No Longer Strangers. Cultural Integration in Church and Society in Ireland.

Doctrine & Life Special Issue October and November 2006 pp 128

Tony Walsh: The Trauma of Cultural Displacement pp 8-14

“To become a refugee is to become dislocated, often separated violently from home, loved ones, work and community, and from all that is familiar and predictable. Physical, cultural, psychological and emotional displacement is at the heart of the experience.”

[...]

“In their new context there will be difficulties as they [the refugees] interact with officialdom, or experience threats, rejection and negativity form existing residents. At times, there will also be the attitudes of fellow refugees to contend with as they, acting out their own saga of pain and frustration, scapegoat vulnerable newcomers and vent their anger on them.”

[...]

“Sudden cultural or relational displacement can also create a huge perturbation through which we recognise that our former value systems are unshared in the new context, as well as no longer adequately in the task of making sense of the events of our life.”

[...]

“The challenge for refugees, then, is to engage in a process of recreating the self in a way that fits with the new society, with a view to creating personal stability and economic and social security. An essential part of this endeavour is to draw on the internal resources and potentials created by their whole life experience, and the resources and supports that can be marshalled within their new environment.”

Anne Ryan. Levels of Engagement between Cultures pp 15-23

“Many Church congregations, whose membership is increasingly culturally diverse, are grappling with decisions about how to create an environment that facilitates interaction between people from different cultural backgrounds.”

[...]

“An integration or assimilation approach seeks to eliminate differences. This is generally done by supporting or forcing minority cultures to abandon their ways and adopt the culture of the dominant group. [...]

Multiculturalism acknowledges the importance of difference and the need for people to be allowed to take pride in their cultural inheritance. In practice, it often leads to paralled development with little or no interaction between cultures. [...]

Interculturalism goes beyond multiculturalism by recognising the importance of retaining distinct identities while also seeking to promote greater understanding between different cultures. Exchanges between cultures can, however, remain at functional levels such as attending the same schools and churches [...].

Transculturalism [...] is about creating the conditions that allow all involved [...] to enter into a process that allows for understanding and change. Encounters of this nature involve on-going learning:

- learning how to engage;

- learning to take account of those factors that inhibit interactions; and

- learning to overcome these obstacles.

Transculturalism, is therefore about establishing and sustaining a community that is inclusive and cohesive.”

[...]

“As any group forms, or reforms to accomodate new members, it goes through cycles of ease and difficulty. Curiosity, tolerance, fear and hostility take precedence at different times. What makes for a good relationship is the willingness and the capacity of groups and individuals to communicate with each other.”

[...]

“Those who are not party to determining priorities and setting agendas cannot influence the direction of their community and are consequently unlikely to be able to sustain commitment to the on-going long-term process of building trust.”

[...]

“Creating an environment where silenced voices can emerge can be difficult. There is evidence that in certain circumstances communities deliberately suppress or mask internal differences. For example, when groups that perceive themselves to be different, encounter each other and fell threatened, the members of each group draw together to present a united front.”

[...]

“In order to get to know each other we have to appreciate each other’s values. This means getting to know the codes of the ‘other’ culture and, perhaps most importantly, it calls for identifying our own coded values and assumptions. Interrogating our own beliefs is difficult. We take them for granted so they are largely invisible to us. Generally, they are obvious to those who hold different values and assumptions. Consequently, we find that although we are often blind to our own beliefs we are capable of asking penetrating and provoking questions about the beliefs of others.”

[What is then needed is a communication process by which we help each other to understand the values embedded in each culture.]

Alan V. Martin: The Ephesian Moment. The Possibilities of Cultural Reconciliation in a Cosmopolitan Environment pp24-77

“The naive idea that contact between different ethnic and racial groups would automatically produce positive attitudes and behaviour changes has been rudely shattered in recent years. [Proximity is not enough; positive action has to be taken. The early Church took this positive action in the cosmopolitan cities of the Roman Empire, notably in Ephesus. The Roman Empire made it possible that people from various backgrounds would settle in the same cities. However, on the whole they were group-oriented and assessed themselves and others in terms of stereotypes. Something special was needed to overcome the division among them. This something special was the transcultural experiment of the early Church.]

[...]

“The Gentiles who became ‘God-fearers’ attended Jewish synagogues and became accustomed to the type of worship associated with the synagogue but they did not socialize with Jews. The cultural boundary marker for Jews was table fellowship. That was reserved only for fellow Jews. [...] The breakthrough came with the sharing of meals by both Jews and Gentiles within the Christian community.”

[...]

“While the Jesus movement began exclusively among Jews it changes in the forties of the first century, to a movement for both Jews and Gentiles. It could not have done this without the acceptance of an authority that approved of this change. Above all, the authority of Jesus was needed to justify the incorporation of Gentiles into the Church without the requirement of first becoming Jews.”

[...]

“The universalist theme in Luke-Acts commences with the words of Simeon, who recognizes in Jesus the salvation which God has prepared before all peoples, ‘a light for the illumination of the Gentiles and the glory of your people Israel’(Lk 2:31-2). It should be noted that Simeon also includes Israel in the divine plan. Soon after this, Luke alters Mark by extending the quotation from Isaiah 40 to include the words of Isaia 40:5 ‘and all humanity will see the work of God’. (Lk 3:5-6). Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus back to Adam (Lk 3:23-38).

[...]

“Mark shows Jesus making a number of crossings from one side of the Sea of Galilee to the other. This is significant because from the names and places mentioned it becomes clear that one area is Jewish (Mk 5:21ff) and the other is Gentile (Mk 7:24ff). [..] In the Gentile area known as the ‘Decapolis’ Jesus heals a Syro-Phoenician woman and a Gentile man who cannot speak. Then he feeds a Gentile crowd. [...] Feeding of the people was expected of the Messiah; but these twin feedings of Jewish and Gentile crowds point to a significant enlargement of the role of the Messiah. [..] These two crowds gather on different sides of the Sea of Galilea and between the two feedings Mark says that Jesus and the disciples had to cross the Sea of Galilee and that the crossing was difficult. [...] They travel by boat [symbol of the Church] and they have only one loaf with them in the boat. [...] Only one loaf is needed because separate bread will not be needed for the Jewish and non-Jewish disciples.

[...]

“The Acts of the Apostles describes the birth of the Christian Church (Ecclesia) through the coming of the Holy Spirit. Those present from many countries all hear the words of the disciples in their own tongue. In other words the new community of the Church will bring unity without destroying diversity of language or culture.”

[...]

“Roman citizenship conferred equality upon all granted that status. However, [...] citizenship could not be conferred on slaves, resident aliens or foreigners. By contrast in the early Church membership was extended to women, foreigners and slaves.” (Gal 3:28)

[...]

“Distinctions between Jews and Gentiles were not destroyed. The early Church was not a celebration of cultural homogeneity. [...] It was a celebration of being one because Christ is one.” (Eph 2:13-18) [...] The early Church did not attempt to destroy social distinctions, e.g. between slave and free, but rather to establish a pattern of relationships of respect, concern and responsibility.” (1Cor 11:17-34; Acts 6:1-6)

[...] The sharing [amongst the early Christians] reached beyond the local Christian community. In 1Cor 16:1ff Paul organizes a collection to be taken up amongst the Christians in Corinth for the poorer Christians in Jerusalem. [...] In vs 3 he writes, Ï will send to Jerusalem with letters of introduction those people you approve to deliver your gift’(my italics). They were to choose those would bear the gift to Jerusalem.”

Reconciliation

“The early Church must have had some members who from their collective past bore resentment against others in the Church. Yet the writer of the Letter to the Ephesians can say that through Christ both Jews and Gentiles are one: ‘So you are no longer aliens or foreign visitors; you are fellow citizens with the holy people of God...’ (Eph 2:19). Both a letting go of the past (forgiveness) and a change of attitude (repentance) are implied.” [...] As it is put in Eph 4:32, ‘Be generous to one another, sympathetic, forgiving each other as readily as God forgave you in Christ.’ This grace of forgiveness was constantly proclaimed to them through baptism and the Lord’s supper. [...] This is why those participating in the Eucharist exchanged the sign of peace.”

[...]

“Paul is not so much concerned about the existence of disputes among Christians as he is with how disputes are resolved. He makes requests for the appointment of mediators, ‘yokefellows’ as he calls them (Phil 4:2-3). [...] The Church is to provide a forum for resolving disputes within the fellowship of believers.”

[...]

[settling disputes goes back to the tradition of Jesus himself] “In Mt 18: 20 Jesus promised that, ‘Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name there I am in the midst of them.’ Modern readers usually take this as a mandate for a small prayer meeting. However, examination of the context leaves no room for this interpretation. The whole chapter is focused on relationships and misunderstandings and this verse is clearly linked to that theme. Moreover ‘two or three gathered’ is a phrase familiar from OT usage. In the context of adjudicating disputes it indicates an acceptable quorum of witnesses (Dt 17:6; 19:15; Heb 10:28). Thus it seems clear that Jesus’ words are intended for peace-making. Where believers gather to resolve disputes in his name, Christ is present among them.”

[...]

“Christ came to reconcile. Reconciliation is the primary mark of redemption, [...] the primary manifestation of God’s new community.”

Transcultural congregations in Ireland

“There are about 30 transcultural congregations and Christain fellowships in the Republic of Ireland. I define these as having at least 25% of total membership from new immigrants.”

[...]

“Members of transcultural congregations meet frequently together in the same building [... in] common worship, shared meals - often to celebrate an event such as a naming ceremony, a Baptism - or in Bible study and prayer meetings, excursions and conversations over tea/coffee. The depth of the interaction varies from congregation to congregation and between individuals but usually develops after initial awkwardness in speaking to people who are different has been overcome.”.

[...]

“There is a need to find a balance of both styles of worship and culture in the common worship. Participation and input need to be encouraged from all. Whether it be through informal or more formal styles of worship there is need for careful planning to ensure that one cultural group does not get privilege or become dominant. [...] The planning needs to involve leaders from all the cultural groups who therefore have to respect and recognize the leadership of each other. [...] Many of the Christians from Nigeria who have come to Ireland come from a strong Pentecostal background which looks to charismatic leadership. The cooperation of these figures of authority is important. ”

[...]

In a congregation in Galway an African musical group regularly lead the praise for a period of 15 minutes. The decibels from the drumbeats have been reduced by agreement so as to be acceptable to European ears. If they so wish, people may pray aloud simultaneously in any language during the prayers of interecession under the guidance of a leader. This is all very different to the style of worship practiced in that congregation before the influx of new residents; yet a fair balance of cultures and style seems to have been reached and is acceptable to all.”

[...]

“It is clear that expectations of in-depth interaction differ between African and Irish people assembling for worship. An African Christian may be looking forward to something akin to arriving at a relation’s home to spend the day. They see a Christian congregation as an extended family with whom you want to spend time. The timing of the arrival is not very important. The activities of the day will include worship, singing together, sharing a meal, conversation and enjoyment of each other’s company. An Irish Christian will attend worship as something he/she wants to do or feels obliged to do for a fixed period of time. Even though done in the company of others, many Irish people still see worship more as a private act than a social event.”

[...]

“Experience shows that in successful transcultural congregations misunderstandings, when they occur, are dealt with immediately and not swept under the carpet. [...] This is where good leadership is needed” [of each cultural group and the leaders having a close relationship of trust between them].

Grasping the Ephesian moment in the State

“The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform launched ‘Planning for Diversity: the National Action Plan against Racism (NAPR) in February 2005. The plan is comprehensive and seeks to develop a more inclusive, intercultural society in Ireland. It seeks to provide a commendable, intercultural framework of Protection, Inclusion, Provision, Participation and Recognition.”

[...]

“Social harmony can only be developed when people are given the opportunity to meet regularly. On the whole, it is the initiative of schools, sports clubs, local Churches, art centres and individuals that makes this possible.”

[...]

“Unequal treatment of migrant workers is a serious hindrance to building up good relationships. Integration requires that migrants are treated fairly and not exploited. Examples have come to light of wages being paid to migrant workers that are well below the minimum wage, and of landlords refusing accomodation when they see the colour of a person’s skin.”

[...]

“The authority of the state is exercised in two main areas. It controls who enters the state and it shows hospitality to those who come seeking refugee status, to refugees and some migrant workers. Immigration control policy attracts more notice than does hospitality. Many states give the impression that keeping the immigrant levels as low as possible is their top priority. Ireland, while receiving many migrant workers, keeps the level of asylum-seekers very low: figures for the third quarter of 2004 indicate that Ireland received less than half the number of asylum-seekers of either Cyprus or Slovakia in that period.”

[...]

“The state carries out this obligation [of showing hospitality to the asylum-seeker and refugee] by providing accomodation and a small weekly grant. The special accomodation sometimes has the effect of isolating asylum-seekers. [...] The smallness of the weekly grant aslo means asylum-seekers have little money left for socializing.”

[...]

“Integration cannot be forced on a population but government can give general authority to the process. If a daily diet of asylum-seeker scare stories and deportations is to be combated, governments need to proclaim publicly their obligation on behalf of the state to give hospitality to asylum-seekers.”

[...]

“There is a tension between this general obligation to give hospitality and the practical regulatory system that a state needs to control numbers. It is our contention that both need to be given authorisation by the state

French philosopher Jacques Derrida has written about this dilemma. The context of Derrida’s discussion is the cosmopolitan city that is open to newcomers yet in the present day must have some restrictions. How can the tensions between refugee and asylum rights and the ethic of hospitality be resolved?

Jacqes Derrida refers to the biblical vision in the Book of Numbers where God says to Moses: ‘Speak to the Israelites and say, ... these six towns will serve as refuge for the Israelites, for the foreigner and for the resident alien, where anyone who has accidentally killed someone can take sancturay’ (Num 35:15). He then states that Pauline Christianity radicalised this Hebrew concept within the Christian Church: Gentiles are ‘no longer foreigners not strangers in a foreign land but fellow citizens with God’s people, members of God’s household’ (Eph 2:19).”

[...]

“A problem facing any government is that, apart from the practical need to have some restriction on numbers entering the jurisdiction, citizens of a state can become fearful of being swamped or deprived of work or benefits from too generous a hospitality. In a democratic state this leads government to aspire, at least publicly, to a strict policy on asylum-seekers rather than appear weak. Derrida suggests that it is a matter of transforming and improving state laws while at the same time accepting the principle of unconditional hospitality offered to every other. He admits that this position is uncomfortable if not contradictory, but can see no way of avoiding it.

[...]

“A cosmopolitan city will have many ethnic groups some of whom may have had periods of conflict in the past. The racism that exists in Ireland has been handed down from times when one race felt superior to another. Integration, therefore, requires some degree of forgiveness. [...] There needs to be a desire to move on to building new relations, a new city.”

[...]

“Some politicians in Ireland have offered apologies after racist attacks have occurred. It is needed because four out of five people from ethnic minorities have been the victims of racism while living in Ireland.”

Grasping the Ephesian moment in the Church

“Hospitality is a helpful concept but it needs to be used carefully as it sometimes carries with it the notion of ‘host and guest’. If by ‘hospitality’we mean us welcoming others into our house [church] then this is a metaphor of limited value. But if we understand the house to belong to God, then together with God we work to build a house where all belong, open to giving and receiving from each other.”

[...]

“The majority of Christians now live outside the western world. Western Christians can no longer regard their expression of Christianity as ‘standard’ nor are we free to isolate ourselves.”

[...]

“When the Christian faith crossed the cultural boundary that separated Jew from Gentile new categories had to be found to express in theological terms what Christians were experiencing. Significantly they used metaphors from both cultures. They continued to use the Hebrew title ‘Messiah’ but also ‘Lord’ (Kyrios), a Greek word. Similarly, when Christians today experience more fully the transcultural nature of the Church new categories will have to be found. Creative theology will become necessary.”

[...]

“Transcultural local Churches by their very nature will bring clashes of culture, misunderstandings and stress. They must practice reconciliation if they are to continue. In the Western tradition of Christianity much emphasis has been put on each individual receiving God’s forgiveness but it is also important to practice forgiveness and the resolution of disputes for the sake of the new community as a whole.”

[...]

“Many of the migrant Churches in Ireland are Pentecostal, and most Irish Christians have little knowledge of them. They may even be a little suspicious of strange manifestations and styles of worship. On the other hand, some African Pentecostal Church members regard traditional Irish Churches as being lifeless lacking what they regard as the manifestations of the Spirit. [...] In the Irish context there is an opportunity for Pentecostals and Christians of many traditions to enter into a dialogical process, without feelings of superiority on any side, so as to learn from one another.”

[...]

“Many Christians still feel the close link between their sense of nationhood, their culture and their Church. Yet if we live in cosmopolitan societies with the influence of many cultures we cannot associate the Church exclusively with any one culture as has happened in the past. Instead all branches of the Church, including new migrant Churches that have come to Ireland and elsewhere need to strive more diligently to become a counter-culture as the Church was in the early centuries.”

Sahr Yambasu: Embracing the Different Other pp 78-84

“I see in the story of Peter and Cornelius (Acts 10-11) a drama of cross-cultural embrace. [...] The content of the vision each man receives is different. Neither man knows the meaning of his vision. This is because each vision is incomplete and will need the other to make complete sense. Each man will have to hear from the other sharing what God has communicated to him. This would happen only when the men meet face-to-face - an act which will lead these two men, hitherto strangers, to embrace each other as brothers.

[...]

Miroslav Volf [Exclusion and Embrace: a Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation) identifies four steps in the process of embrace. He describes these steps as: ‘opening the arms’, ‘waiting’, ‘closing the arms’, and ‘opening the arms again’.

[1] When we open our arms we have created space in ourselves for others to come and inhabit. Also an invitation to others to create space in themselves for us to inhabit. Both Cornelius and Peter are willing to risk crossing cultural boundaries.

[2] ‘Waiting’ is a statement about our own powerlessness to make people accept us. We respect others’ freedom to agree to relate or not to relate with us. Cornelius sends messengers to Peter and has to wait for his reply. Peter takes the cultural risk of inviting them [non- Jews] to spend the night in his lodging.

[3] ‘Closing the arms’ is the actual act of embrace in which each must hold the other and be held by the other in return. It is done gently so that one does not crush the other nor assimilate him. Cornelius, a Roman officer, falls at the feet of Peter, a Galilean peasant. Peter tells him to stand up. Both of them are simply human beings whom God chooses for his good purposes. They listen to each other and their separate visions become clear. The Spirit falls on Cornelius and those gathered in his house in the same way she had fallen on the Jewish Christians before. No special treatment, no special cases.

[4] ‘Opening the arms again’ signals that the time for parting is near. Embrace does not make two inseparable bodies, absorbing one into the other. Peter and his men have to return to where they belong and Cornelius and his people have to stay at home. Yet, the embrace leaves both of them no longer the same people they were before the embrace.

Tony Walsh: Experiencing Transculturalism pp 85- 102

“A group of members involved in transcultural congregations were invited to answer six questions about their Church’s story of multicultural development.”

[1] In what significant ways has your church changed?

One of the answers says: “Unfortunately for many people, I think that the church unwittingly fufils the function of a bastion against change. It’s a place they retreat to, to comfort themselves. In reality it should be a place in which to grow, to be challenged and to take steps of faith”.

[2] What for you has constituted the most enriching aspects of becoming a transcultural congregation?

About non-Irish Christians: “Look at what they’ve been through and they’re still praising God” or “They’re not ashamed to share Jesus, like we sometimes are”.

About Irish Christians: “They have a quiet faith; they do not shout, but if people in Africa believed and behaved like these Irish believers, then the problems there would just go away.”

[3] What did you find most challenging in the process?

“Sometimes you don’t think about cultural differences until you hit against it. For instance in our culture, we never invite true friends to visit. They do not need an invitation, your home is theirs and you just expect them to call. Irish friends didn’t understand this and thought they were not welcome because they were not invited. And we began to think they did not want to come, because they did not call.”

[4] Were there particular events, moments or experiences that were of seminal imprtance in the experience of transcultural development?

“Once we made trip all together [to Glendalough], to see something of the Irish culture and countryside. Some people had never been outside Dublin before, and we all felt ‘Oh they’re showing us not just love but something that is important to them, they want us to know more about their life, their history, what is important to them’.”

[5] Do you feel that your thinking has changed in response to transculturalism?

“Our church has not changed much despite all the newcomers, despite our lipservice to inclusiveness. It seems that the real issue is that we have continued as on the basis that ‘they’are welcome to join ‘us’. There are two real problems here as I see it; the first is about control, and particularly about who maintains control, particularly control of the content of the service. The second is about creating purely tokenistic change which is more cosmetic than real. This preserves the status quo.”

[6] What do you see as important for the future?

“To work more with women. On the surface it seems that in many societies women have small roles. This is not true. For us women are the ones who really push; they are the strong ones.”

Tony Walsh: Changing Culture pp 103-128

This chapter draws “on the disciplines of cultural studies, change management, organisational studies and learning theory to offer some ideas which may be of use to transcultural congregations and others involved in similar work”.

Culture

“Gaining some kind of map of how different peoples think, react and prioritise is vital to creating understanding and cooperation between two or more groups coming from different ethnic backgrounds.”

[...]

“Often it is only in meeting with members of a very different culture that people begin to compare and question, and ultimately to recognise the particular range of assumptions and behaviours which comprise the bedrocks of their own culture.”

[...]

“A small Nigerian boy, being upbraided for poor homework in a Dublin school met the overworked teacher’s onslaught with silence and downcast eyes. Later, in describing the incident the teacher defined the child as not only disobedient and troublesome (because of the lack of homework), but also as sullen and shifty. ‘He went into a sulk; he couldn’t even meet my eyes.’ The small boy was in fact acting with utmost politeness according to the dictates of his home culture. He had been taught the rudeness of ever making eye-to-eye contact or of justifying himself. Both pupil and teacher were trapped into reacting according to the behavioural patterns and interpretative lenses of their own cultural worlds.”

[...]

“Major difficulties can occur when trying to achieve a goal or accomplish a task because different cultures make varying assumption about how to proceed, the exact nature of the job to be done, and how best to achieve an end result.”

[...]

“Every transcultural congregation needs to put time aside for the following tasks:

* Spend time getting to know about each others cultures, history, traditions.

* Acknowledge together that there may be differences in ways of seeing and doing.

* Examine how these may/will affect behaviours, reactions, interpretations and hence relationships.

* Explore how the different cultures deal with anger and frustration.

* Recognise that cultural difference will tend to affect vision, goals and work pace.

* Imagine together where the difficulties are most likely to arise and for whom.

* Plan how to acknowledge and resolve issues.

* Organise regular occasions where the different cultures can meet share and discuss.

Change

[1] “While change is exciting it is also experienced by many as quite threatening and hence needs to be managed carefully and with consideration towards all involved.”

[2] “Resistance to change is quite normal; it often relates to people’s rarely publicised fears and, despite appearances to the contrary, is usually not sourced in pure stubbornness.”

[3] “Change and its implications cannot be easily compartmentalised: shift at one level often necessitates change at other levels too.”

[4] “The more important a group or organisation is to an individual, or the more they see themselves as identiifed with it, the stronger will tend to be their reaction.”

[5] “It may not necessarily be the change per se that is the issue but people’s perception of that.” change and how it may affect them, their roles and their sense of security.”

Learning

“Stephen Brookfield suggests that the process of critical reflection lies at the heart of learning and consequent change. He suggests that in the process of critical reflection, one’s assumptions and presuppositions are first of all made conscious and then assessed for their appropriateness, accuracy or fit. When our underlying meaning schemes are made consciously explicit they no longer have the same power to control our thinking and can be changed in a conscious and rational way.”

[...]

“The process of transculturation invites critical reflection not just on individuals and congregations involved and their realities. It will also invite attention to anomalies, abuses and inequalities which are central to society and indeed to the Churches’ways of functioning. It remains to be seen whether these structures will respond appropriately.”