Multiculturalism

C.T. 8009U: FAITH AND UNDERSTANDING MULTICULTURALISM: ‘A CRITICAL ISSUE FOR CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY TODAY.’ 15 November 2013. Introduction It must be stated at the beginning of this essay that the purpose of this paper is not to present an argument ‘for’ or ‘against’ multiculturalism, but rather to give an account of why I believe multiculturalism is a critical issue for Christian theology today. In this essay ‘multiculturalism’ is simply treated as an existence of a social order of a community where people from different ethnic and cultural background find themselves living together in a particular place at a particular time, and desires to live together in harmony and in peace with mutual respect and recognition of their diversity and the challenges it provides. It must also be said that the use of ‘multiculturalism’ in this essay is limited to, and, in relation to a Christian community. It uses the term ‘multiculturalism’ in a ‘normative’ sense rather than a ‘descriptive’ one as described in Wikipedia: Multiculturalism relates to communities containing multiple cultures. The term is used in two broad ways, either descriptively or normatively. As a descriptive term, it usually refers to the simple fact of cultural diversity; it is generally applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, sometime at the organizational level, e.g. schools, business, neighbourhoods, cities, or nations. On a normative term, it refers to ideologies or policies that promote this diversity or its institutionalization; in this sense, multiculturalism is a society “at peace with the tapestry of human life and the desire amongst people to express their own identity in the manner they see fit. Such ideologies or policies vary widely, including country to country, ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of Cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to. Wikipedia, Free Encyclopedia: Multiculturalism En.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism (accessed 10 Oct 2013) Therefore, this essay will seek to name and explore critical issues for Christian theology raised by ‘multiculturalism’ within a Christian community. It will also seek to provide resolutions to those issues named, and how those resolutions can best be achieved. Critical Issue One: Doing theology together The question that this critical issue raises is: How can people who have different worldviews, and who have different lenses through which they perceive reality and interpret the Christian faith do theology together? Having raised that question, two biblical communities come to mind. First, the Babel community in the Old Testament in Gen 11:4-9, who belong to the same family as descendants of Noah, perceive things the same way, and speak the same language but were totally confused to the point of not understanding what they were on about. Second the Pentecost community in the New Testament book of Acts Ch. 2. New Revised Standard Version (Iowa Falls, Iowa by The World Bible Publishers 1989) Though they were Jews, they came “from every nation…and at this sound the crowd gathered and were bewildered because each one heard them speaking in the native language of each.” (Acts 2: 5-6) With the two communities above, it can be said that a stated imperative for doing theology together is to understand what we are on about, understand who and whose we are, to understand the other, and to know where we come from (culturally) in a consistent and coherent manner, giving birth to a Pentecostal community, rather than a perceived togetherness that serves only to confuse. The danger here of course is what I call ‘wholesale tolerance’ of the ‘other’ for the sake of maintaining a false objective. Peter T. Cha put it this way in an essay ‘Doing Theology In A Multicultural Theological Community.’ A given interpretive community, it is argued, can, and should construct its own interpretation of a text, an interpretation that is authentic to the lived experience and perspective of the community that is situated in a particular social location. Such a hermeneutical approach not only elevates the “particular” to dominate, if not eclipse, the “universal” but also dissolves any meaningful possibility of accountability of a local interpretation (i.e., no one from outside of the community can and should critique the validity of the interpretation). Such a method of hermeneutical practice is problematic for Christians who embrace the notion of the absolute and objective Truth. However, taking social location seriously does not have to lead us to the pathway of relativism. Peter T Cha, “Doing Theology in a Multicultural Theological Community”, Torch Trinity Journal Vol., 10, no. 1 (2007) pp. 95-106, divinity.tiu.edu/academics/faculty p.99 (accessed 8 Nov. 2013). The true objective of doing theology together is not ‘relativism’ but the enriching experience of contributions from those who are different. It’s not only an opportunity to engage the other person whose values and way of doing theology may differ from us, but as we grow more culturally diverse in our theological colleges and our churches here in Australia, we will be asked, even required to consider and/or re-evaluate the way of being church and our theological methodology at the least. Kevin Vanhoozer rightly states; There is a single meaning in the text, but it is too rich that we may need the insights of a variety of individual and cultural perspectives fully to do it justice… The single correct meaning may only come to the light through multicultural interpretation. Kevin Vanhoozer, “’But That’s Your Interpretation’: Realism, Reading, and Reformation,” Modern Reformation (July/August 1999): 21-27 Quoted by Cha in “Doing Theology in a Multicultural Community”, p. 99 (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Critical Issue Two: The universality of Jesus Christ The ecclesia is a community of faith and not a collection of individuals. This means that we receive/accept, value, and affirm our unity in Jesus Christ regardless of which background we come from, and remain vulnerable to the continuing work of the Holy Spirit in shaping, reforming, and building up the kingdom of God here on earth. This declared ‘community of faith’ presupposes a unity bound together by the common bond of what God has done, is doing, and continues to do in, through, and with God’s people. It is in this area of being ‘church’ that we may find the most critical issues in the relationship between multicultural practice and expressions of faith, and, doing theology e.g. the universality of Jesus Christ. Fr. John Wilcken SJ, although writing particularly on Aboriginal Traditions and the Christian faith, made an important statement that can also be related to all ethnic communities and migrants who have come to call Australia home. Wilcken states: If I were forced to conclude that Aboriginal people could have an orthodox faith in Jesus Christ only by abandoning their own culture and their own religious heritage, replacing these, for example, by the culture and religious heritage of Europe and North America, then I would have to deny the genuine universality, or catholicity of Christianity. Fr. John Wilcken, “Christology and Aboriginal Religious Traditions”, The Australasian Catholic Record., Vol., 75 no.,2 (Apr., 1998), pp. 185 - 186 It is almost unthinkable and difficult to comprehend that much of our culture and tradition had been (regardless of where you are from), absorbed into the abyss of a dominant culture. But having said that, there is also great achievement in the redeeming work of the Gospel in some cultures especially in the areas of social justice and equality. This universality of Jesus Christ is a central issue for doing theology today because we find ourselves in a more globalised, secularised, pluralistic society that has within it a multicultural and multi-religious diversity. Now the church has found itself having to address it as a matter of urgency. In contrast to Wilcken, Bishop Walter Kasper wrote this about the universality of Jesus Christ and the Christian mission: This universality applies first of all to the church’s mission. Jesus sent his apostles into the whole world, to all nations, to all human beings {Mt. 28:19; Mk. 16:15; Luke 24:27; Acts 1:8). The church’s mission is therefore universal, and the church by her very nature missionary (Ad Gentes, 2). She is not tied to a given nation, nor to a given culture or language or even to a given political or economic system. The church is, in a manner of speaking, the world’s oldest “global player.” In the Second Vatican Council she describes herself as the universal sacrament of salvation and as a sign and instrument of unity (Lumen Gentium, 1; 9; 48; Gautium Ad Spes 42; 45; Ad Gentes, 1; et al). She transcends all ethnic, national and cultural differences and wants to unite all peoples, tongues and cultures in praise of the one God. Bishop Walter Kasper, “The Unicity and Universality of Jesus Christ.” (Oct., 17 2000) http://www.bc.edu/dam/files/research_sites/cjl/texts/cjrelations/resources/articles/kasper1.htm (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Wilcken’s understanding of this universality of Jesus Christ is an immanent one where the presence of God can be perceived within culture whilst Kasper’s understanding of it is transcendental. God transcends all culture and all ethnicity. Both can be redemptive. One, from within culture and, the other, from outside culture. Kasper also wrote in the same article that: In the Second Vatican Council the Catholic Church rejected the position she frequently held in the past by which she judged non-Christian religions as heresy and superstition. In the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate, the council clearly and plainly stated that the church “rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many respects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men” Nostra Aetate, 2). Kasper, “The Unicity and Universality of Jesus Christ”. p. 4 Pope John Paul II echoed the same sentiment in his address to Aboriginal Australian Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders in Alice Springs in November 1986.’ Where he states: You are part of Australia and Australia is part of you. And the Church herself in Australia will not be fully the Church that Jesus wants her to be until you have made your contribution to her life and until that contribution has been joyfully received by others. Bishop Christopher Prowse, “The Twentieth Anniversary of Pope John Paul II’s Address to Aboriginal Australians”, The Australasian Catholic Record Vol., 83., no.3.p. 267-268 (accessed 8 Oct 2013) What is most important about the Pope’s statement is the sense that the Church can now accept the Aboriginal people whose way of life, and perception of God or lack of it can contribute to making the Church that which Jesus want by their contributions and the joyful receiving of it. The idea is applicable to all ethnic groups and all cultures: ‘that the Church cannot be the Church Jesus wants until all make their contributions to her life, and their contributions are joyfully received.’ Critical Issue three: The church and her mission in a culturally diverse society The church’s evangelical mandate is not questioned here. Rather, the methodology and practice of it. The treatment of cultural diversity varies from country to country and the models that are used are often to the benefit of the dominant culture and not those we serve. The experience of the American Latino/a is a case in point. The wealth of scholarship and research on the subject of multiculturalism is proof enough of its criticality. Some Latino/a theologians argue against multiculturalism. Peter Casarella ‘Peter Casarella is professor of Catholic Studies and director of the center for World Catholicism and Intercultural Theology at De Paul University. writes of John Allen’s presentation of his ‘reportage on the treatment of cultural diversity at the 2007 annual meeting of The Catholic Theological Society of America’: Allen seems to have gotten a real scoop on U.S. Hispanic Catholicism. Nanko Fernandez, an Hispanic theologian from the Bronx, had raised a seemingly new question. At another point in the same meeting, Nanko Fernandez intervened with this remark: “We are not your diversity!” Peter Casarella, “Recognizing Diversity after Multiculturalism”, New Theology Review, (Nov., 2008) p., 17 (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Another Latino/a theologian that agrees with Fernandez was Espin Espin insisted, “multiculturalism hides the fear and inability to deal with cultural diversity. That the very idea of building a multicultural church is based upon a view of “equality” that inevitably seeks to dominate.” Espin’s contribution quoted by Casarella is not footnoted nor in the list of bibliography The point I’m making here is, there is arguments on both sides and some comprise are made by some which make it clear that ‘multiculturalism’ is a critical issue for Christian theology. Resolution one: Doing theology together The fact that all Christians are members of the one body and that doing theology is a faith enterprise, it is a communal event that has its rightful place within the Christian community. It is true that theology is done best in community, because we engage other ways of thinking, doing and being. It also puts us in a position where we can shape the way other people think without imposing our own on them, and at the same time be enriched and shaped by the input of others through studies, reflection, and meditation. Our theological education must remain robust but also sensitive to the needs of those who desires to be part of the body of Christ We must be available and theologically prepared to engage an ever increasing secularist, pluralistic and an often hostile reaction to the gospel. A more pluralistic, and multi-dimensional communities will confront our future priests and pastors. Doing theology together as a multicultural community, can only enhance our effectiveness, and our awareness of that which we are called to proclaim and to teach. Lastly for this resolution, a question: Would our University of Divinity be able to design a curriculum that caters for the cultural complexity of our society? Resolution two: The universality of Christ In a multicultural context, the danger is very much the substitution of the Christ with cultural images that gives people false hopes and false sense of security. A kind of idolatry. The universality of Christ is manifested in different communities in different ways. What may help to save us from relativism is that Christ is central to the Christian faith. Christ is universal because he is available to all people but he is also the centre of our faith. He is the eternal living God with us that cannot be bought or substituted. He is not bound by any culture or boundaries for Christ the resurrected one is both immanent and transcendent. Resolution three: The church and her mission in a culturally diverse society Globalisation has created a global village life where things can be at your fingertips, and society develops a culture of tolerance where the weak are often exploited. In such context of close living but less real relational value, competitions are fierce in all areas of community life including religion. Materialism really comes to the fore. People become more individualistic and the question they ask, ‘why church?’ We have all we wanted and we don’t depend on the church for anything. How can the church remain faithful to her call to proclaim the good news to all people in a rapidly changing and complex environment? The church of Jesus Christ was called forth by God through the power of the Holy Spirit and built upon the rock of faith. She exist between her confession of faith and her confession of failure, between Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ, and his betrayal of him in his hour of need. She has withstood the trials of the last two thousand years and though scarred, she is the risen body of Christ. There is a tendency in some people to seek to change the church to accommodate the needs of the people. That often led people to think that if you can make the church popular, the numbers will increase. The mission task of the church is not to adapt herself to the needs of the people but to prepare the people for the kingdom. Mirslav Volf has this to offer in his explanation of ‘Difference and Identity’: It is Christian identity that creates difference from the social environment, not the other way around. The faith of the Petrine community is nourished more on its own intrinsic vision than on the deprecatory stories about others. Let me reinforce this point by an observation. When identity is forged primarily through the negative process of the rejection of the beliefs and practices of others, violence seems unavoidable,, especially in situation of conflict. We have to push others away from ourselves and keep them at a distance, and we have to close ourselves off from others to keep ourselves pure of their taint. The violence of pushing and keeping away can express itself in subdued resentment, or it can break out in aggressive and destructive behaviour. The Petrine community was discriminated against and were even a persecuted minority…………………….When blessings replaces rage and revenge, the ones who suffers violence refuses ti retaliate in kind and chooses instead to encounter violence with an embrace. But how can people give up violence in the midst of a life threatening conflict if their identity is wrapped up in rejecting the beliefs and practices of their enemies? Only those who refused to be defined by their enemies can bless them. Mirslav Volf, “Soft Difference, Theological Reflections on the Relation Between Church and Culture in I Peter”, A Northpark Journal on the Symposium in the Theological Interpretation of Scriptures (accessed 28 Feb 2012). http://www.northpark.edu/sem/exauditu/papers/volf.html As for the church’s proclamation we are encouraged to learn the culture(s) and language of our parishioners (if possible) so that we may become effective communicators of the Gospel. Thomas G. Rogers (Professor of homiletics at the Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary) said this: ….As logical and laudable as that approach might seem, it assumes that the real cultural challenge lies outside the preacher. This assumption fails to recognize that the most effective cross-cultural preaching often begins not with an outward, but with an inward look. One of the biggest mistakes preachers make is to ignore their own culture. We are all intimately familiar with the cultures with which we were raised and still live, but rarely do we consciously consider the assumptions on which our daily activities and interactions rest…. Challenges like these drive home the point that our own cultural universe is not culturally universal. This lesson learned is a necessary first step toward adopting and using effective cross-cultural preaching strategies. Thomas G. Rogers, “PLTS: Multiculturalism”, Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary. http://www.plts.edu/multiculturalis.html Bibliography 1. Cha, Peter, T., “Doing Theology in a Multicultural Theological Community”, Torch Trinity Journal Vol, 10, no. 1 (2007) divinity.tiu.ed/academic/faculty (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Casarella, Peter, “Recognising Diversity after Multiculturalism”, New Theology Review, Nov 2008 (accessed 8 Oct 2013)` Kasper, Walter, “The Unicity and Universality of Jesus Christ”, Oct 17 2000 (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Prowse, Christopher, “The Twentieth Anniversary of Pope John Paul II’s Address to Aboriginal Australians”, The Australasian Catholic Record Vol. 83, no 3. P. 267-268 (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Rogers, Thomas, G., “PLTS: Multiculturalism”, Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary. http://www.plts/edu/multiculturalism.html (accessed 8 Oct 2013) Volf, Mirslav, “Soft Difference: Theological Reflections on the Relation Between Church and Culture in 1 Pet”, A Northpark Journal on the Symposium in the Theological Interpretation of Scriptures http://www.northpark.edu/sem/exauditu/papers/volf.html (accessed 28 Feb 2012) Wilcken, John, Fr., “Christology and Aboriginal Religious Tradition,” The Australasian Catholic Record Vol., 75 no 2 (April., 1998)