Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 10, 2014

Posted under

Multicultural churches

Comments

Leave a comment

Immigration is Tough

I took a couple of days vacation this week, so I’m also taking a short cut with this blog post. I recently came across this article on ESPN that describes the challenges confronting Latin American baseball players who’ve been raised in poverty when they move to the US.

“Let’s cut Yasiel Puig some slack”

Yasiel Puig is a star player for the Los Angeles Dodgers. Puig was born and raised in Cuba. He defected from Cuba in 2012 and shortly after signed a multimillion dollar contract with the Dodgers.

Yasiel PuigIn June 2013 Puig made his major league debut. Since then he has seemingly made a habit of attracting controversy and criticism. Off the field he’s twice been arrested for driving 40-50+ mph over the speed limit. On the field he’s been criticised for some of his decisions and effort. His attitude toward the media  has also lacked cooperation at  times leading to more criticism.

If you’re an American member of the media, or coaching staff, or fan, you look at his behaviour and evaluate it based upon standards and social expectations with which you’re familiar. In this article Dan Le Batard does a good job of explaining all the adjustments Puig, and other Latin American players, go through when they find instant wealth in a new country.

I share this article here as a reminder that many industries have to work through the cultural challenges that arise in a multicultural environment. Churches can learn from these businesses and industries. Over time Puig will undoubtedly become more familiar with American expectations and customs, but in the meantime he will continue to fumble his way through social situations and probably offend some people as well.

This article reminds me that often we know very little of what’s going on in  a person’s life that motivates their behaviours and attitudes. We need to  exercise care not to simply criticise behaviours without making and effort to understand what’s going on int he bigger picture of their life.

I remember an elderly lady in my home church who emigrated from Germany after World War II. Fairly regularly she would drop an expletive into a conversation. She was a wonderful Christian so this always seemed very strange. One day I learned that her husband had been killed by the Nazis and she’d emigrated on her own. She’d found work wherever she could get it and worked in the fields harvesting crops for many years. In that environment she was exposed to a lot of course language at the same time she was learning English. She simply didn’t have anyone in her life to help her navigate the social acceptance of particular words. Knowing that back story really helped to understand conversations I’d had with her!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

April 2, 2014

Posted under

Multicultural churches

Comments

Leave a comment

The Conference Conundrum

Late last year I came across an article describing the lack of racial diversity among speakers at major evangelical conferences around the US.

Since I can be a pretty skeptical guy, let me get the limitations of this article out of the way:

  • The numbers are not serious research as they were determined simply by the author scanning names and photo’s of speakers at the various conferences. (I expect they should still be pretty close to accurate.)
  • The article’s bottom line that only 13% of conference speakers represent minorities is skewed by some conferences with many speakers but low minority involvement. In fact about one-quarter of the conferences listed have 20% or higher minority speakers.
  • The numbers do not reflect the percentage of “unique” speakers, either white or minority. It could be the same 5 black and Hispanic speakers at each conference!
  • Some of the organizations that host these conferences serve mostly white churches. The speakers reflect the target audience.
  • The evangelical movement is largely a white movement. As the article itself points out 81% of evangelicals are non-hispanic whites. Wouldn’t we expect their conferences to be largely white?
  • This is not just a white issue. The religious landscape is scattered with black denominations, hispanic workshops, etc.

Despite the limitations listed above I thought the article raised a valid point on whether these significant and influential events among evangelical church leadership should better reflect the goal of racial diversity.

In a similar analysis Mark DeYmaz concluded that based upon US population distribution at least 25% of conference speakers would be non-White. He’s not arguing for quotas or compromising the quality of speakers, just more awareness of this issue and the racial landscape of the United States.

I’ve never organized or hosted a major conference. All my reflection should be understood through that lens.

These major events that attract thousands of church leaders have an easily generalised goal of influencing the church to be more passionate and effective in carrying out the mission of God. In many ways these conferences seek to model what local churches can look like, and inspire them to move in certain directions.

If a conference rolls out white male after white male speaker, it implies that these white men are the keepers of God’s word for the church today. It discourages minorities from attending the conference as their social context and cultural perspective will not be represented. It further insulates the “white church” from the influence of other people groups and thus perpetuates the issue of segregation within the church.

I’m not at all blaming conferences for the segregation of the church. I am criticising these conferences for not leading the movement toward racially integrated churches. I see this as an opportunity missed.

Because I know some people will quickly point a finger at the various workshops and conferences catering to minority groups let me address that topic for a moment.

Some of those conferences need to exist to serve a particular language group. Some of those conferences exist because they function as identity preservation for a particular cultural group. (If there was a conference for “Australian church leaders working in the US”, I’d try to get there!) Some of these workshops allow issues specific to Asian-American immigrants to be addressed by those familiar with the issues.

I’m not trying to argue that all conferences should offer a melting pot of speakers and attendees.

However, even within the workshops that cater specifically to non-White populations it seems that many of the arguments for greater diversification still have some validity. I would hope that all church leaders across the racial spectrum agree that we can learn from each other.

If there isn’t room for racial diversity in our iconic events, then there’s unlikely to be room for this enrichment in our local congregations.

Thankfully, DeYmaz could also reflect, “With this in mind, we should be encouraged as trends are moving in a positive direction.”

If you’re interested in multi-ethnic conferences here are a couple to consider:

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 26, 2014

Posted under

Multicultural churches

Comments

Leave a comment

Am I too White?

I don’t know a lot about River Pointe Church in Houston. This video was embedded in this interesting article on River Pointe and its efforts to embrace racial diversity.

I’m going to make a few comments on the video, so WATCH IT NOW!!!

The question “Am I too white to be your pastor?” seems like a fair one to ask. That one question addresses several underlying issues. “Do you think a white guy like me can speak into your cultural world?”, “Do you think God can speak to you through me in a relevant way or am I too different?”, “How important is it for your worship to reflect your culture?”, “Can the Spirit of God operate cross-culturally?”

In sharing this question I don’t want to disparage any minority that might answer “Yes”. There are times when I convince myself that I’m too white to pastor in a multiracial church.

I found it interesting that many of the people surveyed in the video who answered “No”, still attended mono-racial churches. I suspect that for many people the thought of church as anything but mono-racial has never crossed their mind.

From watching the video and reading the original article I get the sense that this church actively pursues cultural competence.  They’re asking awkward questions and hosting difficult conversations. Theydon’t pretend racial diversity is an insignificant accident. This quote from lead pastor, Patrick Kelley, demonstrates the attitude necessary to make a church like this survive.

“The key has been humbly becoming a learner,” says Patrick, who adds that he had to overcome racist attitudes he picked up from his parents. “I went in as ignorant as could be. And more than once, I’ve gone to our church and said, ‘I want to ask your forgiveness. But if you’ll give me a lot of grace, we’ll go together trying to reach our community for Christ.’ ”

I liked how in the video Reggie Slater made the point that worshiping with people unfamiliar with us requires us making an effort. It’s easier to stick with what’s familiar, and many people choose easy. But easy is seldom best. If it was easy we’d have solved this problem a long time ago and moved on to the next topic.

I also liked how Reggie turned the initial question around, “Am I too black for your church?”. As a minister I can ask all day whether or not I’m too white to be your pastor, but if my church believes the individual is too black, too Latino, or too Asian to fit in, then I’ve asking the wrong people the wrong questions.

Lastly, let me point out from the article that River Pointe didn’t set out to be a multiracial church. It simply set out to serve it’s community with a willingness to become multiracial as a reflection of that community. Kelley comments, “It’s not a goal of River Pointe to be diverse, but to help all people groups find a meaningful relationship with Jesus Christ. We have to figure out how to be all things to all men in order to win some.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 20, 2014

Posted under

Current Events

Comments

Leave a comment

May I Vent?

I am enough of a sports fan that I also publish a christian sports blog. As an Australian football fan I’ve been poking around their league website as the season is just starting. As I poked around I immediately noticed two articles (here and here) related to promoting multiculturalism in the sport and tolerance in our society.

Look at the vision and resources dedicated to this program described in this quote,

The AFL is pleased to announce 183 multicultural community leaders from around Australia will join the AFL Multicultural Community Ambassador program in 2014.

The aim of the AFL Multicultural Community Ambassador Program is to further engage multicultural communities in Australian football through a network of dedicated volunteers… representing 44 countries of birth, 65 nationalities and around 100 languages.

So here’s my vent…

How can a football league recognise the value of racial and ethnic diversity to its future growth while many Christians complain that the complexion of their neighbourhood has changed?

How can a football league proactively recruit and train “lay people” to spread the good news about football within their communities, while the answer most churches have is to start a new church for the new people?

How can it seem so normal for a football league to celebrate cultural diversity and such a political statement for a church to do the same?

How can a football league possess greater passion in spreading its game to new people than the church has for spreading the message of new life in Christ?

Can you imagine the church recruiting and training 200 “ambassadors” representing 44 countries of birth, 65 nationalities and around 100 languages? Wouldn’t that be a dynamic workshop?!

A separate article describes how Essendon captain, Jobe Watson, joined the AFL’s multicultural ambassador program as “the token white guy”. The rest of the players in this program represent immigrant or aboriginal communities. So why would a white guy from the suburbs join? I love his answer,

How can you expect society to be inclusive if a proportion of society only think multiculturalism is the responsibility of people with multicultural backgrounds?

To build on being an inclusive game and being accessible to people from all different backgrounds, it’s important that someone who doesn’t have as diverse a multicultural background as others is interested and is part of the program.

Those two sentences carry a lot of weight when applied to the church. Unless people of all ethnic backgrounds willingly work together our churches and society will never change. It shouldn’t be about a minority or collection of minorities conducting a campaign. It shouldn’t be about the majority legislating a path forward. It should be about everyone being willing to talk and work together.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 13, 2014

Posted under

Book Review

Comments

2 Comments

Cultural Competence

This is the fifth and final post discussing a five stage continuum of growing cross-cultural competence that Mark DeYmaz describes in his book, Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church. He calls this destination stage “Cultural Competence”.

We should not confuse Cultural Competence with expertise. DeYmaz describes Culturally Competent people as “individuals who value diversity, conduct self-assessment, manage the dynamics of difference, acquire and institutionalize cultural knowledge and are able to adapt to diversity and the cultural contexts of the communities they serve.” (105) That’s quite a mouth full.

This definition becomes clearer when we contrast it with the previous stage, Cultural Sensitivity. Sensitivity emphasises asking the right questions. Competence has learned the answers to the question and now does something about it.

Notice the action words in the above definition: Value, conduct, manage, acquire and institutionalize, and adapt. The Culturally Competent person still continues to ask questions and explore different cultures. This person remembers previous lessons, avoids the pitfalls and uses their inquiries to benefit others of that culture.

One personal example of obtaining Cultural Competence involves football. Coming to the United States in 1999 I was aware of “gridiron”, but had zero understanding. Over time I asked questions and listened to sports talk radio. I selected a team to support and participated in conversations with American fans. I still know more about Australian football than American, but I have reached a level of competence so that I can blog about American sports, including NFL.

What areas of church life require us to pursue Cultural Competence? Of course, individual relationships are the most important, but many other areas of congregational life present opportunities for cultural misunderstandings. The worship service can potentially project the values of inclusion and acceptance by the people involved in public responsibilities. A variety of musical styles communicates openness to diverse cultures.

Less obvious ministry opportunities to demonstrate Cultural Competence include church meals and the nursery. If the church fellowship team prepares a menu for each church meal that is monocultural some members and guests will feel overlooked. While chicken and mashed potatoes may be staples in one cultural setting, others long for various beans and even different meats. Drinks also present a challenge not only between coffee and hot tea, but in a variety of cold drink preferences.

Then consider the nursery. As the parent of a 4 year old I’m aware of many different parenting approaches just within my white middle class community. Are Hispanic or Asian parents as willing to drop their children off at the nursery as White or African-American parents? Do different racial groups have different behavioural expectations for their children in the nursery? How can these differences be accommodated? How do these differences impact the scheduling and training of nursery volunteers? These cultural distinctions are not limited to racial differences but could also be relevant between urban and suburban families.

When churches can navigate these potentially troubled waters there’s a great likelihood that they’ve achieved Cultural Competence. At least in those areas of church life.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

March 5, 2014

Posted under

Book Review

Comments

1 Comment

How Sensitive Are You?

This isthe fourth post discussing a five stage continuum of growing cross-cultural competence that Mark DeYmaz describes in his book, Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church. He calls this fourth stage “Cultural Sensitivity”.

If you’re reading this blog you’re probably already on the path to cultural sensitivity. Not because you’re learning from the most sensitive person in the world. I’m not. But because you’re making the effort to learn more about the subject. Hopefully you’re just as willing to learn more about other cultures you encounter in your church and community.

Many people practice cultural sensitivity when we travel overseas. In 1958 an influential fictional book was published with the title The Ugly American. It described a sensitive and insensitive approaches to interacting with locals in foreign countries. In time the phrase has often been associated with American tourists. However, tourists from all countries run the risk of being “ugly” when insensitive to local customs and values.

Most people I know when preparing for international travel take time to research the culture of their destination. Internet articles and numerous travel guides alert travelers to possible local sensitivities. Other people I know make an effort to speak to friends who’ve already traveled to those places and learn from their experiences.

But surely if I’m attending church with people who grew up in the same city as I did, I don’t need a “travel guide” to understand them!

Phil RobertsonFor several months I attended the church where Phil Robertson is an elder. I respect him, his family and the church. However, his comments in a GQ article regarding African-Americans that he observed prior to desegregation in the South demonstrated a lack of cultural sensitivity. He seems to assume that what he saw reflected the hearts of the people.

Practicing cultural sensitivity requires sitting down with those same people and saying, “I saw this and this on the news. How does it affect you?” Or maybe asking “Do you feel that our laws treat you as a lesser human being?” Without those conversations and efforts to understand those from another culture we’re never going to be sensitive to the thoughts and hearts of others.

Pursuing cultural sensitivity requires that we seek more than the facts regarding a culture, a race, or an historical event. True sensitivity demands that we seek to glimpse the feelings and heart of people with different experiences and values than ours.

Churches can promote the pursuit of sensitivity through organised events where different cultures exchange perspectives on various events. However, this does involve a risk of debating or comparing values. The most effective way for churches to embrace diverse ethnicities is for leaders to model the practice of cultural sensitivity one-on-one. These leaders will find themselves better equipped to lead the congregation along the multi-ethnic journey toward Cultural Competence.

The need for cultural education isn’t limited to when we travel. Too often we assume everyone sees the world the way we do. We need to pursue cultural sensitivity each time we engage people from a different cultural background to ourselves. Since loving our neighbour requires us to express that love in a way that is meaningful to them, we have a responsibility to first learn “what is meaningful to them”.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 25, 2014

Posted under

Book Review

Comments

1 Comment

The Point of No Return

This is my third post discussing a five stage continuum of growing cross-cultural competence that Mark DeYmaz describes in his book, Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church. He calls this third stage “Cultural Awareness”.

Cultural Awareness occurs when a person recognises and accepts cultural distinctives. To reach this point one crosses a tipping point away from the previous stage of Cultural Blindness. Once a person accepts that culture runs much deeper than the skin and actually makes up a large part of a persons identity they can no longer deny that cultural differences exist.

Churches positioned in the stage of Cultural Awareness will find themselves talking about their diversity. They will also take steps to address obvious cultural issues such as providing sign language interpretation for deaf members. Decorations and art around the church building may reflect racial diversity. Signs and announcements may be printed in multiple languages. The church might even provide English as a Second Language classes.

DeYmaz describes how Mosaic church has hung flags in their worship area to “communicate no only our awareness but also our appreciation for the individuals and nations represented in our body at any given time.” (104) This makes a public statement that other nationalities and cultures are wanted and welcome at the church.

My observation of this stage is that churches and individuals willingly make adjustments to accommodate differences they observe with people of another race or culture.

This stage cannot be the final destination on the journey of cultural awareness. Although it has crossed a tipping point it still deals mostly with surface issues and observed needs. At this stage understanding intangible cultural values is not a priority.

Although a church service might be bilingual, the attitude toward time and punctuality may still reflect the values of the majority group. A casual attitude toward punctuality on the part of the minority may be generally regarded as disrespectful and rude.

Cultural Awareness does not necessarily lead one to seek understanding of other cultures. The word “awareness” is key to this definition. People recognise differences, but probably can’t explain the differences or the heart issues and values of the other culture. At this stage a person might acknowledge the fact that racial discrimination occurs, but not sit down with a man or woman of colour and ask them to describe the feelings that come with being discriminated against.

If your church is at a place of Cultural Awareness, celebrate that perspective! This is the starting point for a positive dialogue. From this point growth is possible without requiring a new worldview. But don’t sit back as though this is the destination.

Encourage your church to explore cultural issues. Take the first step yourself. Whether your part of a majority or minority, take some time to sit down with someone and compare cultural notes. Find someone you trust and ask them questions you’re nervous to ask publicly.

Don’t think you’ve arrived because you can list those differences.

Make an effort to understand the reason for differences.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 11, 2014

Posted under

Book Review

Comments

5 Comments

Footprints on the Toilet Seat

This is my second post discussing a five stage continuum of growing cross-cultural competence that Mark DeYmaz describes in his book, Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church. He calls his second stage “Cultural Blindness”.

While stage one actively promotes destruction of other cultures, stage two takes a much more subtle approach. While stage one should never be valued within a church, many churches seem to pursue stage two as a desirable goal.

DeYmaz provides the following definition of cultural blindness:

“[an attitude that] fosters an assumption that people are all basically alike, so what works with members of one culture should work with all other cultures.”

The cunning danger of cultural blindness is that this attitude feeds off words like “equality”. Those who adopt this definition of equality don’t realise that that they actually dehumanise all people. They devalue the unique experiences and values of diverse cultural, ethnic, racial groups and fit them all into a single “human” mold. Strangely that single mold often looks like the person or group making the statement.

I have personally witnessed the pursuit of cultural blindness when I have suggested to churches that they should celebrate the racial diversity among their members. In reply I have heard back statements such as:

  • We don’t want to make a big deal of it, we’re not that different from other churches. (This is a false statement.)
  • When I see people I don’t see colour, I just see people.
  • We’re all Christians, let’s focus on what we have in common.

I’m thankful that the congregation I currently serve does celebrate Harmony Sunday each year.

If we say we see people, but not colour then we’re really not seeing people. If you tell me you know me well and you love me, but you want to ignore the fact that I’m an Australian then you’re ignoring a large part of who I am. You’re ignoring the way I pronounce words, the words I use, the sports that I value most, summers at the beach, a love of lamb meat. Instead, you project on me your likes and dislikes on the basis that we’re both human.

I’m not just being critical of others. I still remember saying to a good friend something like, “I think cultural differences are a crock for people who can’t be bothered to be polite or decent.”

Yep, that was me.

Then I lived with some international friends who had several conversations about whether or not they could balance to squat on a raised toilet as they were accustomed to squatting on the lower toilets in their home country.

A person might say they don’t see colour, but there’s a good chance they’ll see footprints on the toilet seat and not be happy about it!

It’s much healthier to recognise and discuss cultural distinctions than pretend they don’t exist while complaining or fighting about them.

Then there’s those Christians who quote verses like 1 Corinthians 12:13 “For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.” They then use this to argue for a Christian culture subsumes other human cultures.

I was once invited by an African-American family to participate in the funeral of a loved one. I spoke with the minister of the church hosting the funeral and sought clarification on what the various elements of the service were. Some of them were new to me but apparently familiar to this African-American community. Rather than give me an explanation he laughed at my question and said something like, “We’re all Christians so just speak the word.”

That wasn’t very helpful and made me feel a bit stupid.

Yes, Christians have an enormous amount in common with one another. In fact, it’s the presence of the Spirit of God within in us that motivates us to overcome our cultural differences to work together and honour God as a unified body. But the worship at a Chinese church is never going to look like a worship service at a predominantly black church. That difference is culture.

While it’s tempting to pretend that racial and ethnic differences are only skin deep, it’s crucial for church leaders to encourage our members to pursue understanding, not ignorance.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 5, 2014

Posted under

Book Review

Comments

1 Comment

Are Churches Destroying Cultures?

In Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church, Mark DeYmaz describes a five stage continuum of growing cross-cultural competence. Over the next month I’m going to spend some time discussing each of these stages. Here’s DeYmaz’s introduction:

So how can those of us committed to Christ and to the local church pursue cross-cultural competence and avoid ethnocentrism? Although there are a variety of ways to go about it, we should first understand that it will be an ongoing developmental process. We see a cultural continuum moving from destructiveness to blindness to awareness to sensitivity to competence. (p103)

Cultural Destructiveness

I hope that this first stage is never present in a church. DeYmaz includes  a quote that at this level “the emphasis is on using differences as barriers.” People with this mindset acknowledge only one way of being and intentionally seek to subdue and eradicate other cultures.

Examples given of this stage of cultural competence include the ethnic atrocities arising in Nazi Germany, Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur. Attempts to “reform” native cultures in the United States by forcing Native Americans to Westernise and the tragedy of the Stolen Generation in Australia also fall under this heading.

The goal of multi-ethnic churches is to respect all cultures, not force all cultures to dissolve into the dominant culture of the church.

So while Cultural Destructiveness is never (should never be) a goal of the church, it remains a great fear that hangs over race relations within the church.

Here’s an example from my personal experience.

Australian’s love to watch American movies and TV shows. There’s a lot of them. Some of them are great. Some connect with niche audiences. They generally have high production values and talented writers and actors. What’s not to like?

This movie raises some of the issues in the Australia – US relationship. I thought it was very well done.

In contrast films made in Australia telling Australian stories have much smaller budgets. The writers and actors do a terrific job, but the movies always seem to lack the Hollywood glitz. Australia doesn’t have super spy agencies. Australia doesn’t have the super glamourous rich and famous segment of society. Basically, Australia just lacks the same “cool factor” that American movies seem to ooze. As a result less people watch them.

That’s simply the market realities. There is no secret US plot to take over Australia and suppress Australian stories and destroy the Aussie culture. (or is there???) But when kids who need the police in an emergency dial 911 instead of the Australian emergency number 000, the influence is undeniable. Aussies then become defensive toward Americans as a way of protecting their cultural identity and independence.

Can you picture this same process taking place in a church setting?

While teaching English to immigrants can provide a valuable service to that community, if immigrants are expected to always speak in English in the church they will always be outsiders. If the church doesn’t support the learning of the parent languages among 2nd generations, it may appear that the church is on a mission to Anglicise and Westernise all immigrants as much as it is to worship God.

If US churches make a big deal of Independence Day celebrations, but fail to acknowledge Martin Luther King Day, or Chinese New Year they silently make the statement that only one culture is important. Sometimes churches feel good because their Chinese members celebrate the Lunar New Year together and it’s on the church calendar, but no one really expects the whole church to attend. Yet for the Labor Day picnic the entire church body is expected to be in attendance (including the Chinese members).

While an initial survey of this continuum may tempt us to disregard the first stage, it really needs to be considered. While only in rare and extreme situations would a church actually say “we don’t want a particular racial group or culture to enter our church”, the fear of cultural destruction is very real for minority groups within a church. “Do we have to give up our racial and cultural identity to become part of this church family?”

Churches and individual Christians need to make the conscious decision that we will not only love and embrace people from other races and cultures, we we will also do our best to welcome their culture. One way we will demonstrate our love is by expressing interest and value in the customs of cultures we don’t know well.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 21, 2014

Posted under

Current Events, Theology

Comments

1 Comment

Why Did Jesus Choose a Samaritan?

Luke 10 contains Jesus’ Parable of the Good Samaritan. The basic message is that we are to love each person that crosses our path.

The parable Jesus told contains an additional message that we might easily rush by.

In the previous chapter (Luke 9) a Samaritan village refused to provide food and shelter for Jesus because he was traveling to Jerusalem. That sounds like prejudice at its finest. Jesus’ disciples then sought to return the favour as they asked if they could call down fire from heaven upon the village. Jesus rebuked them and walked on to another village.

good samaritan 01A little later when asked to answer the question “Who is my neighbour?” Jesus tells a story that contrasts the religious leaders of the day and a foreigner. If Jesus simply wanted to create a contrast for his story, he could have told the parable of the Good Undertaker, or the Good Tax Collector. He could have used any number of unclean or unwelcome characters from Jewish society. Instead, Jesus made his hero a Samaritan.

In choosing a Samaritan as his hero Jesus provided a subversive commentary on Jewish societal attitudes of the day. So if you think Jesus wouldn’t have anything to say about race relations in the US (or any other country) today, you’re wrong.

A significant message from this parable is that we are to love our neighbours that have black or white skin. We are to love those who speak English poorly, or not at all. Of course, none of us are racists. But there are some groups of people we don’t like very much.

  • The (white) suburbs don’t like when the (black) city starts spreading outward.
  • We complain aobut all the Indians in the call centers who we can’t understand.
  • We don’t like the (sometimes illegal) immigrants taking “our jobs”.
  • We don’t like the Asians we see driving around town in their nice cars. (Because they all drive Mercedes, right?)
  • We’re uncomfortable driving through neighbourhoods where the store signs are all in another language.

Maybe we don’t want to call down heavenly fire onto these people, but it would be a stretch to say that we love them.

Yesterday was Martin Luther King Jr Day. As a figurehead within the civil rights movement he played a pivotal role in bringing great transformation to this country. In his “I Have A Dream” speech he made the statement,

“I have a dream, that one day, my four little children will live in a country where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

That’s a dream Jesus had for the world. Jesus dreamed of a kingdom defined not by ethnicity, but by character. It’s certainly a sentiment found in this parable. In verse 37 we find that the true neighbour is not identified by race, but as “The one who had mercy upon him.”

We need to respect the colour of skin, and the riches of languages and cultures of other people. We also need to look beyond these traits to their heart needs and their character.

In The Parable of The Good Samaritan Jesus makes a subversive statement about race relations. “Samaritans are God’s people too.” It’s a message that retains its relevance in 2014.