Boost Your Cultural IQ

Many Colors: Cultural Intelligence for a Changing Church
Rah, Soong-Chan
Moody Publishers
August 24, 2010
208 pp., $11.46
As the nation heads toward a "majority minority" population, Soong-Chan Rah argues that the evangelical church will get there faster—and has a chance to be ahead of the curve in modeling a multicultural community. His new book, Many Colors: Cultural Intelligence for a Changing Church, offers some thoughts about what a multi-ethnic church can look like.
At what point does a church deserve to be called a multi-ethnic church instead of a monocultural church with some outsider members?
I think the strict sociological definition is 80 percent of one culture or ethnicity and 20 percent of another. I think that tends to be a little bit too generous, because even with 20 percent of another ethnic group, the dominant culture can still be dictated by the 80 percent. That's what I'm trying to get at in the book, that it really is more about ethos, it really is more about the larger sense of what is happening in the church. If you have many different cultures but one culture dominates, I would hesitate to call that a multicultural church.
So it's more a matter of mentality than numbers.
Mentality, attitude, approach. Multiethnic congregations have the sense of, "We are a church that is not only numerically diverse or demographically diverse, but also culturally diverse. We know how to appreciate different cultures that are a part of our church rather than [having] one group that dominates how business is done, how meetings are conducted, how worship is conducted."
What are some ways that multiethnic congregations could defuse situations where factionalism has split the church along cultural lines?
The cultural mix is going to be different from place to place. If we have answers for a church that is half white/half black, and we apply those same principles to a church that is half white/half Asian, then we're probably going to end up with a different answer and equation altogether. That's why I'm really advocating for cultural intelligence, an ability to understand how multiple cultures operate in multiple cultural contexts. It is not so much [about] the specific ways we handle conflict. It really is understanding how one group understands it and the other understands it. How do all these different groups interact with one another? Because that's also a different dynamic on top of that.
Different cultures can place different emphases on certain sins. How does a multiethnic congregation deal with sins in the body if diverse cultural groups have different feelings regarding their relative gravity?
I don't think there's a relativism when it comes to sin. Whatever goes against the will of God is a sin. In a multicultural context, people are coming from different angles on this. It doesn't mean that one is more right or less right than the other. It just means that we are now given an opportunity to have an insight into areas of sin that our cultural blinders might not have allowed us to see. It's not to say, "You're right, I'm wrong; I'm right, you're wrong." It really is to say, "What are we learning from each other?" We have an understanding of who God is, the way he deals with sin, from these multicultural contexts, and that's actually very positive. That's a gift that God gives to us here in the United States. We're challenged to see things in ways that we have not been able to see them in the past.

Grieving with the Good Friday God
La complejidad hispana: Todo cambió en el 2012

(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).












Comments
Displaying 13 of 9 comments
See all comments
Reading Even More Closely
I am not upping the ante, but responding to the claim by "reading closely" that "You're Kidding, Right?" misread Rah. Rah DID say, in print, "Before grace can be extended, forgiveness must be asked." When pressed that this did not address the heart of the offended person and Jesus's command to forgive, he continued, "The onus is on the offender to seek forgiveness." The "concrete historical reality" is namely this: the command to forgive on the part of the offended is as central to the Christian message as the command to seek forgiveness on the part of the oppressor. While many theologians address this reality directly, Rah only skirts it, even when pressed by an interviewer. The criticism lodged by "Your Kidding, Right?" is legitimate as it is based on Rah's published words. The charge of creating a "straw adversary" and intentionally misprepresenting the book is misplaced. The comments are on the interview.
reading closely
The comments here reflect that there was not a close reading of Dr. Rah's statements. In clarifying his comments, Rah said that grace can be extended unilaterally, however, that this does not remove the responsibility of people asking for forgiveness. In short, there are 2 reflections here; A) transcendent theological truth-- grace is unilaterally and unmeritedly extended, B) a historical concrete reality- forgiveness and repair should also be sought for us to live in "beloved community." These are not 2 irreconcileable truths. In short, he is saying something true about grace while simultaneously challenging people to confession and repentance. I think this was part of what worked in Truth Commission in South Africa. Commentators, please do not take sentences out of context to make a straw adversary. At best, it is poor reading of nuance and at worse it is intentional misrepresentation of the book as a whole.
grateful believer
I haven't read Rah's comments, but I would like to comment on this one: "Before grace can be extended, forgiveness must be asked." It is true that God made provision for our forgiveness at the Cross; He stands ready to forgive. It is also true that we must be willing to receive His forgiveness, that we must be humble and confess our sin, our need of Him. In human relationships, we should always forgive others who harm us, whether they ask forgiveness or not, and we should be ready at any moment to graciously extend forgiveness to them if they desire it. At the same time, if they are filled with ill will, hatred, malice, etc, toward us, if they refuse to admit any wrongdoing, there can be no real peace between us. I think this is reflected in Paul's admonition, "As much as lieth in you, live at peace with all men." There are men (and women) who simply won't live at peace with us. But we should always return good for evil at all times. ONLY the Holy Spirit can effect this in us