. Some congregations ask for a contribution for a monthly use, a hourly use or per session. In some cases, the amount of contribution differs with the size of the congregation.

Many congregations see the building as a blessing, however, the maintenance, especially of old buildings, can turn into a huge financial burden. The guest congregation needs to understand that maintenance and repair costs tens of thousands of dollars a year and it is not at all inappropriate to be asked for a contribution.

Insurance. No matter whether there is a written or oral agreement, insurance is a very important issue. Accidents always can happen and things break all the time. Without insurance coverage small things can become an unbearable financial burden. Often each congregation is asked to have their own insurance. The host church should receive a copy of the insurance policy. The insurance company “Church Mutual” (www.churchmutual.com) has been recommended. It has a special “tenant” insurance.

Organizational issues. There are three basic organizational issues: (1) time and space, (2) cleaning, and (3) storage space, which need to be addressed and clear to everyone.

Time and Space. First, each congregation has defined times and rooms they can use. A magnetic calendar in the hallway, for example, is a great way to provide transparency. Each congregation has a color and can reserve the time and space they need additional to the fixed service times. The first congregation, who reserves it, can use it. This procedure is well tested by the International Community Church.

Another possibility to communicate this clearly is to use a joint Google calendar, where people can book space depending on availability. It is important that pastors have agreed on how to reserve the facilities and that the use of space is communicated ahead of time. Nothing is more frustrating for both congregations to come to the church building and find that the space is already used. Good communication on that issue is crucial. Moreover, there should always be enough time for smooth transition, clean up and set up between two events.

Cleaning. Second, as cleanliness is a sensitive issue, it should be agreed on how the congregations have to leave the space. If the chairs need to be stacked up a specific ways it should be kept easy and be explained clearly. It is helpful to have a plan in each room. If this is a recurring source of conflict, one way to solve this issue is to hire a custodian or a cleaner together.

Storage Space. Thirdly, each congregation has different equipment and material for their gatherings, therefore it is important to provide enough clearly labeled storage space for each congregation. There are different opinions on whether this space should be lockable, as, ideally, the basis for the relationship is trust.

Other aspects to consider

Sharing other resources. Depending on the shared space situation even more resources than the facilities could be shared, such as a copy machine, Internet/WiFi, audio/visual equipment or even human resources, such as an accountant or church administrator.

Billboards/Signs. It was recommended that groups have a sign on the outside of the church building that indicates everyone who is sharing the facilities. This is not only helpful for members to find the space, but also reflects a certain community among the congregations.

Shared Worship Space arrangement on each other’s website. Another way to demonstrate a commitment to recognize and care for each other’s congregation is to display the other congregations on the website, as, for example, Ruggles Baptist Church does.¹⁵

Intercultural Encounter and Joint Events

Sharing worship space is more than a functional relationship, as it reflects the one Body of Christ. Joint events are a visible expression that Jesus Christ connects people across cultural lines.

Although it has been emphasized, especially by the church building owner, that sharing worship space is building the Kingdom of God, only a few congregations intentionally are seeking to build personal relationships with members of other congregations. The interaction is often reduced to the pastors or one joint service a year if at all.

The reasons are lack of time or the lack of enough space to hold joint events. Some pastors of the guest congregations indicated that they think any joint activity needs to be initiated by the host congregations.

The intentions to do something together are there, but there is no driving force, no one who takes it on and starts to organize it; therefore, nothing is happening. Whenever the time was invested and joint services or picnics took place, everyone remembered it as beneficial and a learning experience.

However, generally there is little understanding for the importance and opportunities to build personal relationships across congregations, especially across cultural lines.

Besides the fact that it is personally and spiritually beneficial to develop relationships across cultural lines, the opportunity of outreach is immensely overlooked. A multicultural experience which reflects the love of Christ is very attractive, especially for young, urban non-Christians, as diversity reflects their life situation.

The following suggestions for joint events were provided by the congregation we interviewed.

Guiding principles of joint worship services:

• People from each congregation are involved in preparation

• Short sermons in each languages so that everyone has to sit through a ten-minute devotion in another language

• Joint worship team with songs in different languages

• Short interview/testimonies of one person of each congregation

• Fellowship with shared meal

Other possible joint events:

• Vacation Bible School

• Soccer games

• Youth events

• Marriage seminars

• Community outreach events

• Building cleaning and repair event

• Yard sale for community outreach and to support the ministries

Section Five: Advice from Sharing Worship Space - Experts

As mentioned earlier, there is no magic bullet for sharing worship space and it requires significant time and effort. The pastors have been asked in the interviews to give some advice for people who are considering sharing space. In this section, I will share their insights. As the host and guest congregations have different perspectives and emotions regarding sharing worship space, I will address them in two sections.

Advice from host congregation to host congregation:

• Be clear on the conditions and expectations

• Count the cost before sharing your building with another congregation and then make decision

• Be willing to adapt to change that will come

• If money is your only motive, do not share worship space; it can become counterproductive

• Perceive sharing worship space as a way to serve

• Be patient and flexible

• It is sometimes easier to share among three or more churches because it reduces the potential of an "us and them" mentality developing

• While interviewing a pastor, who needs worship space discern whether you can relate interpersonally to each other.

Advice from guest congregation to guest congregation:

• Be proactive with conflicts and show your servant attitude

• Take good care of the children and the equipment

• Make sure that the members of your congregation know what you have agreed on with the owner

• Be responsible, respectful, responsive, and thankful

• Pray for the host congregation as part of your ministry; this enables the members to value the space and helps them to take good care of it

• Being supportive of each other

• Seek the Lord on where you should be and who you should be with

• Don't share worship space with a congregation who speaks the same language to prevent membership competition

Section Six: Conclusion: Sharing Worship Space – a Long-Term Solution?

Given all the reasons to share worship space such as difficult economic times, lack of human, physical, and financial resources, I wonder why more congregations do not consider sharing worship space as a long-term solution.

I have observed that churches desire their own buildings, even though they have good relationships to the host congregations. Sometimes it is the need for more space, more flexibility, or the dislike of service times in the afternoon. For only two churches we talked to, sharing worship space is a long-term option because one is committed to the specific neighborhood and the other values the shared worship arrangement, as it gives the possibility to spend its few resources on ministry and not a building.

Cultural and personal misunderstandings will occur, therefore a long-term commitment to sharing worship space is also a commitment to invest in relationships, reconcile conflicts, and not avoid difficult conversations.

It is time to think differently about sharing worship space and develop creative and innovative approaches that build the Kingdom of God, witness a loving body of Christ, serve the neighborhoods, enhance intercultural learning, and reflect the nature of the Kingdom of God as written in Revelation 7:9:

“there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language standing before the throne and before the Lamb.”

Intercultural Ministries of EGC offers consulting and training to assist congregations in navigating through cultural challenges. If you are interested in receiving more information, contact Gregg Detwiler at gdetwiler [at] egc.org .

Footnotes

¹ In this article the term “majority culture” refers to the U.S. society in general and not to the majority or minority in a given community or congregation. “Majority culture” is shaped by language, religious practice, values, and social structure of people of predominantly Euro-American descent.

² See Hall, Douglas, Judy Hall, and Steve Daman. 2010. The Cat and the Toaster: Living System Ministry in a Technological Age. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock., p. xiii-xv; and Doug Hall: “What is the Quiet Revival & Why is it Important?” in New England’s Book of Acts (2007). The growth of immigrant churches is also documented in New England’s Book of Acts.

³ This is an observation Rev. Ralph Kee made in his work as the animator of the Greater Boston Church Planting Collaborative (https://www.egc.org/church-planting/).

⁴ However, that is not possible everywhere anymore. On December 5, 2011, the Supreme Court rejects worship at public school appeal for NYC; consequently more than 60 churches in NYC need a different space to worship starting February 12, 2012 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/05/us-usa-religion-schools-idUSTRE7B41ML20111205 - accessed 01/10/2012).

⁵ All the data is obtained from EGC’s Boston Church Directory (http://egcboston.force.com/bcd - accessed June 2011).

⁶ http://gatecitychurch.org/about/leadership-team/ (name changed, new web site, link updated 04/11/2017).

⁷ We have contacted the headquarters of the main denominations to ask about guidelines regarding shared worship space. However, no practical guidelines have been developed. Two denominations had some sort of guidelines. The Church of the Nazarene mentioned the process of developing multi-congregational churches under 100.1 in their Manual (http://nazarene.org/files/docs/Manual2009-2013.pdf, p. 63 – accessed 01/23/2012). The Presbyterian Church USA has only guidelines regarding sharing space with another religion: (www.pcusa.org/resource/sharing-building-space-group-another-religion/ - accessed 01/23/2012).

⁸ Between July and December 2011, we conducted 15 formal interviews with six pastors whose congregations own the church building, eight pastors whose congregations worship in someone else’s church building worship space and with a representative of one parachurch organization, who has churches worshiping in their facilities. Moreover, I had many informal conversations about shared worship space.

⁹ All Scripture Quotations are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version, published by Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI.

¹⁰ See Hall, The Cat & the Toaster. p. 116ff.

¹¹ Ibid. p. 180-183.

¹² Ibid. p. 19ff.

¹³ In this article, the term “majority-minority relations” refers to the U.S. society and its structure in general and not to the majority or minority in a given community or congregation.

¹⁴ This issue was addressed in November 2010 through a workshop. Subsequently, the report Re-thinking the Way We Think about Church Buildings was published by EGC in the Emmanuel Research Review, Issue 61, Dec. 2010. Contact EGC to request a copy, or search here: https://www.egc.org/blog/emmanuel-research-review.

¹⁵ http://www.rugglesbaptistchurch.org/– accessed 01/23/2012.

Resources:

• Anderson, Lorraine: Under One Steeple:  Multiple Congregations Sharing More Than Just Space. House of Prisca and Aquila Series. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2012.

• Behnken, Ken. Together in Mission: Sharing Facilities With Another Culture Group. Irvine, CA: Center for United States Missions, 2008.

• Lanier, Sarah A. Foreign to Familiar. A Guide to Understanding Hot- and Cold-Climate Cultures. Hagerstown, MD: McDougal Publishing, 2000.

• Rah, Soong-Chan. Many Colors: Cultural Intelligence for a Changing Church. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2010.

• The Christianity Today article “Space Frontiers” features three churches that are pioneering new ways to use facilities for the gospel. It inspires one to think a little more out of the box. www.christianitytoday.com/le/2009/fall/spacefrontiers.html - accessed 01/23/2012.

Author

Dr. Bianca Duemling served as the Assistant Director of Intercultural Ministries at Emmanuel Gospel Center (Boston, MA) since 2010. Raised in Germany, Bianca earned her degree in European Community Education Studies as a licensed social worker in Koblenz, and a Master of Arts in Intercultural Work and Conflict Management in Berlin. She completed her Ph.D. at the University of Heidelberg, studying emerging immigrant churches in Germany and their relationship with mainline churches. She is a founding member of the Forum Intercultural Relations of Together for Berlin and the Foundation Himmelsfels, where she served as the project coordinator for an intercultural reconciliation project.

Let's Do It! Multiplying Churches in Boston Now

God’s intent is that everyone living in Greater Boston be enthusiastically and holistically engaged in a community of vibrant Christian faith. The best way to make that happen right now, in 2012, is by church planting—apostolic-led church planting. That is the story of the Book of Acts and it is the story of Christian history ever since.

Awakening Your Inner Church Planter

Awakening Your Inner Church Planter is a motivational book with practical suggestions to encourage the involvement of the whole Body of Christ in the important work of starting new churches.

Diakonia, the Church at Work

Do you want to see the Church at work? This little book by Rev. Ralph Kee, veteran church planter in Boston, helps us get a handle on what the Bible calls “diakonia” and what we call “the deaconate.” Diakonia, we will discover, is much more than just a religious word. Diakonia moves us quickly from words to action, for it is, in fact, the life of service the church carries out in the world. In our day, as in Jesus’ day, as in the Apostle Paul’s day, diakonia carried out in the power of the Holy Spirit is still absolutely critical to the work of a credible church.

Ethnic Ministries Summit: Divinity & Dirt

“The Summit was a reality check. And it wasn’t a reality check that the world is becoming more multi-ethnic, but rather that God’s Kingdom is already multi-ethnic, and what am I going to do about it? How am I going to respond?” 

—Rebekah Kelleher, Student at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, the Center for Urban Ministerial Education

The questions that Rebekah Kelleher voiced following her participation in the Ethnic Ministries Summit are the questions that have been growing at EGC, not only in the past three years as we focused our energies on preparing for the April 2010 Summit, but for over 40 years as dynamic flows of migration have carried nearly one million people from over 100 nations into Greater Boston. Newcomers from Latin America, Asia, and Africa, where Christianity has grown, have helped fuel dynamic Kingdom growth in our region. Other flows bring tremendous opportunity for Christians to relate to some of the world’s most unreached peoples, including Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and Muslims. We have been asking those questions ever since we became aware of these ethnic streams of spiritual vitality and opportunity. And over the years, EGC has been constantly shaped by our response to these migrations and the way they have profoundly impacted the church, our city, and the region. 

Here are some facts which underscore the ethnic diversity of churches in Boston today: 

• There are more African American churches than any other ethnic church, including White churches.

• After African Americans, Whites, and Latinos, the five next most common major ethnic identities of churches are Haitian, other West Indian, multi-ethnic (churches with a broad mix of ethnicities), Asian, and Brazilian. 

• In the five years between 2001 and 2005, Latinos planted the most new, non-English congregations—approximately one out of every four new congregations.

• In 1968, there were no Haitian churches in Boston and Cambridge and only two Haitian Bible studies. Between 2001 and 2005, Haitians planted nine new churches, bringing the total to over 50 churches.

• The churches in Boston and Cambridge are becoming internally more diverse and multicultural. 

(Facts are from EGC’s research from the Boston Church Directory, 2005.)

THAT THEY MAY BE ONE

In our work since the 1970s to understand and nurture spiritual vitality in the city, we have documented that much of the church’s spiritual vitality has come to New England through the doors of immigration. If this is where God is at work, then this is where his children need to be at work, in this relatively new reality, this new way of defining the church in New England. And it’s not just EGC and our urban ministry partners who need to respond. In growing recognition of the changing demographics in our neighborhoods, towns, and cities—with the world at our doorstep—the 21st century church across North America needs to envision and embrace our new reality as well. 

This was the vision behind “A City Without Walls,” the 10th Annual Ethnic Ministries Summit. This vision of a city without walls (from Zech. 2:4-5), a church without division, but united in Christ across cultural and denominational lines, became the uncompromised goal for the Summit. Isn’t this what Jesus was praying for in John 17, when he said of future believers, “so that they may be one as we are one”?

At EGC, we believe that by nurturing authentic connections between the many nations represented in the Body of Christ and the many nations in our own backyard, and by learning from and listening to each other, the resulting love and understanding can tear down walls that hinder unity in the Body of Christ and we will see the Kingdom of God continue to advance in our region. But what does it take to get us to the place where we can be about that work of nurturing?

WEAR KINGDOM LENSES

The place to start is to gain the right perspective of God’s church. Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler, director of EGC’s Intercultural Ministries, says that we have to have eyes to see what God is doing in his Kingdom. “And in order to see, we have to make sure we have the capacity to see, to make sure we have the right lenses on.” Wearing “Kingdom lenses,” Gregg explains, means seeing reality as much as possible the way that God sees it and the way the Scripture describes it, rather than through our own limiting mental models (inner assumptions).

To explain what Kingdom lenses are, Gregg first talks about what they are not. He says we don’t want to use our “ethnocentric lenses, when we only see reality through our own ethnic perception or our own ethnic identity.” Neither do we want to use our denominational lenses. “If we only look at what God is doing through our own little narrow denominational lenses, we’re going to miss seeing the complete picture.” Another limiting factor would be what Gregg calls economic reality lenses. “So if we are middle class or upper middle class and we don’t have a connection to a lower economic class, if we are not in touch with that reality, we are going to miss it.” All these lenses are insufficient, he says, and so we have to make sure we have a way of perceiving and communicating with people different from ourselves.

Why is vision important? Gregg says, “God is doing a divine thing, but a lot of us have not been perceptive of the work of the Lord in our midst. And part of his divine working is all these various streams that did not exist three or four decades ago.” As EGC’s research department has worked to identify these streams, we helped to host gatherings of leaders from many cultures to explore and celebrate New England’s ethnic church diversity and vitality. In 2002, we convened a gathering of Boston’s church leaders. Then in 2007, we hosted the Intercultural Leadership Consultation, where 400 diverse leaders gathered to explore the many cultural expressions of the church in the New England region. New England’s Book of Acts is a collection of reports and articles on these New England ethnic streams, produced by EGC for the 2007 Intercultural Leadership Consultation, available online at www.newenglandsbookofacts.org.

DEAL WITH BOULDERS

Part of seeing reality is also to see that all is not well. Diversity, in and of itself, is not the goal. Gregg says, “It isn’t enough just to get diverse people in the same proximity. That in and of itself does nothing. As a matter of fact, it can actually make things degenerate. But if you can work on the element of trust in a diverse community, then that community can have new innovation and new breakthrough and even multicultural teams working at fostering trust and mutuality and respect and listening to one another. Then those communities and those organizations can excel. We have to build that level of trust.” 

Trust is hard work. Gregg found this to be true in the journey of the past three years as he met with a dozen leaders from many cultures to plan the Summit. “The journey involved both celebration and repentance, joy and pain, divinity and dirt. Therefore, it required a willingness to navigate in a state of tension between these things as we related to all these different streams in the Body of Christ.” This willingness to operate in the middle of tension became one of the primary takeaways from the Summit journey. “While there is divinity flowing in all these ethnic streams, there are also problems—there’s dirt and boulders and barriers that are impeding the flow as God has intended,” Gregg says. While we celebrate the work of God flowing in these streams, we also want to create an environment where, he says, “we can confess and acknowledge and understand and deal with the dirt and the boulders and the barriers.”

CREATE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT

How does EGC’s Intercultural Ministries deal with the dirt that comes up between and within cultures? “The first thing is that we have to provide good leadership to try to create the necessary environment, a safe environment where we actually are able to model acknowledging the dirt, acknowledging our brokenness, our fallenness, where we are missing the mark of God’s intention.” Gregg says leaders must intentionally model humility and an ability to repent, while we also set up an environment where people feel safer to begin to share some of their brokenness. 

Gregg uses the analogy of a family reunion when he is coaching a group to create a safe place to work through differences. While some people love a family reunion and come ready to rejoice and celebrate and enter in, some people really hate family reunions because it shows them all their brokenness. “We are not going to ignore the fact that there is pain and brokenness and fallenness and not everything is perfect in the family, even the family of God on earth, and so we just begin to acknowledge that and model it from the front, and encourage people to share that part of the story.” 

FIND GOD'S TRAJECTORY

The best way to deal with the barriers is not in isolation, but in community. Our responsibility is to discern and understand “the trajectory that the Lord is on,” as Gregg says. “In order to understand that, we need to read Scripture, and read it together, as even our understanding of Scripture is culturally bound and formed because of who you are reading Scripture with, and who you are praying with,” he says. “And so my conviction is that if we are reading and praying the Scripture with a diverse community that is coming from different backgrounds and different realities, and we create a listening environment where we are really learning and listening together, we will better perceive what it is that God is headed toward.” 

Not surprisingly, the final goal is described in the Bible, Gregg points out. “Almost all of us would agree, as you look at the end of the story in Revelation, the picture of the consummation of the Kingdom where there will be people there from every tongue, tribe, and nation, is the goal. So our hypothesis is that the more that we can reflect that on the earth, without forcing it through our own human manipulations, then the more reflection of the glory of God on the earth will be seen. And unless we move toward that, we will be off track, and we will probably find ourselves having a lot of problems and counterproductivity.”

BROADEN YOUR TEAM

“In order to get anything done that is bigger than yourself you have to work with a team,” Gregg says. “In any team development there is the friction that can happen within a team. But when you are trying to do a task that is really bigger than your team, it really requires that you broaden your team and you bring new people to the team that maybe you do not typically relate to …. Inevitably, misunderstandings and conflicts will come up. We all have our cultural practices of the way things are done, our expectations through our ethnicity, through our denomination, through the culture of our local church and the way our local church operates, through our reality of whether we are from the city or the suburbs—all of those dictate the way we want to operate in a team, and so now you are bringing this very diverse team together to try to get things done, and what happens is inevitable. You go into that place and you are not real secure with one another. And so, for the Summit planning team, that was a breeding ground for a lot of tentativeness, insecurity, misunderstanding, not knowing where the other person was coming from. And the way we got through that was that we made it very, very clear up front what the mission was and that we were committed to the mission. And we normalized the fact that we were probably going to have many bumps along the way in this journey. We tried to normalize it so that when it happened none of us would be caught off guard.

“We also have a commitment to the long term, and so it wasn’t just that we were going to push this through to the end as a team for the purpose of getting through the Summit, but we really wanted to learn through the journey so that when we came out of the Summit our relationships were in a different place.” 

1000 MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Gregg believes that the work of building a multicultural team greatly magnifies the expected difficulties in team building. Psychologist Bruce Tuckman first came up with the words “forming, storming, norming and performing” to describe the team-building process. “And a good team will continue to do that,” Gregg says, speaking of the Summit planning team. “But in this task of bringing parts of the Body of Christ together the process was magnified. The ‘storming’ part was magnified because folks just don’t work together. They have their own way of doing things.” The differences between all the stakeholders from culture to culture, from the suburbs to the cities, and the different ways all these organizations see things, created what Gregg says can only be described as a journey of 1000 misunderstandings. “Therefore, it required walking and leading with reconciliation in mind, for the whole three years, knowing that things were going to come up that were going to be conflicts. You just go in knowing that and leading with that in your mind.”

How do you keep moving in such an environment? Gregg says you have to keep the mission central. Jeff Bass, executive director of EGC, agrees. “Without that missional approach, it would have been easy to give up, saying, ‘This is too hard.’ ‘This is too crazy.’  Gregg is not overstating it when he says this was a journey of 1000 misunderstandings and magnified storming …. Stubbornness is a real important quality in working through these kinds of things. And I think that is something Gregg is particularly gifted with, staying in the middle of this chaos, and stubbornly, quietly moving everyone forward together, even though it is really hard along the way. That is part of the lesson that I have taken away from this, that this takes really hard work.” 

Gregg says, “Without question this has been the most intense season of ministry in my life. The demands related to the Summit are sizeable, but even more weighing on me is the greater goal: the long-term impact the Summit journey will have on the church in Boston and New England, and to the degree that we have influence, on the church in the U.S. and Canada.”

BEYOND THE SUMMIT

“Through the Summit, we wanted to create strength of intercultural relationships that weren’t there. Coming out of the Summit we have the strength of both a new depth and intercultural relationships among leaders and organizations, and we also have some new infrastructure that was created at the Summit. Both of these make possible new things on the horizons. What those new things are … we don’t fully comprehend at the moment, because we feel that a lot of those things are happening organically, that happened in the flow of doing the journey together so things have shifted and there are things that we may not be able to know or perceive yet.” Gregg is working now to survey participants, reflect with his team on lessons learned, and ask God what is ahead.

“Part of what I mean by things have shifted is that where we were relationally as a church is not the same place as where we are now,” Gregg points out. “I have had some debriefing with many leaders and they have just unloaded on me on how impactful this journey has been on their learning and their understanding of broadening their horizons and their categories and their thinking.

“I think a lot of the lessons we learned in the last three years are lessons that have application in our ongoing work in Intercultural Ministries,” Gregg says. “The idea of letting the mission drive everything we do, that was a lesson we learned.” The Summit journey “has opened up deeper conversations,” Gregg says. “An ongoing part of our work is to have these deeper conversations where we understand one another’s realities on a much deeper level so that the Body of Christ can work in an interrelated way …. It has increased our capacity to work together across all these different lines, so we have developed a more functional team for getting things done. And what we want to do in Intercultural Ministries is to encourage that and to nurture it. These lessons learned are just really underscoring more clearly those things that we are doing in Intercultural Ministries at EGC and that we want to continue to do.” 

by Steve Daman

[published in Inside EGC, May-June, 2010]

Sol's Story: Come to Boston Brother! We Need You!

“In June of 1972, I was discouraged because a year had gone by since I had graduated from seminary, and I hadn’t raised a penny to go back to Haiti, which had been my goal. So after preaching at a church in New York City, two ladies asked me whether they could join my wife and me for a night of prayer. We agreed, and I said, ‘Please ask the Lord to tell me what to do! I heard the call for the ministry, but now I have been trying to raise funds to go to Haiti and I cannot raise any money. If he has something else in mind, let me know.’”

Soliny Védrine was born in L’Asile, Haiti, one of seven children of a tailor, Sauveur Védrine, who, at great financial sacrifice, sent Sol away to school in Port-au-Prince at age 14. Sol eventually graduated from the university with a law degree, married, and came to the U.S. to study at Dallas Theological Seminary. But then, Sol hit an impasse.

“By the time the two ladies left, we were tired and hungry. We were glad we prayed, but we were glad they left! That afternoon, one of the sisters came back and said, ‘We have found the answer to your prayer.’ I wondered, was it Haiti? Miami? The sister said, ‘Boston.’

“‘Boston!’ I said. ‘How do you know?’ She said, ‘Mr. Jean-Pierre, who lives in Boston, just came to spend the weekend with us. And he keeps complaining that Haitians are pouring into Boston by hundreds yet there are no churches. So I tied up his complaint with your request!’

“She put me in contact with Mr. Jean-Pierre, who said, ‘Come to Boston! We need you. Haitians are coming from New York to Boston. You should come, brother. Come!’”

Six months later, Sol and Emmeline obeyed God’s call to go to Boston. There they found two small Christian fellowships serving a rapidly growing population of Haitians. Assuming their full-time job was ministry, Sol and Emmeline began to meet with Haitian families to share the Gospel and their dream about starting a church. But when their first baby was due and they had no money, Sol took a secular job as a welder for eight months and then as a bookkeeper for eleven years, while working many hours developing the church.

Meanwhile, Haitians continued to move to Boston, and by the 1980s, new churches were starting every few months. Marilyn Mason, a missionary with EGC, began to build relationships among the Haitian pastors, and soon recognized that Pastor Sol had a strong vision to see pastors working together for effective, city-wide ministry. She asked Doug Hall, EGC’s director, if he couldn’t find a way to help Sol leave his accounting job to dedicate himself full time to helping grow Haitian churches. Several Haitian leaders said the same thing, so Doug made the call.

“We met for lunch and Doug talked to me about whether I would be willing to leave my accounting job and come by faith to the Gospel Center to begin these connections,” Sol says. “The strange thing was that that was my prayer, too! It was my dream to create a forum where pastors could have fellowship and discuss problems. On November 4, 1985, Sol joined EGC as Minister-at-Large to the Haitian Community.

Today, Boston has the third largest Haitian community outside Haiti, behind Miami and New York City. There are about 200 Haitian churches in New England, with about 60 in Greater Boston supporting a population of over 70,000 Haitians. EGC’s Haitian Ministries International works to encourage and strengthen Haitian pastors in Boston and to facilitate Haitian churches working together to serve others.

Pastor Sol’s work includes counseling and consulting with pastors and ministry leaders in Boston and across the Haitian diaspora; assisting Haitians immigrating to Boston, especially since the earthquake; and organizing evangelistic, discipleship, and training programs that serve the Haitian community in Boston and beyond.

Pastor Sol also teaches seminary classes for emerging Haitian leaders at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, and he continues to serve as senior pastor of the Boston Missionary Baptist Church, which he and his wife founded in 1972.

by Steve Daman

Mutual Empowerment of Christian Leadership Across Culture

by Bianca Duemling, Intercultural Ministries Intern, Spring 2010

A City Without Walls, the April 2010 Ethnic Ministries Summit in Boston, was a big and joyful event. The seminars and plenary sessions were encouraging for some and challenging for others. But overall, it was a powerful celebration of the diversity and beauty of the Body of Christ. Many people felt that worshipping together was like a glimpse of heaven, a taste of how it will be when all people come together before the throne of God from the North and South, the East and West. 

Such experiences and conferences are indeed important for reminding us of the beauty and power of the Body of Christ, as the reality of everyday relationships is too often far from united or powerful. Cultural misunderstandings, theological controversies, and power issues influence our relationships and encounters between churches of different ethnic backgrounds and denominations.

Having studied and been part of the developing relationships between immigrant and mainline churches in Germany for the past five years, two questions are always in my mind when I am in an intercultural church setting, such as the Summit. First, how can Christians overcome the ethnic segregation in our countries and be role models in living out unity in diversity? And second, how can relationships among cultural groups and churches be transformed from conflict or oppression to equal partnerships?

There are no simple and clear answers to these questions. The relationships are complex. Oppression and conflicts are passed down from history. For that reason, I am not in a position to provide answers, but I want to share my observations and thoughts. Needless to say, these are limited to my own white-Western perspective and so I am open to any disagreement and discussion.

During the Summit, I became aware of a challenge I never saw so clearly before.

There are two kinds of realities in our society, our universities, and our churches. The first reality is that we are in the midst of sweeping demographic changes. North America—but also Western Europe—is becoming more colorful. It is a fact that white, Anglo Americans have been the majority culture for the longest part of America’s history. In just a few decades, the whites will be a minority. This will be true for the society as a whole, but also for the churches. Over the past years, there has been a constant decrease in white Christianity and a continuing increase in the number of churches of people of color and various immigrant churches, the very churches in Boston that have led the Quiet Revival. Additionally, some of the larger suburban churches are rapidly diversifying ethnically.

The second reality is that while white Christians are numerically not a majority anymore, especially in urban areas, they hold disproportionally key leadership roles. Moreover, Anglo American churches have never spent as much money on their buildings, ministries, or staff as nowadays. So far, none of this is new to me, but in my analysis of the situation, I was somehow only focusing on how the dominating culture needs to create space for other cultural expressions of faith and leadership, how we need to foster equal partnerships, to empower leaders among people of color, and to share economic resources and access to power. All of this I am still convinced is crucial. But there is another challenge to it. As the demographic reality shows, there will be a natural change so that in a few years, white Christians will be the minority. It is hard to predict the future, but I sense a danger that there is little shift from oppressive to equal relationships, but our roles are only being interchanged.

Having an isolated white Christian minority in a few years would be really counterproductive as the painful segregation of the Body of Christ might only increase. There is a need for mutual empowerment. As a white Christian, I need to be empowered to be a witness to my people, who are less and less interested in the Gospel. But at the same time, I need to empower non-white Christian leaders, as they have been marginalized and oppressed economically and spiritually for so long. In fighting for equal partnerships instead of only power shifts, we all need to make sure that mistakes and oppressive patterns are never repeated. There is a need in the church for secure space to be able to give constructive criticism and to empower without being oppressive and without being perceived as oppressive. And, moreover, we need to overcome the dichotomized thinking of “them and us,” as we are all one Body, baptized with one Spirit, and we all believe in the one God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

As I said, there is no simple answer to these challenges. But there is a key, and that key is redemption, reconciliation, and forgiveness. Every member of the Body of Christ must honestly question his or her motivation, and must reflect on how his or her culture has given or denied access to resources and power. We have to ask for forgiveness, but we also need to forgive, as we are already forgiven through the Cross.

Bianca Duemling worked at EGC with Rev. Gregg Detwiler to help prepare for the Ethnic Ministries Summit. After she returns to Germany in May, she will defend her Ph.D. dissertation on “Ethnic Churches in Germany and Integration” at the University of Heidelberg’s Institute for the Study of Christian Social Service. She was introduced to EGC through Together for Berlin, a citywide organization with networking ties to EGC. Besides her involvement in intercultural ministries, she is a founding member of “Stiftung Himmelsfels,” a foundation which fosters cooperation between ethnic churches and trains in the area of second generation youth ministry in Germany.

Guest editorial by Bianca Duemling, Intercultural Ministries Intern, Spring 2010

A New Kind of Learning: Contextualized Theological Education Models

Resources for the urban pastor and community leader published by Emmanuel Gospel Center, Boston

Emmanuel Research Review reprint
Issue No. 59 — September/October 2010

Introduced by Brian Corcoran, Managing Editor, Emmanuel Research Review

“There are many challenges facing theological schools in the 21st century and the challenge of dealing well with the different histories, worldviews, languages, dialects, and cultures is the most significant and most overwhelming,” says Dr. Al Padilla, Dean of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, the Center for Urban Ministerial Education. Boston is a prime example of the ways the ethnic and cultural composition of North American society continues to become more diverse. Recognizing this cultural shift, Dr. Padilla asks what bearing and challenges does this present to our current understanding and approach to urban theological education systems and models? And what does all this mean for the broader Evangelical Church? Padilla observes that “God is performing a transformation in the Church… reshaping the very core of what the church is,” and says that God is working through “women and men from diverse backgrounds and perspectives teaching us.” This is not a comfortable thought to some. However, guiding all of this is “the clearest theological image of contextualization,” the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ—“pitching his tent with us,” as Dr. Padilla says.

Our lead article, “A New Kind of Learning: Contextualized Theological Education Models,” by Dr. Alvin Padilla, Ph.D., Dean of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Center for Urban Ministerial Education, is based on his plenary presentation at the 2010 Ethnic Ministry Summit in Boston in April this year. You can also download or listen to 32 selected seminars from the Summit at http://reimaginegrace.org/summit-audio.

Also in this issue is a sample list of urban ministry training systems in Metro Boston prepared by EGC.

A New Kind of Learning: Contextualized Theological Education Models

by Alvin Padilla, Ph.D., (former) Dean of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary – Boston, the Center for Urban Ministerial Education (CUME). [ed. Dr Padilla is at Western Theological Seminary as of 2017.]

It is undeniable that the ethnic/cultural composition of our North American society has changed in the last 50 years and, as a result, the face of American Christianity is rapidly changing as well. All of us here today are aware that the numeral epicenter of Christianity has shifted to the Global South. A century ago, Europe and North America comprised 82% of the world’s Christian population. Today, Europe and North America comprise less than 40% of the world’s Christian population. It is estimated that by 2050, 71% of the world’s Christians will be from Africa, Asia, and South America. Closer to home, it is estimated that by 2050, ethnic minorities will comprise over 50% of the population in the U.S. By 2025, minorities will comprise 50% of all children. Those are staggering statistics and in some way or another they challenge all of us—for diversity seems to be overwhelming us.

Scripture, Cultures, and Unity

Even to the casual reader, there is little doubt that the Christian Bible is a broad collection of documents spanning millennia in composition, multiplicity of literary genres, and diverse in its content. Yet there is, at the same time, little doubt that unifying theological themes can be readily discerned throughout its voluminous pages. For centuries, Christians read and talked about this wondrous collection and discerned that “embedded in all these differences and diversities there was a single voice and that this voice was personal, the voice of God.” (Peterson, Eugene H. Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 2006, p. 26.)

Genesis 1:26 is often cited as the cultural mandate wherein humanity is assigned the task of creating human culture.

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” —Gen. 1:26

By the time of the prophet Isaiah, humanity has evolved into many cultures resulting, sadly, in a state of enmity among the nations and cultures. The poet-prophet expresses his longing for a day when all the different cultures of the world would gather together on the mountain of the Lord:

It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be lifted up above the hills; and all the nations shall flow to it, and many peoples shall come, and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.” For out of Zion shall go the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. He shall judge between the nations, and shall decide disputes for many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. O house of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord. —Isaiah 2:2-5

The prophet envisions a time when peace and justice will prevail for the Lord sits enthroned, ruling humanity with equity.

Eight hundred years later we see the fulfillment of this desire on the day of Pentecost—all the nations present in Jerusalem—Mt Zion, the Mountain of the Lord—and they hear the wonderful news of God’s gracious offer of salvation in their own tongue. This fulfillment is only in part for the time being, and we see in 1 Peter 1:1 and 2:11 that those who claim to live on the slopes of Mt Zion must live as aliens in a foreign land—living in the here and now but knowing that we do not belong here; for we know that we have not yet reached the ultimate summit of the mountain. Christians must live as aliens (pilgrims) ascending the path toward the summit of the mountain. In reality, we know that those who rule on earth see us as undocumented aliens who have no right to be here. Finally, we see in Revelation a vision of how it will all turn out; a vision of our arrival at the final summit and the gathering of God’s people from all nations, and cultures, and languages.

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands. —Rev. 7:9

Though we “see” the idyllic vision of Revelation 7:9, and “hear” in it the melodious harmony of many languages and cultures weaved together into a intricate symphony of unequal beauty, the reality is that most in our North American society see only disunity and hear cacophony. On the Day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon those gathered on Mt Zion, it was only those who were from foreign lands who recognized the miracle for what it was—“Why, are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born?” (Acts 2:7-8) Those who were “native born,” the dominant culture in Jerusalem, could only mock and say “They are full of wine” (Acts 2:13). They too heard the apostles speaking in their own language (Aramaic most likely), but to them that was no miracle, for that was the dominant language group in the region. Trusting in the familiarity of their own cultural preferences (in this case, language) they were unable to grasp the significance of the miracle happening literally before their very eyes and ears. Their only reaction is mocking—for they do not understand what God is doing. If you would grant me some homiletical license, these persons would be the ones caucusing for an Aramaic-only stature in Palestinian law.

I am afraid that a significant segment of the Evangelical Church in North America finds itself in the same dilemma—the works of God are manifested for all to see—yet we mock them for they appear to be nothing but a rabble of uneducated men and women speaking nonsense. In the Presbyterian circles that are familiar to me, there are many who cannot fathom how God could use the apparent “indecency and disorder” of these churches—particularly those that label themselves Presbyterian.

The Evangelical Church in a Pluralistic World

Early in this 21st century, the Christian Church—the Evangelical Church—finds herself in a challenging position as we confront the multicultural, postmodern and pluralistic world in which we have been called to bear witness to Christ. At best, we are perplexed and bewildered, not knowing what in the world God is doing through us. At worst, some of us claim the death of the Church and even Christianity itself—ignoring the tremendous growth of Christianity in cities like Boston. Still others see the next wave of Christianity emerging over the southern horizon and long for the arrival of its powerful undertow on our very shores, so that it may take hold of the North American Church and sweep it under its power. I do pray that you count yourself among the latter group.

Indeed, the whole world has come to our doorstep. Learning to live well in the diverse culture of North America is no longer an option, but a necessity. The U.S. Census estimates that in 2050 the proportion of whites in the population will be only 53%. Our children will live and serve in a society in which their classmates, neighbors, and fellow disciples of Christ will be equally divided between whites and people of color. As new people move into our cities and local communities, the communities undoubtedly will change. The changes could be haphazard and filled with misunderstandings, hurt feelings, and even violence, or the changes could permit all to reinvent and reinvigorate themselves for the better.

Although the West (North America, Europe) has indeed lost the numerical superiority, it still retains an iron grip on the reins of power in the Church. We in the West assume that we speak ex cathedra for all of Christendom. It is our theology that is normative; our way of being the Church is the standard for all to follow. In the area of theological education, we continue to assume that Western educational methods work best for everyone. We have not dared to envision new ways of learning to serve the increasing ethnic and cultural diversity overwhelming our society. We are unwilling to reinvent ourselves.

It should be noted, for example, that current practices in American seminaries reveal that theological schools remain enamored with pedagogical systems that are dated and increasingly irrelevant to our communities and are disconnected from both global and local realities. They fail to incorporate Hispanics, Blacks, and others in leadership roles at all levels of the school’s structure and neglect paying attention to issues of particular relevance to ethnic Americans, such as immigration reform, healthcare, education, etc. There are many challenges facing theological schools in the 21st century, and the challenge of dealing well with the different histories, worldviews, languages, dialects and cultures is the most significant and most overwhelming.

While Christianity in North America continues its progress toward the creation of a multiethnic Church, seminaries are mired in monoculturalism. Yes there are mission statements indicating the school’s commitment to ethnic diversity and its desire to attract non-White students. However, these statements are rarely accompanied by a significant multi-ethnic presence among the faculty and senior administrators. Recently I spoke with a colleague from another seminary in the midst of searching for its chief executive. A comment he made surprised me. He commented that the majority culture finds it difficult to follow someone who is non-White or has a notable foreign accent. With opinions and comments like that, no wonder seminaries lack ethnics among their senior leadership. What my colleague demonstrated with that comment is the school’s lack of intentionality in its pursuit of ethnic diversity—though its mission statement clearly indicated their welcoming stance of the stranger. Lacking intentionality, schools find reasons to rationalize the continuation of past hiring practices. The challenge to diversify staff and faculty is endemic to Christianity because of our commitment (in principle) to the equality of all—Christian institutions must diversify or risk making a mockery of our belief that all men and women are made in the image of God.

The fact is that as ethnic Christians in North America, we find ourselves confronted with the reality of being marginalized in the context of our own faith tradition. We identify with American evangelicalism on a broad scale; indeed many of us are immersed in evangelicalism. My own personal journey of faith is not uncommon: conversion from Catholic to Pentecostalism, educated at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (GCTS), ordained, serving mainline churches, Bible teacher at an evangelical Christian College and now GCTS. On the surface I am part of the evangelical mainstream. Yet I am oftentimes still seen and treated as an outsider. As my colleague Dr. Soong-Chan Rah has stated, “I grow weary of seeing Western, white expressions of the Christian faith being lifted up while failing to see nonwhite expressions of faith represented in meaningful ways in American evangelicalism.” (Rah, Soong-Chan. The Next Evangelicalism: Releasing the Church from Western Cultural Captivity. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Books, 2009, p. 16.)

In the Pain of Transformation

Indeed, God is performing a transformation in the Church, a transformation that is reshaping the very core of what the Church is—how we are structured, when we meet to worship, how we worship, in what language, with what instrumentation, women and men from diverse backgrounds and perspectives teaching us. It is transforming how we envision and deliver theological education. Transformation is a wonderful thing; it is the process of changing from one state to another. However, if you do not like change, transformation can be a very troubling thing. If you do not like uncertainty nor unpredictability, then transformation is indeed a daunting thing. Whatever your take, transformation is a very painful process—but the end results are well worth it.

The Pentecost nature of Christianity enables us to create new paradigms for witness and evangelization. Instead of rejoicing, many find themselves threatened and on the defensive, wondering whether all this heterogeneity is not merely the babblings of a world falling apart, rather than the blessing of a world that God is giving birth. In too many cases, Christian institutions, particularly evangelical theological seminaries, see themselves as the last line of defense in a siege by a pluralistic and skeptical age, maintaining the status quo down to the last member.

Christ’s transforming presence provides us with the willingness and the power to adapt ourselves for missionary ministry in this postmodern world, to contextualize the Gospel message to the culture that surrounds us.

Look at the opportunities some of this ethnic diversity provides for the Church we are called to serve at this time. Let us look, for example, at Hispanics in our communities. By the year 2020, Hispanics will make up nearly one quarter of all U.S. residents. Researchers predict that by the end of this decade, Hispanics will make up more than 50% of all Catholics in the U.S. “Organized nationally and possessing forceful leadership, Hispanics will make a major impact on the future of Catholicism in the U.S. much the same way the Irish did in the 19th century.” And it is not just the Catholic Church that Hispanics are changing. An estimated one out of every seven Hispanic left the Catholic Church for a Protestant church in the last twenty-five years. If this trend continues at the same rate, then half of all Hispanics will belong to Protestant churches by the year 2025. The question we need to answer is: “How many of them will join the church you will be leading?” For theological seminaries, this implies that they must seek ways to make theological education accessible and practical for Hispanic Americans.

Becoming the People of God

If we were to take seriously the vision of Revelation 7:9, then we will understand that becoming a multicultural church or seminary is not a condescension of the white dominant culture to facilitate evangelistic efforts among ethnic minorities around us. Rather, it is the elevation of every one of us, including the white dominant culture, into something far greater, far more marvelous and wonderful—the people of God.

A number of years ago I heard an illustration concerning the post-war life of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. The speaker used it to highlight the dignity and humility of a great man who lowered himself so that others might be lifted up:

It’s a warm spring Sunday at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Richmond. As the minister is about to present Holy Communion, a tall, well-dressed black man sitting in the section reserved for African Americans unexpectedly advances to the communion rail; unexpectedly because this has never happened here before. The congregation freezes. Those that had been ready to go forward and kneel at the communion rail remain fixed in their pews. The minister stands in his place stunned and motionless. The black man slowly lowers his body, kneeling at the communion rail. After what seems like an interminable amount of time, an older white man rises. His hair snowy white, head up, and eyes proud, he walks quietly up the aisle to the chancel rail. So with silent dignity and self-possession, the white man kneels down to take communion along the same rail with the black man.

Now this illustration was meant to illustrate how Robert E. Lee lowered himself so that this black man could take communion in the church. In my opinion, this application of this story misses the mark altogether. What I see is how this unidentified black man elevated the congregants of St. Paul’s into the very presence of God. He raised their status into the very presence of the divine rather than lower them; it is our arrogance that sees a great white man lowering himself for the sake of the marginalized. In reality, the opposite happens—and it happens on a daily basis for those with eyes to see.

Allow me to return to the idea of cultural norm referred to above. Seeing our cultural perspective as the norm, we view others as divergent and devalue their contribution to our lives, to our churches, and to our educational institutions. We value them as definitely less than we are and we do a great thing to humble ourselves for their sake. It is like that in far too many of our congregations and educational institutions. In dire need of new members and students, they would be welcomed into our hallowed halls and sanctuaries—as long as they conform to our norms, as long as they become just like us in every shape and form.

As we take note of the diversity among us, we marvel at what God is doing, and in the process disclose our ignorance of early Christianity.

Take a quick glance at the original New Testament story of the early Christian movement: how the slaves, the disenfranchised, the low merchants, the widows, the unemployed, the immigrants, and the socially downcast found a new and exciting alternative to social life that that world had not imagined possible. In this new community, everyone was accepted with reverence and respect. For the early Christians understood that the Lord himself had emptied himself of all social status for their sake; then shouldn’t they do the same for each other?

Consider the originality of the Christian movement: everyone had a new family name, Christian, a third race. A new common bloodstream, the blood of Christ! This new reality was created not by transforming the basic nationality of each person, but by transforming the limitations of national identities inherent in each person. The early Christians were considered atheists by others because they refused to recognize the national gods of any particular nation while accepting the One God of all humanity.

Having taken a brief look at this original Christianity, doesn’t it seem strange that we in North America see multiculturalism as something new?

The Qualitative Dimension of Multiculturalism in the Church

Taken as a whole, definitions of multicultural communities provide both quantitative and qualitative dimensions. The quantitative dimensions deal primarily with the numerical makeup of the ethnic groups that meet together. We all agree that there must be sufficient representation of particular ethnic groups in order to claim that a church is multiethnic. One or two families do not a multicultural community make!

The numerical makeup of a multicultural community is a determining factor, but it is only one factor that defines the multicultural community. Multicultural communities also hold significant commitments to the qualitative dimension, which is the aspect of the church that refers to the life and organization of the local ministry. Here the church or educational institution has biblically contextualized its ministry to the multiethnic context in which it finds itself demographically. This includes reforming the structure and administration of the body to represent the church biblically in the same way it did when it was a homogeneous institution.

How are each of the ethnic groups represented and involved in the life of the church (or seminary)? Does the organization/structure of the church involve or allow for the actual membership of the church to lead and to direct the ministry God has given to the congregation? It may be that structural change will have to represent the cultural mix of that congregation, but this cannot be done without a clear understanding that the Bible provides the necessary tension for that formulation.

The qualitative aspect also has to do with matters of reconciliation and justice. It is important that the educational institution understand the goal of the multicultural community. Maintaining ethnic diversity in a local church is part of the multicultural community, but it is not an end in itself. Gaede states in his book, When Tolerance Is No Virtue:

Multiculturalism also carries much baggage that ought to worry Christians. This baggage has less to do with the details of multiculturalism than with its general orientation. And perhaps the best way to get at this is to notice that more and more, those who favor multiculturalism argue not on the basis of a desire for justice, but on the basis of multiculturalism’s practical necessity or its validity as a general worldview. (Gaede, S D. When Tolerance Is No Virtue: Political Correctness, Multiculturalism & the Future of Truth & Justice. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1993, p. 36.)

This is often called, the “pragmatic” approach to building a multicultural community. “The problem with the pragmatic approach to multi ethnic sensitivity,” Gaede continues, “is that it rules out Jesus’ approach. It says that the end is cooperation, good relations, harmony and agreement. And it thereby undermines and displaces the true ends of human existence.” (Gaede, p. 37.) Both quantitative and qualitative dimensions are necessary for a multicultural community to be effective in reaching out to a community that is ethnically diverse and growing in this diversity. Presence of the multiethnic community in the local church is a given if mission is applied, but presence without incorporation limits the process of true biblical discipleship. The qualitative dimension occurs as participants are discipled and become responsible members of the local ministry. It is a state of incompleteness when the church neglects to train and incorporate believers into the fullness of the ministry.

In a true multicultural community, as women and men from other cultures and ethnic groups are incorporated into leadership roles, the structure of the institution, of the community of faith itself, is reshaped (reformed, if you will) in order to allow for a smoother transition, and in response to the inner workings of the Spirit in the community. Conversely, if you do have some participation of ethnic persons in your community of faith, but it has not structurally changed the institution, then what you have is assimilation and not a true multicultural community. Referring to the tragedy of assimilation, Hispanic educator Arturo Madrid states, “Diversity is desirable only in principle, not in practice. Long live diversity—as long as it conforms to my standards, to my mind set, to my view of life, to my sense of order.” Not only is there structural change, there is also change in purpose, in mission and, of course, in the overarching vision of the ministry. As we are transformed into a godly multicultural community, we incorporate the issues and concerns affecting the lives of everyone in the community and we allow the Other to lead us in this transformational journey.

Take a cursory look at Acts 6. The Church continues to grow, and we encounter the first cultural conflict: the Hellenistic Jews (most likely Jews born and raised in the diaspora) complained that their widows were being neglected by the Hebraic Jews (most likely Jews born and raised in Palestine). The solution is to choose seven Hellenists to be part of the leadership of the community. Can you imagine the change in our national history if our founding fathers had asked the men and women who were enslaved if they could give an opinion as to their future?

Qualitatively Multicultural Theological Education

The challenge before us as we seek to become truly multicultural Christian institutions is: how do we become really multicultural without the trappings of a merely quantitative approach—interested only in numbers and balanced budgets? How can we reach a level of interaction and personal engagement wherein everyone feels welcomed and affirmed? Christian ministry (service, really) at its core is interacting with all kinds of people in ways that give them glimpses of Jesus in us. In Christianity, we affirm the value of each person. Indeed we claim that before God we are all the same, we are equal regardless of ethnicity, culture, or language.

In empowering others for Christian service, the problem for educational institutions and the Church is multilayered. How do we prepare our students and would-be disciples to live in a multicultural, multiethnic world that is largely freed from racism? The word “prepare” in the above sentence suggests an educational process. One of the key objectives of educational institutions is the reshaping of life in relation to human purpose. For theological schools, this implies that we must seek to reshape our students to enable them to live well in a multicultural world. The work of the Church is expressed through koinonia (community and communion), diakonia (service and outreach), kerygma (proclaiming the Word of God), and didache (teaching and learning). To foster an environment of multiculturalism within its institutional ethos, theological schools must create a climate that embraces this work of the Church.

How can we foster this process in our educational institutions so laden with traditional structures that resist change to the core in order to enable them to become multicultural communities?

• The process of developing a curriculum that fosters multiculturalism begins when members of the institution come together to discuss issues relevant to multicultural communities. This is koinonia.

• The school’s leadership drafts and develops an intentionally anti-racist, pro-multiethnic statement to be adhered to by all. This is kerygma.

• This intentionality must be accompanied by practices that promote multiculturalism (diakonia).

• Lastly they discuss strategies, policies, legislation needed to further promote multiculturalism (didache).

Elizabeth Conde-Frazier recommends, among other things, that we follow a trajectory of intentionality, hospitality/friendship, and that we learn to encounter the Other by risking friendship. (See: Conde-Frazier, Elizabeth, S S. Kang, and Gary A. Parrett. A Many Colored Kingdom: Multicultural Dynamics for Spiritual Formation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004.) When authentic relationships are built that embrace diversity, tremendous growth in Christ likeness can occur. In following intercultural friendships, safety is critical. We must learn to become safe persons. A safe person has:

a. listening ears,
b. limiting loaded words, and
c. loving arms.

In this risk-taking, we learn to tell and listen to stories—stories of the struggles, and particularly for the dominant culture, they must learn to listen attentively and respectfully to the story of invisibility that we as ethnic minorities feel, even in a Christian institution.

Develop Cultural Intelligence, Not Polite Thoughts

Allow me to add another option for us to consider. As Christians in a multicultural world, we need to approach cross-cultural interaction that stems from inward transformation rather than from information or, worse yet, from artificial political correctness.

Our goal should not be that we may learn more about different cultures, nor should our goal be to simply be better able to navigate cultural differences. Our goal should be to develop what David Livermore calls cultural intelligence, CQ. (The term is not original with him.) (See: http://davidlivermore.com/ for Livermore’s information and resources on Cultural Intelligence.)

CQ is a meta model which provides a coherent framework for dealing with the array of issues involved in crossing various cultures at the same time. CQ deals with people and circumstances in unfamiliar contexts on a daily, continuing basis. CQ also measures our ability to move seamlessly in and out of a variety of cultural contexts that we will encounter by merely being present in any North American city.

Basically, as outlined by Livermore, cultural intelligence (CQ) consists of four different factors:

• “Knowledge CQ” refers to our understanding cross-cultural issues; it measures our ongoing growth in understanding in cross-cultural issues. It refers to our level of understanding about culture and culture’s role in shaping behavior and social interactions.

• “Interpretive CQ” measures our ability to be mindful and aware as we interact with people from different cultural contexts. It helps us intuitively to understand what occurs in an actual cross-cultural encounter; it is the ability to accurately make meaning from what we observe. Interpretative CQ calls for a reflective, contemplative mindset, which mitigates against the zealous, activist approach permeating much of American evangelicalism, where thinking and reflection are often disparaged at the expense of getting things done.

• “Perseverance CQ,” or motivational CQ, indicates our level of interest, drive, and motivation to adapt cross culturally; in other words, Perseverance CQ is our intentionality. And finally,

• “Behavioral CQ” refers to the ability to observe, recognize, regulate, adapt, and act appropriately in intercultural settings; how we behave in such settings.

It might be easier to adapt our message, our curriculum, and our programs, but adapting ourselves is the far greater challenge. CQ provides us with a mechanism by which we gauge our commitment and level of cultural interaction and contextualization. What does it look like to contextualize ourselves to the various cultures where we find ourselves in a given time and place? What do we do when we encounter the Other and how do we react to her or him? That is the challenge we face, the challenge you will face as you venture out to minister in the name of Jesus in the multiethnic, multicultural society he has called you to.

Ministry in Context

At GCTS, CUME has grappled with these realities for decades, determining to provide contextualized theological education in its holistic dimensions—evangelism and social justice, theology and praxis. In doing so, CUME has structured itself to be in the city, of the city, and for the city.

Contextualization may connote different images to many people, but the clearest theological image of contextualization may be found in the Incarnation. In the life of Jesus Christ, coming to dwell on earth in physical, bodily form, we see God dwelling among us—pitching his tent with us. Contextualizing an educational endeavor in the midst of a city means expressing an “urban kenosis”—emptying oneself for the service of others. The theology, curriculum, teaching methods, and academic policies are informed by the context of ministry—by the city and its constituencies.

---

ALVIN PADILLA, Ph.D. (former) Dean of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, the Center for Urban Ministerial Education; Dean of Hispanic Ministries; Associate Professor of New Testament. Dr. Padilla has a B.S. from Villanova University; a Master of Divinity degree from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary; and a Ph.D. from Drew University Graduate School. He came to Gordon-Conwell after five years teaching biblical studies at Nyack College in New York. Prior to that, he founded and taught at the Spanish Eastern School of Theology in Swan Lake, NY, for seven years. He has also served as pastor of the Fort Washington Heights Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in New York City, a Spanish-speaking congregation. In his work as Dean of the Center for Urban Ministerial Education, he oversees the educational programs of CUME, including Masters and Doctor of Ministry degrees. Dr. Padilla is an ordained minister in the PCUSA and holds professional memberships in the American Academy of Religion, the Society of Biblical Literature, and the Asociación para la Educación Teológica Hispana. [ed. Dr. Padilla is at Western Theological Seminary as of 2017.]

Resources and Links

Urban Ministry Training Systems in Metro Boston

The following is a sampling of urban ministry training systems currently operating in Metro Boston [in 2010]. The list is divided into four categories: Lay Training Centers, Pastoral Training Centers, Bible Schools and Christian Colleges, and Accredited Divinity Schools. (Because of its diverse offerings for students at different levels of academic and professional backgrounds, Gordon-Conwell’s CUME program is listed in three of the four sections.)

Lay Training Centers

1. Células, Congregación León De Judá (Cells at Lion of Judah Church), Pastor Gregory Bishop, www.leondejuda.org/es/taxonomy/term/69

Our cells are one of the most exciting ministries of our church. These are small groups of people gathering in homes, universities and work place for worship, Bible study, prayer and ministry to one another as needed, to evangelize and offer mutual support. They offer a great opportunity to introduce nonbelievers to the fundamental principles of the gospel.

2. Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Center for Urban Ministerial Education (CUME) Lay Ministry Training and Diploma Programs, Eldin Villafañe, www.gordonconwell.edu/boston/cume_lay_ministry_training_and_diploma_programs

CUME seeks to serve the larger community by offering a variety of non-degree certificate programs. Each certificate spans approximately one academic year with a multiplicity of educational experiences:

• Urban Christian Streetworkers Certificate Programs: CUME offers a unique program of study for the training and equipping of men and women reaching out to the youth at risk in our cities. The program spans eight workshops/courses over two semesters.

• Diploma in Foundational Christian Studies: CUME offers a ten-course, modular program of study leading to a Diploma in Christian Studies. The program provides the student with a basic overview of theological education for ministry and consists of nine (9) required courses and one (1) elective. The Diploma in Foundational Christian Studies may be applied toward coursework in one of the M.A. degrees or the M.Div. degree once a student is accepted to one of those degrees. Credit determination will be made by the admissions committee.

• Diploma in Urban Ministry: CUME offers a ten-course program of study leading to a Diploma in Urban Ministry. The program focuses on the essentials and practical training of benefit to the urban practitioner. This program of study seeks to provide the urban practitioner with theological and biblical reflection on his/her call to ministry and the nature of that ministry. Five (5) courses comprise an urban theological core. Four (4) courses are taken in a particular concentration area with the remaining one (1) course taken as an elective. Particular emphasis is given to the equipping of these men and women for a holistic ministry in the city. The diploma is awarded upon the completion of ten (10) courses.

3. Institute for Christian Leadership, Mario Antonio da Silva, www.leadershiptrainingcenter.org

The certificate program in Lay Pastoral Ministry is designed for Christian men and women interested in evangelism and church development. It is a program for those who want to expand their knowledge, faith, spirituality, and leadership abilities. This program serves as a means of preparation for those seeking to serve as lay ministers according to their churches' affiliations. The LPM Program is a rich learning environment for personal development, spiritual growth and practical training in Christian ministry. It is sponsored by the Presbytery of Boston, PCUSA.

 4. Urban Academy (URBACAD), Paul Bothwell, www.urbacad.org  

URBACAD provides lay people with discipleship and leadership training that is practical, culturally relevant, flexible, accessible, and solid. It emphasizes the vital nature of ministry through the local church by centering its training in and around the local church. Materials are in many languages.

Pastoral Training Centers

1. Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, the Center for Urban Ministerial Education (CUME), Eldin Villafañe, www.gordonconwell.edu/boston_admissions

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Boston campus, also known as the Center for Urban Ministerial Education (CUME), is particularly focused on equipping urban pastors and church leaders for more effective ministry and outreach in their own communities and throughout the world. CUME also serves in a support capacity by providing resources, ministerial fellowship, and stimulation for cross-denominational endeavors in evangelism and church growth.

The Doctor of Ministry (D. Min.) is the highest professional degree for men and women already successfully engaged in ministry. The M.Div. or its equivalent is a prerequisite degree for entrance into the program. The D. Min. enables leaders in Christian ministry to increase their effectiveness in the church, parachurch organization, or mission in which they minister. The degree is designed to help students improve their skills and understandings in urban ministry to such an extent that they can impact their congregation or community more powerfully for God. Over a three-year period, participants spend two weeks per year in residency on campus. Over the course of the year, they carry out practical, residency-related assignments in their own context and also do the extensive reading required for the next residency. The program concludes over the fourth year with participants designing and implementing a thesis/project which serves to culminate their learning experience.

2. Instituto para la Excelencia Pastoral (Institute for Pastoral Excellence), www.excelenciapastoral.net

Instituto para la Excelencia Pastoral strives to strengthen the Hispanic pastor of New England by providing them with the knowledge, skills and skills demanded by today’s pastoral practice, strengthening the capacity of lay leaders accompanying him on his work and contributing to the integration of the pastoral family.

Bible Schools and Christian Colleges           

1. Boston Baptist College, David Melton, www.boston.edu

At the heart of every academic program at Boston Baptist College is the study of Scripture. While collegiate general education is offered, as is an array of instruction in the practical skills of Christian ministry, all programs require a major in Biblical Studies. Within the Boston Baptist College family there is complete unity in the confession of the Bible as God’s inerrant Word and the challenge to understand truth in all disciplines through the context of the divine revelation.

2. Eastern Nazarene College, Corlis McGee www1.enc.edu/

Located on Boston’s historic south shore, within walking distance of Quincy Bay, Eastern Nazarene College (ENC) recently celebrated its 100th birthday. A fully accredited traditional liberal arts college, ENC has about 1,075 students distributed across a traditional residential undergraduate program, adult studies, and a graduate program. ENC is known for its success in getting students into top graduate and medical schools and has a 100 percent acceptance rate for its students into Law School. While many faculty are active in publishing and research, and some are leaders in their fields, the emphasis is on the teaching and mentoring of students in a nurturing, spiritually informed, and academically supportive environment. Students are encouraged to travel, engage in service learning projects, and participate in praxis experiences as a part of their education. ENC is one of 160 members of the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities (CCCU).

3. Gordon College: Clarendon Scholars, R, Judson Carlberg, www.gordon.edu/newcityscholars

The Gordon College Clarendon Scholars program offers full scholarships to 10 students each year from city settings to attend Gordon, and provides support systems to encourage their success. The Scholars are identified through relationships the College has built with city-based organizations throughout (but not limited to) the East Coast, such as Emmanuel Gospel Center's Boston Education Collaborative in Boston. Through mentoring relationships, training and peer support, the students are helped to make the transition to college and given leadership experience to help ensure their success.

4. Zion Bible College, Charles Crabtree, www.zbc.edu

Zion Bible College in Providence exists to teach and train students for Pentecostal ministry, in fulfillment of the Great Commission.

Accredited Divinity Schools

1. Boston Theological Institute (BTI), Rodney Petersen, www.bostontheological.org.

The Boston Theological Institute (BTI) is an association of nine university divinity schools, schools of theology, and seminaries in the Greater Boston area, including:

• Andover Newton Theological School

• Boston College School of Theology and Ministry

• Boston College Theology Department

• Boston University School of Theology

• Episcopal Divinity School

• Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary

• Harvard Divinity School

• Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology

• Saint John’s Seminary

BTI is registered as a tax-exempt 501c3 organization. It is one of the oldest and largest theological consortia in the world. It includes as constitutive members schools representing the full range of Christian churches and confessions. Additionally, persons representing other religious traditions are present in many of our schools. The BTI is not a degree granting institution, but coordinates various administrative, program and academic activities so as to enhance the work of the member schools.

Helping Urban Churches Motivate & Support Underserved Students

BEC: Helping Urban Churches Motivate & Support Underserved Students

Perhaps because Boston is home to over 50 colleges and universities (inside the I-95 belt), or perhaps because education has always been an important value in the New England culture, the desire to give our children a good education remains a top priority for Bostonians. And today it’s not just parents, educators, and politicians who focus on education, but urban churches and faith-based nonprofits also have education on their minds. Churches in Boston are looking for ways to motivate and support students in their communities, wanting to help them gain the skills they need to become successful, responsible individuals who have a positive impact on the city. And EGC is looking for ways to help churches meet these important goals.

Building upon research and needs assessment studies at EGC, the Boston Education Collaborative (BEC) was founded to support urban churches and organizations in strengthening their existing education programs, starting new initiatives, and evaluating the short- and long-term impact of their programs. To do this, we also have added a couple new initiatives—coordinating learning groups, and organizing peer trainings for Christians involved in education.

NEW RESEARCH

Over the past few years there have been shifts in the ways the BEC supports churches in educating their children as well as transitions as in our program staff, so we have used these changes as an opportunity to get a fresh start, to understand the needs and dreams of churches today, and to discern how we can best serve churches in meeting their objectives. This past year, the BEC conducted surveys to increase our understanding of the current education landscape and to provide insight into real leverage points and strategies to help churches best engage in education.

From the nearly 50 surveys gathered so far, we found that half the churches surveyed already offer programs geared toward education, with tutoring and extracurricular programs the most common. Most churches are saying that the greatest challenges to education faced by the people in their communities are financial aid for college, academic tutoring, and getting into college. Two other areas that many churches say need more attention are parent involvement and mentoring.

BUILDING BRIDGES FOR SHARED LEARNING

At the beginning of the last school year, the BEC planted a few seedlings. We began growing learning communities among people working at churches and Christian nonprofits as a way to encourage a spirit of mutual learning and support. We are not ignoring the needs identified by the churches, but neither are we taking the position of solution providers. Rather, we would like to see these churches build collaboration as a way to support each other and share insights as they address the needs they see. So the first thing we did was to launch what we call “Reflection & Learning Sessions.” These informal groups meet quarterly, and provide attendees with space to reflect on their work as well as the opportunity for peer fellowship and networking. Secondly, we launched two topic-specific “Learning Groups” last March to offer practical tools and resources that participants can use for tackling challenges in their work. So far, these gatherings have brought together over 40 different individuals who represent over 20 churches or faith-based organizations. Feedback has been very positive, and attendees say that these sessions are meeting their churches’ needs and providing them with practical, emotional, and spiritual support.

WHAT’S NEXT?

Where do we go from here? We will continue to convene and support a growing network of Christian leaders for reflection, learning, prayer, peer support, and coordinated action in education. We have started and we will continue to conduct youth focus groups to learn about the youth’s educational experiences and their perspectives about the role that churches can play in addressing educational needs. And we will be more intentional about bridging churches to each other, as well as introducing them to secular agencies that can serve as resources, to the school systems, and to other Christian, education-focused nonprofits.

If you would like more information about the BEC, contact Ruth Wong, director, Boston Education Collaborative, at rwong@egc.org or at 617-262-4567 x194. Visit https://www.egc.org/education/.

by Steve Daman

When the Faith of Our Fathers Collides with the Culture of our Children

While it is the nature of teens to consider their parents to be “out of touch” and the nature of older people to complain about the younger generation, the biblical mandate to pass the faith on to our children becomes extremely difficult in immigrant communities where younger people rapidly assimilate into a culture very different from their parents’. While this is not a new issue, to those experiencing the conflict, it is an issue that seems to threaten the very future of their faith.

In July, 2008, Drew Winkler, a Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary graduate, began working at EGC with Pastor Soliny Védrine, director of EGC’s Haitian Ministries International, sharing concerns, praying, and thinking about vision together. Because Drew has always had a heart for youth ministry, he was especially attentive to issues related to Haitian youth. One issue that grabbed his attention was the apparent growing divide between first generation Haitians (those who were born in Haiti and immigrated to the U.S. as adults) and second generation Haitians (children of first generation Haitians, born and raised in the U.S.).

Second generation Haitian youth don’t feel incorporated into their parents’ Haitian churches, and many of them look for other churches where they feel more at home. “Sometimes these youth will attend a non-Haitian church, such as Jubilee Christian Church in Mattapan, a predominately Black church that has many Haitian congregants. Other times the youth will leave the church altogether,” Drew says. Drew began discussing his concerns with his wife, Sherly, a 1.5 generation Haitian (someone born in Haiti but raised in the U.S.) and with their 1.5 and second-generation Haitian friends. He began to watch for the issue wherever he went.

In May 2009, Drew got the green light to begin in-depth research as part of his work at EGC. Drew jumped into the work with a lot of enthusiasm and a lot of plans for doing focus groups and conducting other forms of research, but all this was shelved once he realized that before he could study the Haitian community, he needed to first build strong relationships with Haitian pastors and leaders, both stateside and abroad. So Drew shadowed Pastor Sol, met with local Haitian pastors, and last year, accompanied Sol on trips to The Bahamas and the Dominican Republic, meeting Haitian leaders and youth there.

At the end of the summer, Drew began helping a local Haitian pastor with English language needs. In the process, Drew unexpectedly learned more about the perspective and values of first generation Haitians. Like many first generation Haitians, this pastor’s focus is to help Haitians come to the U.S. and understand the culture, find jobs, and learn how to become a part of society. The church’s work with the youth in their congregation focuses on helping newcomers and their children understand the language and navigate the school system. Drew’s understanding of dynamics in the Haitian church in Boston began to deepen as he worked with this pastor. “Even though we didn’t specifically talk about the second generation, just seeing the pastor’s focus and vision was really eye-opening,” he says. “There was definitely a need in his church which they were meeting.” But Drew was concerned that the church was unintentionally overlooking the needs of second generation Haitian youth.

Drew meets often with a young Haitian man working in the church community. They talk about issues they encounter, and especially first and second generation issues. “Because I have the unique perspective of being inside and outside, I’m able to help him think through decisions he’s making,” Drew says. “I can also challenge him by saying, ‘Hey, this is what first generation leaders are upset with, and you’re not purposely doing it, but this is how it can be taken.’”

After more than a year building relationships, Drew was ready to revisit some of the goals he had when he began, like organizing focus groups, or gathering leaders. But then came the earthquake, and the priorities for ministry suddenly changed. It is too soon to tell where Drew will go with this research. Meanwhile, he continues to build relationships with Haitians of all ages as they daily respond to the new pressures brought on by January’s tragedy.

by Grace Lee

Intro to Hexagoning: Groups Listening to Their Own Social System

Intro to Hexagoning: Groups Listening to Their Own Social System

by Doug and Judy Hall

Sometimes a group of people who are grappling with an issue that is relevant to all of them need to be able to “see” their issue in a clearer way, to hear their own system speak. Judy and I often use a facilitated group brainstorming technique called hexagoning to help achieve that. The process is called hexagoning because one of the primary tools used in the exercise is hexagon-shaped.

Hexagoning: a facilitated open mapping process used to develop the conscious thought process of a group to understand complex systems, to create shared vision, and to identify systemically derived and thus aligned action plans.

Briefly, hexagoning involves evoking all the variables everyone can think of around the topic or issue at hand. There are always many, many variables that people can think of, usually at least 40. One group had 300! The more variables, the better picture they get of the interrelated complexities of the issue.

But the multiplicity of variables soon becomes overwhelming to the group. To address this complexity we have the group put the variables into categories so they can better deal with them. As each category is named in a way that reminds the group of all the variables it contains, and written on a board for all to see, the group soon has a pretty good visual picture of the larger issue it is addressing.

We find that usually this shared vision has been invisible to the group before this exercise, or if not entirely invisible, it has never been well defined. This process brings it out where all can see it.

This group is using large, rectangular Post-It Notes to accomplish the same thing.

At the Emmanuel Gospel Center, we have done hexagoning sessions at least a hundred times with many different kinds of groups in different cultures, in both urban and suburban settings, in large and small churches, with community groups and leadership teams, with gatherings of people interested in a common goal, and on a wide variety of topics. It seems to work effectively with all groups, and serves to surface ideas that are aligned with living systems.

I will take a few pages just to introduce you to the process. If you are interested in using it in your setting, you will be able to learn more at our website or from other sources.

What’s the question?

The first step in the hexagoning exercise is to come up with the one key question that you plan to present to the group.

If, for example, you have been asked to help a church leadership team clarify their goals for neighborhood outreach, you would meet with some of the church leaders to try to understand the problem from their perspective and draft the question. You might suggest a question such as, “What are the greatest felt needs in our neighborhood?”, and allow the leadership team to help refine the question to best elicit the kinds of responses that will help reveal what the group collectively thinks.

Some questions I have seen used in the past are:

• What are the really good things about this ministry that we don’t want to lose?

• What can be done to produce racial reconciliation among Christians? (The group was also asked to respond to this: What are the hindrances to producing racial reconciliation among Christians?)

• How can we work together as a team? (The group could also respond to: What hinders teamwork in our organization?)

• What would an ideal youth ministry look like here at First Congregational Church? (This question was first asked of the church leadership, and, at a later session, of the youth themselves.)

Initial large group hexagoning process

Next, meet with the entire group in a comfortable setting, perhaps around tables, and where everyone can see a white board. Write the question down where all can see it.

Give time for everyone to respond, first by insisting that each person, working on his or her own, write down three responses to the question on paper. Once everyone has had time to write, then start to go around the group, letting each person verbally give just one answer.

The secretary or scribe for the exercise will write each response in a summary or headline form on a single hexagon. Hexagons are available in a magnetic form suitable for dry erase markers and adhering to a magnetic white board, or in a Post-it® note format which you can write on with a marker and adhere to the wall or chalkboard. The designated secretary will put a consecutive identifying number at the top of one of the points of the hexagon, and place it on the board or wall.

If the group is processing both negative and positive answers, keep those separate from each other, putting all the positive responses in one place and the negative in another.

Depending on the size of your group—and we find this works with groups from ten to sixty people—go around more than once, possibly three times, so that everyone speaks several times. This method helps to encourage those who might not offer answers in an unstructured discussion due to shyness.

After everyone has shared, ask if anything is missing. Give suggestions. When everyone is satisfied, the next step is to organize the responses.

Group the hexagons into categories

The facilitator leads the group in putting all the answers into categories. Ask participants to call out which numbered hexagons are related. Someone will say, “Number 3, mutual respect, is like number 35, respecting differences.”

The secretary or facilitator will move those two hexagons together so that one side from each is touching. Continue the process of combining similar thoughts and ideas until there are four to eight clear groups or clusters of hexagons.

Next, ask the participants to name the clusters. The name should be a short action phrase with a verb that describes the dynamic of all the items in that cluster, not just a topic heading.

For example, a cluster might be called “Holding boundaries,” or “Being flexible,” or “Celebrate interracial reconciliation,” or “Unwillingness to move out of our comfort zone.” Circle the clusters and write the label directly on the whiteboard.

When everyone is satisfied with the results, then make new hexagons with the names of the clusters, and move those to a clean space.

Interrelate the clusters; infer causation

Ask the group, “From these new hexagons, what comes first? What causes or leads to what?” Move the hexagon categories around as people explore the causal connections.

When the group is fairly sure of the connections, draw arrows on the board showing what causes what, how the categories interconnect in their causal interactions. Look for causes, not logical connections. You may have more than one arrow coming out of or pointing to a category, as relationships are complex.

What you now have is the beginning of a causal loop diagram. The causal loop diagram will provide an entry point for where to begin to take action. If you start at the right place, one event causes the development of the next.

Meet with your learning team

Take the results of this exercise back to the learning team. Verbalize the “story” as represented by the arrows in your initial interrelated diagram. Adjust the relationships until every point in the loop contributes to a coherent story.

The whole interrelated diagram should make sense overall. If there is anything that seems to be left out, feel free to add additional cluster names to make sense of the story.

The next step we take is to identify and number the loops and determine which ones are “balancing loops” and which are “reinforcing loops.” Explaining these is beyond the scope of this post. But this is a process to determine how the causal momentum moves around the diagram.

Then we isolate the key topics, generally the ones with the most arrows coming in or out of them or which appear to be leverage points. We limit the variables in the final loop to seven or fewer.

FINAL OBSERVATIONS

• The learning team may then explore biblical parallels to our narrative of the interrelationships, and write this up.

• We then describe the practical implications of what we have learned thus far.

• We report back to the initial group for feedback.

If done well, this total process produces social revelation showing how the social system itself operates to get a task done.

Indeed there is much more to this process, but hopefully you get the idea. Over time, the learning team can reduce all this learning into its simplest form so that it can be remembered and applied by everyone in the system.

LEARN MORE

Hexagons: From Ideas to Variables

To order hexagon pads, visit ThinkingTools.net.

Spiritual, Social and Systemic Conversion

Christians need to change. Sometimes that change is so radical, we could call it conversion. But how can those who have been converted be converted all over again? Here, Dr. Hall talks about three types of conversion, a spiritual, social, and systemic conversion. Using examples from his own life, he explains how each type of transformation was needed for him to do ministry effectively, and all three types of change were empowered by the redemption won by Jesus Christ on the cross.

by Dr. Doug Hall
September, 2009

Do the converted need conversion?

In the message to the Laodiceans in Revelation 3, it seems as though Christ is encouraging people who were already Christians to be converted! He is preaching redemption to the redeemed. Why would Jesus ask Christians to repent in such strong language? Why would he ask those he declares to be poor to “buy” something from him? And why would he tell Christians he is outside some door knocking to come in? This text is full of mystery!

I have just recently realized that I have had a wrong premise in writing this book. I kept asking myself, “How can the reader apply the material in this book?” And I have been expecting that the readers would first gain an intellectual grasp of the concepts and then apply that understanding to their life experiences.

But just the other day, a good friend, Dr. Bobby Bose, reminded me that it didn’t work that way for me. I didn’t begin my journey into living system ministry with intellectual understanding, so why should I expect you to find that as your entry point to a new level of ministry?

Then Bobby asked me, “How did you get converted to the way you do things?” What an interesting way to put it. As we talked, I realized that for me it really took a conversion experience, and I think this may be what is needed for you as well.

In the first few verses of his letter to Laodicea, Jesus calls the Laodicean Christians “poor, blind and miserable,” as though they had a need of redemption and needed to be saved. Next, he counsels them to buy gold, white clothes, and eye salve, symbolizing confession, forgiveness, and new life, also redemptive concepts. It sounds like he is saying that these saved people need redemption! Then he asks them to repent. Soon he is knocking outside the door of the Christian. Why is Christ outside the door of the believer’s heart? You would think this text would be about the unbeliever.

The fact that this seems to be a contradiction shows us that we are not conditioned to understand this text with the way we usually think about things as Western Christians. If we did understand it properly, not only would the seeming contradictions disappear, but also we would discover a different, higher level of understanding of God’s truth.

I think Christ is saying that although the Laodicean believers were converted and already redeemed, they needed to experience a fuller understanding of conversion and redemption. We are like that too. We have experienced one level of redemption, but there are other aspects that we have not experienced. I think Jesus is calling us to convert to full redemption.

As I talked with Bobby about how I had been converted to the way I do ministry, I thought about “three types” of conversion, and it seemed to me that I had undergone each one in some strategic experiences in my own life. Perhaps Jesus is calling us all to three conversions—a spiritual, social, and systemic conversion. Our initial spiritual conversion can give us some insight into how the other areas work.

I first experienced a vertical, spiritual conversion when I became a believer, a follower of Christ. Christians are familiar with spiritual conversion: a bending of our will to God, a calling out to him in repentance for forgiveness and cleansing from sin through a substitutionary atonement, and an acknowledgment that we want to begin walking through life with him.

Later, following my spiritual conversion, I needed and experienced a cultural (or perhaps I could call this a “social”) conversion from the limitations of my own culture to a love for other cultures. In this conversion, I found myself hungry to know about how the Gospel is expressed in other cultures.

A cultural or social conversion

We tend to get spiritual things and cultural things confused. This was true for me. Before I was a Christian, I was a Michigan Norwegian Lutheran. I believe that one of the reasons I was initially hindered from experiencing a real spiritual conversion as a young person was that I had confused what my actual faith was about with what my culture was telling me my faith should be. I finally realized that my culture reflected some things about my faith, but not enough for me to truly have a spiritual conversion. In time, I learned to parse the difference between what was my faith and what was my cultural expression of my faith. This gave me a hunger to discover how other cultures express the same biblical faith.

When I finally found the reality of my faith apart from my culture, and began to see new facets of Christianity expressed in other cultures, I wanted to learn more. I wanted to see the faith reflected in as many cultures as possible, with the belief that each culture could give me another important focus that I had not seen in my original culture. So, as an extension or continuation of my spiritual conversion experience, I also had a social conversion which caused me to see how different cultures were helpful in understanding my faith. No single culture was adequate to tell me all I needed to know about Christ. My own early experience was not in a first-generation immigrant, storefront church, but such churches taught me much about the spontaneous expansion of the faith that was possible in an urban environment. I am not Pentecostal, but Pentecostal Christian friends have taught me how to do my Christianity in a vital and fruitful way. I am not part of a holy order of some liturgical church, but many people who are in such orders have taught me how to see the poor as Jesus himself, how, as he explained it, when I do something for the least of these, I have done it to him. They teach me to see in new ways, to see that people are not to be seen as categorically poor, or addicts, or street people, but as Jesus himself.

This social conversion empties me of paternalism in ministry. I learned to maintain my own cultural identity but develop the ability to have a Process of the Gospel experience where I relevantly communicate and participate with people of other cultures in the meeting of their perceived and basic needs.

The list of other cultural groups who ministered to me and showed me a new way of looking at my faith can go on and on. Today, EGC interrelates with over 100 denominations and over 100 ethnic groups, and people who worship Jesus in 600 churches around Boston in 30 different languages. The Quiet Revival was an invisible movement of God, until we became socially converted to see it with the eyes of faith, and eventually identified it so we could talk about it and show it to others.

Yet, when I talk about cultural or social conversion, I think it will resonate with you because you have already experienced a conversion in the spiritual realm. Those of us in modern society need more than a spiritual conversion, the one that takes us to heaven. Because God’s redemptive design includes people who are not like us, people from every nation, language and tribe, we may need to be converted to the social aspect of God’s redemption.

A systemic conversion

In the course of my early ministry in the city, Judy and I began to experience a third type of conversion, a systemic conversion. A systemic conversion takes me beyond my personal spiritual redemption experience to learning how God’s redemption also extends to other aspects of life as well. On a micro scale, this means that Jesus is able through his redemptive power to supply healing of people’s bodies. On a macro scale, this means Jesus is able through his redemptive power to heal neighborhoods, communities, cities, and other large social systems. As Christ overcame sin through his victorious and sufficient death and resurrection, God is working out his redemptive plan right now to the ultimate end of bringing everything under the feet of Christ. And all this was made possible by the cross.

To confine redemptive activity to the spiritual realm is to miss the truth of Romans 8:22. “We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.” Systemic conversion relates to our ability to embrace the whole created system—the spiritual, social, and physical dimensions of life. I believe it is in God’s heart to redeem our physical world and our social world, as he also provides spiritual redemption. We have to be careful not to elevate the spiritual above the physical. God created the physical world, and he is still a part of it. Christ was God and man, and he lived on earth in a social environment. God was not contaminated by sin from a physical body or by living in a social environment. The contamination came from sin, not earth. Our sin was placed upon him who was perfect, so he could pay the penalty of our sin.

My systemic conversion has really changed me and the way I think and the way I do ministry. I have moved from an organizational/technological thinking process to an organic thinking process that I find is more in tune with what God creates, rather than with what humans create. I begin to understand how social/spiritual realities—families, churches, ethnic systems, even the church universal—operate organically as complex, interrelated living systems, far above our normal understanding of organizational order. After we have experienced a systemic conversion, we can begin to see what scripture means when it speaks of the church as an organism. It is in organic ministry that we learn how to not only know truth, but to do it! Organizational Christianity cannot do truth, but organic Christianity can do truth. Seeing the organic nature of social systems shows us a higher level of very complex order that far exceeds organizational levels of order.

So back to the Laodiceans. The church in Laodicean was a mature church. While spiritual conversion had already taken place for the Laodiceans, making them believers, Christ wrote to them to say they needed more. I believe that Christians need total redemption that extends beyond our spiritual conversion and salvation experience if we are to be involved in the full redemptive activity that God is doing in our world today. His total redemption will ultimately produce not only individual believers destined for heaven, but a whole new heaven and a new earth in which we will eternally reside! The old things will pass away, and the new things, including the physical and social things, will be made new.

For more, check out Dr. Hall's 2010 book, The Cat & The Toaster, Living System Ministry in a Technological Age. Copies are available at the EGC office in Boston at a reduced price (walk-in only, no shipping available).

Cambodian Ministries

From Killing Fields to Living Fields: The Cambodian Ministries of the Emmanuel Gospel Center

The Killing Fields of the Cambodian holocaust that took place from 1975 to 1979 under the leadership of the Khmer Rouge left over a million dead and led to a flood of refugees fleeing from Cambodia. Many escaped from this horrific event to neighboring countries, while others sought safety around the world. A portion of the refugees came to the United States in the early 1980s in an attempt to start their lives afresh. Today, the Greater Boston area has the second highest concentration of Cambodians in America, some estimating as many as 30,000, with the majority living in Lynn, just 10 miles north of Boston, and Lowell, 30 miles to the northwest.

Like most refugees, those coming from Cambodia had little or no resources and struggled to learn the language and find employment. The lack of economic opportunity led to a concentration of poverty in which the next generation of Cambodians grew up. This is a community with many hardships and little or no exposure to the Gospel, a plentiful harvest potential that simply requires a few willing servants.

It was out of this great need that a collaborative effort was undertaken by Grace Chapel of Lexington, Mass., EGC, and the Cambodian Christian community. This eventually gave rise to EGC’s Cambodian Ministries, with Pastor PoSan Ung serving as Minister-at-Large. Pastor PoSan felt a call to reach out to his people with the love of Christ and was especially suited to do just that. Originally from Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Pastor PoSan came to the United States in February 1982 at the age of 10, after having survived the brutal reign of the Khmer Rouge. His spiritual journey began in an unlikely place. “We went from refugee camp to refugee camp from mid-’79 until we got to America in ’82,” recalls Pastor PoSan, “spending most of the time in Thailand at the UNICEF refugee camp. That’s where we ran into missionaries, and I had a chance to study with them.” PoSan’s mother wanted both she and PoSan to learn English, hoping that it would increase their chances of being admitted into the United States, so they began to attend Sunday worship and Sunday school classes with the missionaries. Not only did PoSan begin to speak English, he also learned of the love of Jesus Christ.

In the United States, PoSan worked hard at school, and upon graduation from high school enrolled at Brown University to study biochemistry. He hoped to become a doctor, remembering all the good done by doctors in the refugee camps. “It was in college when the Lord took me all over again to the basics in my faith and…I grew out of my childhood faith into an adult faith,” explains PoSan. Then in his junior year at Brown, he experienced a call to ministry. What seemed to be “just another Friday night Bible study” became a crossroads in his life. “I felt God call me to give up my medical aspiration and go into ministry full time.”

Following this conviction in his heart, PoSan moved to Boston in 1995. From 1996-1997 he was a youth worker with Cambodians through Tremont Temple Baptist Church before answering a call to serve as the English-ministry pastor for the Revere Cambodian Evangelical Church. He then worked with New Covenant Presbyterian Church as a church planter until 2000, when the Lord opened the door for him to be Minister-at-Large to the Cambodian community with the Emmanuel Gospel Center. Pastor PoSan felt a strong call to foster unity among Christians serving Cambodians across New England, and to call together the leadership of these churches.

The partnerships that Pastor PoSan has formed are the core of his work as Cambodian Minister-at-Large. He works both to bring together Cambodian churches and leaders as well as to connect them to the broader Christian community in New England. An active participant in this networking continues to be Grace Chapel in Lexington, and Pastor PoSan is always looking for additional churches to come alongside this Kingdom work. In 2000, the Christian Cambodian American Fellowship (CCAF) was started to bring together church leaders who work with the Cambodian community, and for the past seven years Pastor PoSan has served on the leadership team of the CCAF, acting as Chair for the past four.

“God continued to open up my ministry opportunities,” Pastor PoSan says. Beyond leadership development and encouraging churches, new church planting became an important focus. He felt that the Cambodian Americans, especially the one-and-a-half [those who immigrated to the U.S. as children] and second-generation Cambodians, needed a healthy, thriving church. In 2004, he planted a church in Lynn to address this need, appropriately called Living Fields. This “harvest of the living people, not dead in sin,” as PoSan says, continued the work of bringing new hope to the Cambodian community through the promises found in Christ.

Throughout the different initiatives of EGC’s Cambodian Ministries—whether it’s convening pastors, doing an outreach event, or starting a church—Pastor PoSan’s focus remains on three key areas: leadership training, partnership building, and evangelism. In addition to his work with CCAF, Pastor PoSan, along with Rev. Dr. Gregg Detwiler, director of EGC’s Intercultural Ministries, has co-taught a bilingual course at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary’s Center for Urban Ministerial Education (CUME) aimed at serving the Cambodian community. He is also involved in pastoral training back in Cambodia. In 2004, he helped to bring Asian Access, an interdenominational evangelical church development organization, to Cambodia, and he serves as the organization’s Cambodia Country Resource Person. Both Cambodian and non-Cambodian pastors travel with PoSan to Cambodia to learn how best to support the churches there and also serve the Cambodian community in the United States. There they work to foster networking and leadership development, wanting to engage churches in “Kingdom-level ministry to foster a Kingdom vision,” Pastor PoSan explains. He has also been able to collect Khmer language ministry material during his mission trips in Cambodia, to better reach out to Cambodians in Greater Boston who know little or no English.

Evangelism is central to EGC’s Cambodian Ministries. Pastor PoSan is passionate about helping people come to a realization of what we all truly are in our fallen states and of the offer of forgiveness found in Christ. This is evident in all of the outreach efforts of Pastor PoSan and his volunteer team, whether it’s the homework center run out of the Living Fields office space, the music and English lessons offered, or the clothing closet and food pantry they operate. Outreach to Cambodian youth, young people in the one-and-a-half and second generations, remains a focal point of Pastor PoSan’s ministry.

The need to serve the new generations has resulted in a collaborative ministry effort as Cambodian Ministries works with area churches, such as the First Baptist Church of Lynn, to put on a Vacation Bible School (VBS) for Cambodian children in both Lynn and Lowell. Unlike typical VBS recruitment, which usually occurs months in advance through church signups, Cambodian Ministries has to deal with the reality that many in the Cambodian community are not Christians and do not attend church. Youth from Living Fields and partnering churches go door-to-door to extend an invitation to VBS. The churches’ youth are trained on how to approach families with the Gospel and an invitation to VBS to come hear more. This is no easy task, as the youth volunteers are often confronted with skepticism, suspicion, and even hostility. Yet every year, children from the community come, leaving with at least a seed of hope planted in their lives. Living Fields seeks to draw the families in on this process as well, offering a family dinner at the end of VBS. Scholarships are also offered to the vast majority of participants as an outreach tool, making VBS a reality for children for whom finances would be a barrier to hearing the message of Christ.

When asked about his vision for Cambodian Ministries, Pastor PoSan says it is to “see true disciples of Christ encompass genuine worship of God and live out their faith in life, demonstrating the awesome faith found in Christ—that unreasonable generosity found in the cross of Christ. It is unreasonable because we don’t deserve it—it’s just so big and lavish!”

To learn more, visit www.egc.org and www.livingfields.org.

by Sally Steele