April Boycik is a former student of mine and a lifelong friend. Her prayerful response to my posts on intercultural ministry, with her permission, is posted below.

“Lord,

Let me plug in and serve together with whom you would have me serve, as you would, where you would…

Realizing my brothers and sisters, different from me culturally, politically, educationally are all called according to your purpose, too.

Together, we make the body.

Sepearate, we are but amputees.”

In the old game show, Name That Tune, contestants would say, “I can name that tune in ____ notes” (the lower the number of notes, the better). Well, I canNOT name the “tune” of intercultural (or multicultural or cross-cultural) ministry/relating in just a few notes.

In fact, one specialist in this area lists more than a dozen different names for the concept related to intercultural/multiculturalism. That’s a dozen names–each with its own set of scores of definitions.

So, is the cause hopeless? Nope.

But, keep in mind the humble title of this blog post: “toward a description…” It is not a final anything. And it is not even a “definition.” It is a beginning description.

I’ll save the more technical aspects for a forty-semester hour graduate course, and try to keep matters relatively straight forward for a somewhat short blog post. Of course, that means these basic descriptions have much wiggle room and can easily be quibbled with. That’s good–makes for expanding the conversation.

What Is Culture?

Let’s start with a supposedly simple word like “culture.” This word itself has a myriad of definitions. My working definition of culture is based upon a biblical theology/psychology of how God designed us. Here are two similar ways I would word my description of culture:

Culture is the shared relational, rational, volitional, and emotional patterns for living that people use in social interactions and learn through social interactions.

Culture is the system of shared patterns of relating, thinking, acting, and feeling that members of society use to relate to one another and to others, and that are learned through social interactions.

What Is Intercultural Relational Competency?

First, I use intercultural relational competency interchangeably with multicultural skillfulness. Here are a few ways I describe these terms:

Intercultural relational competency is the ability to relate like Christ with people from other cultures.

Intercultural relational competency is the ability to relate like Christ when interacting with people whose patterns of relating, thinking, acting, and feeling are culturally different (diverse) from yours.

What Is a Christ-Centered TEAM Approach to Christlike Intercultural Relational Competency?

Wow! That question alone is a mouthful!

Just as I build my description of “culture” on a biblical theology of people, so I build my description of competency based upon a biblical methodology of change. In my biblical theory of how to help people to change, I highlight sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding (SHRG). For intercultural or multicultural or cross-cultural ministry, I take these four terms and turn them into an acrostic: TEAM.

T: Tacking Another Person’s Perspective (Or Tracking Another Person’s Perspective)

This is the ability to empathize with someone whose patterns of relating, thinking, acting, and feeling developed out of a diverse culture. It is the ability to walk in the shoes of another person from another culture. It requires culturally-informed listening, among many other “skills.”

E: Engaging in Bridge-Building Conversations

This is the ability to encourage another person to assess their own individual, cultural, and universal experience through the lens of God’s eternal Person, perspective, purposes, and plans. It includes the both/and “skill” of listening to the earthly story while jointly weaving in God’s eternal, heavenly story.

A: Accepting, Reconciling with, and Forgiving One Another

This is the ability to apply Christ’s forgiveness of us to our intercultural relationships. It highlights the fact that “racism” (another word with multiple definitions) is not a skin issue but a sin issue. It recognizes that integration alone is a legislative/law issue, while reconciliation is a heart issue, a spiritual issue. This includes the “skill” of being an ambassador of intercultural reconciliation.

M: Making Disciples Who Are Interculturally Competent (Or Mentoring Disciples…)

This is the ability to equip equippers. It is the ability to envision, empower, and equip others to be interculturally Christlike. It is a spiritual direction/discipleship process that passes on and stirs up Christlike intercultural love.

A Soul Care and Spiritual Direction Model

What I am developing/suggesting is a soul care and spiritual direction model of intercultural (multicultural, cross-cultural) competence. It is not simply an individual model: change one person. Nor is it simply an institutional model: change the law. It is a spiritual, ecclesiological model: a Christ-centered, TEAM approach to cultivating Christlike intercultural relational competency.

My passion is to equip the Body of Christ to relate like Christ when interacting with others whose patterns of relating, thinking, acting, and feeling are culturally different from them.

Thus, intercultural competency certainly includes evangelism, since the unsaved and the saved, even from the same home, have diverse patterns of relating, thinking, acting, and feeling.

But it goes far beyond evangelism (ambassadorship) to include fellowship, worship, stewardship, and discipleship. Christlike intercultural relational competency includes how we relate to one another of different cultures in church, at work, in our neighborhoods…it is all-inclusive.

I’ve been working on a new presentation on Cultivating Christlike Intercultural Relational Competency: A Christ-Centered TEAM Approach. Of course, if it is Christ-Centered, then it is going to be everywhere in the Bible, right?

Is it?

For sure!

Consider just a few examples of how central intercultural ministry is to the eternal plan of God.

1. Intercultural Ministry Is a God Thing: James 2:1-13; Romans 2:4-11. For God so loved the world. God is no respecter of persons. He is calling people from all nations to His forever family. He calls us to godly living that shows no favoritism.

2. Intercultural Ministry Is a Christ Thing: Matthew 28:19-20; John 4:1-42. Christ calls us to make disciples of all nations. Christ models intercultural ministry in breaking social barriers to witness to the Samaritan women, resulting in the people proclaiming that He is indeed the Savior of the world.

3. Intercultural Ministry Is a Spirit Thing: 1 Corinthians 12:12-27. We are all baptized by one Spirit into one body–whether Jews or Greeks. The Spirit purposefully combined the diverse members into one Body so that there would be no division.

4. Intercultural Ministry Is a Salvation Thing: Ephesians 2:11-22; Revelation 5:9. Christ’s salvation purpose is to reconcile, make peace, and create in Himself one new people who have full and equal access to the Father by the Spirit, making us all fellow citizens and joint members of God’s household. The Lamb purchased for God people from every tribe, language, people, and nation.

5. Intercultural Minsitry Is a Church Thing: Acts 2:14-47; Acts 10:1-48. The first Church and the Church throughout Acts integrated believers from diverse cultures.

6. Intercultural Ministry Is a Sanctification Thing: Colossians 3:1-11. As we put off the old and put on the new person in Christ we are renewed not only individually, but also corporately where there is no Greek or Jew, barbarian or Scythian, but Christ is all and is in all.

7. Intercultural Minsitry Is an Eternal Thing: Revelation 7:9-10. As John peers into eternity, he witnesses a great multitude that no one can count from every nation, tribe, people, and language worshipping God together forever.

Is intercultural ministry biblical?

I think so!

Join in again tomorrow when we address the question, “So just what is intercultural ministry?”

Racial Identity in American Life

Here’s an interesting article by Jesse Washington of the AP.

Here’s the original link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081213/ap_on_re_us/obama_s_not_black

Obama’s True Colors: Black, White … or Neither?

By JESSE WASHINGTON, AP National Writer Jesse Washington, Ap National Writer – Sat Dec 13, 2008

A perplexing new chapter is unfolding in Barack Obama’s racial saga: Many people insist that “the first black president” is actually not black.

Debate over whether to call this son of a white Kansan and a black Kenyan biracial, African-American, mixed-race, half-and-half, multiracial — or, in Obama’s own words, a “mutt” — has reached a crescendo since Obama’s election shattered assumptions about race.

Obama has said, “I identify as African-American — that’s how I’m treated and that’s how I’m viewed. I’m proud of it.” In other words, the world gave Obama no choice but to be black, and he was happy to oblige.

But the world has changed since the young Obama found his place in it.

Intermarriage and the decline of racism are dissolving ancient definitions. The candidate Obama, in achieving what many thought impossible, was treated differently from previous black generations. And many white and mixed-race people now view President-elect Obama as something other than black.

So what now for racial categories born of a time when those from far-off lands were property rather than people, or enemy instead of family?

“They’re falling apart,” said Marty Favor, a Dartmouth professor of African and African-American studies and author of the book “Authentic Blackness.”

“In 1903, W.E.B. DuBois said the question of the 20th century is the question of the color line, which is a simplistic black-white thing,” said Favor, who is biracial. “This is the moment in the 21st century when we’re stepping across that.”

Rebecca Walker, a 38-year-old writer with light brown skin who is of Russian, African, Irish, Scottish and Native American descent, said she used to identify herself as “human,” which upset people of all backgrounds. So she went back to multiracial or biracial, “but only because there has yet to be a way of breaking through the need to racially identify and be identified by the culture at large.”

“Of course Obama is black. And he’s not black, too,” Walker said. “He’s white, and he’s not white, too. Obama is whatever people project onto him … he’s a lot of things, and neither of them necessarily exclude the other.”

But U.S. Rep. G. K. Butterfield, a black man who by all appearances is white, feels differently.

Butterfield, 61, grew up in a prominent black family in Wilson, N.C. Both of his parents had white forebears, “and those genes came together to produce me.” He grew up on the black side of town, led civil rights marches as a young man, and to this day goes out of his way to inform people that he is certainly not white.
Butterfield has made his choice; he says let Obama do the same.

“Obama has chosen the heritage he feels comfortable with,” he said. “His physical appearance is black. I don’t know how he could have chosen to be any other race. Let’s just say he decided to be white — people would have laughed at him.”

“You are a product of your experience. I’m a U.S. congressman, and I feel some degree of discomfort when I’m in an all-white group. We don’t have the same view of the world, our experiences have been different.”

The entire issue balances precariously on the “one-drop” rule, which sprang from the slaveowner habit of dropping by the slave quarters and producing brown babies. One drop of black blood meant that person, and his or her descendants, could never be a full citizen.

Today, the spectrum of skin tones among African-Americans — even those with two black parents — is evidence of widespread white ancestry. Also, since blacks were often light enough to pass for white, unknown numbers of white Americans today have blacks hidden in their family trees.

One book, “Black People and their Place in World History,” by Dr. Leroy Vaughn, even claims that five past presidents — Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge — had black ancestors, which would make Obama the sixth of his kind.

Mix in a few centuries’ worth of Central, South and Native Americans, plus Asians, and untold millions of today’s U.S. citizens need a DNA test to decipher their true colors. The melting pot is working.

Yet the world has never been confronted with such powerful evidence as Obama. So as soon as he was elected, the seeds of confusion began putting down roots.

“Let’s not forget that he is not only the first African-American president, but the first biracial candidate. He was raised by a single white mother,” a Fox News commentator said seven minutes after Obama was declared the winner.

“We do not have our first black president,” the author Christopher Hitchens said on the BBC program “Newsnight.” “He is not black. He is as black as he is white.”

A Doonesbury comic strip that ran the day after the election showed several soldiers celebrating.

“He’s half-white, you know,” says a white soldier.

“You must be so proud,” responds another.

Pride is the center of racial identity, and some white people seem insulted by a perception that Obama is rejecting his white mother (even though her family was a centerpiece of his campaign image-making) or baffled by the notion that someone would choose to be black instead of half-white.

“He can’t be African-American. With race, white claims 50 percent of him and black 50 percent of him. Half a loaf is better than no loaf at all,” Ron Wilson of Plantation, Fla., wrote in a letter to the Sun-Sentinel newspaper.

Attempts to whiten Obama leave a bitter taste for many African-Americans, who feel that at their moment of triumph, the rules are being changed to steal what once was deemed worthless — blackness itself.

“For some people it’s honestly confusion,” said Favor, the Dartmouth professor. “For others it’s a ploy to sort of reclaim the presidency for whiteness, as though Obama’s blackness is somehow mitigated by being biracial.”

Then there are the questions remaining from Obama’s entry into national politics, when some blacks were leery of this Hawaiian-born newcomer who did not share their history.

Linda Bob, a black schoolteacher from Eustis, Fla., said that calling Obama black when he was raised in a white family and none of his ancestors experienced slavery could cause some to ignore or forget the history of racial injustice.

“It just seems unfair to totally label him African-American without acknowledging that he was born to a white mother,” she said. “It makes you feel like he doesn’t have a class, a group.”

There is at least one group eagerly waiting for Obama to embrace them. “To me, as to increasing numbers of mixed-race people, Barack Obama is not our first black president. He is our first biracial, bicultural president … a bridge between races, a living symbol of tolerance, a signal that strict racial categories must go,” Marie Arana wrote in the Washington Post.

He’s a bridge between eras as well. The multiracial category “wasn’t there when I was growing up,” said John McWhorter, a 43-year-old fellow at the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Race and Ethnicity, who is black. “In the ’70s and the ’80s, if somebody had one white parent and one black parent, the idea was they were black and had better get used to it and develop this black identity. That’s now changing.”

Latinos, whom the census identifies as an ethnic group and not a race, were not counted separately by the government until the 1970s. After the 1990 census, many people complained that the four racial categories — white, black, Asian, and American Indian/Alaska native — did not fit them. The government then allowed people to check more than one box. (It also added a fifth category, for Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders.)

Six million people, or 2 percent of the population, now say they belong to more than one race, according to the most recent census figures. Another 19 million people, or 6 percent of the population, identify themselves as “some other race” than the five available choices.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the census, specifically decided not to add a “multiracial” category, deeming it not a race in and of itself.

“We are in a transitional period” regarding these labels, McWhorter said. “I think that in only 20 years, the notion that there are white people and there are black people and anyone in between has some explaining to do and an identity to come up with, that will all seem very old-fashioned.”

The debate over Obama’s identity is just the latest step in a journey he unflinchingly chronicled in his memoir, “Dreams from My Father.”

As a teenager, grappling with the social separation of his white classmates, “I had no idea who my own self was,” Obama wrote.

In college in the 1970s, like millions of other dark-skinned Americans searching for self respect in a discriminatory nation, Obama found refuge in blackness. Classmates who sidestepped the label “black” in favor of “multiracial” chafed at Obama’s newfound pride: “They avoided black people,” he wrote. “It wasn’t a matter of conscious choice, necessarily, just a matter of gravitational pull, the way integration always worked, a one-way street. The minority assimilated into the dominant culture, not the other way around.”

Fast-forward 30 years, to the early stages of Obama’s presidential campaign. Minorities are on track to outnumber whites, to redefine the dominant American culture. And the black political establishment, firmly rooted in the civil rights movement, questioned whether the outsider Obama was “black enough.”

Then came the primary and general elections, when white voters were essential for victory. “Now I’m too black,” Obama joked in July before an audience of minority journalists. “There is this sense of going back and forth depending on the time of day in terms of making assessments about my candidacy.”

Today, it seems no single definition does justice to Obama — or to a nation where the revelation that Obama’s eighth cousin is Dick Cheney, the white vice president from Wyoming, caused barely a ripple in the campaign.

In his memoir, Obama says he was deeply affected by reading that Malcolm X, the black nationalist-turned-humanist, once wished his white blood could be expunged. “Traveling down the road to self-respect my own white blood would never recede into mere abstraction,” Obama wrote. “I was left to wonder what else I would be severing if I left my mother and my grandparents at some uncharted border.”