epilogue to cultural autobiography

Epilogue

Reflecting back on what I wrote in my cultural autobiography I am struck by how much easier it is to perceive and criticize aspects of our culture that we have least internalized. Those aspects of our culture that most influence our ways of thinking are usually those we are least aware off, the “background” that Dr. Branson speaks of. My early reflection picked at threads of this background, usually as a result of some boundary crossing experience, but naturally most of that background remained unperceived and uncommented on.

Two readings this quarter have been particularly helpful for me in bringing that background into my field of vision, in problematizing my cultural assumptions for me to again borrow Branson’s language. Emerson and Smith in “Divided by Faith” note the individualistic assumptions and anti-structural assumptions of Evangelicalism (also found Euro-American culture in general). While I think that these assumptions are less engrained in me as a post-modern millennial than they are in my parents, for example, I had never before found the language to describe these assumptions even as I reacted to them. For several years I have felt that systems need addressed and changed, and that the church has not done enough in this area, but I didn’t have the vocabulary with which to fully and insightfully critique this state of affairs. Like a child learning vocabulary and concepts to make sense of this world we need words to make sense of our experiences.

The second reading that helped me see my cultural background was Eric Law’s treatment of power in “The Wolf Shall Dwell with the Lamb.” My perception of power was something that was truly a part of me but of which I was completely unconscious until now. Of the readings this has probably had the most impact on how I interact in multicultural settings. My church is predominantly African-American, and it has been particularly helpful to keep in mind potential differences in power-perception when interacting with my brothers and sisters (particularly the sisters).

Of course, much of my cultural background remains invisible to me even now. The goal cannot be to make the whole background pop into the foreground, but rather to begin to be aware of this background, that it is operating and is a factor in my interactions.

Where to go from here? What are my competencies, and what are my areas of weakness? Musing over these questions I recalled my interaction with people in East-Germany, probably the most significant cultural gap that I have faced. I enjoyed that time immensely even though it was hard going. There is something that I simply love about the messy business of boundary crossing, and that is a helpful place to start.

As I reflected on that experience I realized that there are two significant factors in addition to myself in any boundary crossing endeavor. My experience would have been quite different if the people I interacted with were not open to interaction and dialogue. Whenever I face a cross-cultural situation I need to be thankful for those I am engaging with. Secondly, without God’s moving in our situations none of this would be possible. As I think about boundary crossing and engage in multiethnic events and interactions I need to remember God’s role in this work.

My greatest weaknesses come right back to the first paragraph of my cultural autobiography—I am a white, educated, Euro-American male. As Eric Law points out, I perceive myself and am perceived of as having power. I can “live” the American dream and “make a name for myself” (Gen. 11), and will, unless I learn to live the cycle of cross to resurrection. I need to follow the example of Christ, “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant…” (Phil. 2:5-6). This is not natural to anyone, but is keenly difficult for those (like myself) who hold the most power. Jesus said that it is hard for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God; no matter how I hash it, I am rich—not just materially, but also in education, cultural capitol, etc. As I continue to be involved in boundary crossing I will need to consciously divest myself of this power, giving all that I have to those who have not. I will continue to fail at this, but I hope that what I have learned will help me to fail less frequently, and to succeed more often in becoming a servant, giving to those who do not have, and empowering those who lack power.

Reflections on Eric Law's book

Eric Law’s book is essentially about power. In a multicultural context power is perceived differently, held by different people, and used differently (e.g. leadership styles). I found Law’s cycle of cross (powerlessness) and resurrection (empowerment) helpful, not just in terms of leading or participating in a multicultural setting but even in daily life. We are called to follow Christ in his obedience to God, which often means becoming weak, however we (and some individuals more than others) also need to hear the message of empowerment. In daily life we will encounter situations where we need to either divest ourselves of power or claim empowerment through God, often in the same day.

People like me, well educated, white males, will need to consciously relinquish perceived power in many cases. One example of how this would play out in ministry was explained to me by a parishioner at the Latino church I visited for class a few weeks ago. I spoke with an Anglo man who had helped found the Latino congregation (he had been a missionary in Mexico), and told how he had to consciously back down from places of power when the church was just getting started. He didn’t put himself in power, he was simply perceived by those around him to be the one holding the power. When important decisions were being made, he said, all the Latinos would hold their breath and look to him to see what he had to say first. He said it took several meetings where he would refuse to have the first word before the people began to be comfortable making their own decisions. Ultimately this was healthy for the church because those who perceived that they had no power in this society, who were used to the white man telling them what to do and how to do it, these people gradually began to be empowered both in their own minds and in the life of their church. Now decisions can be made and this white man is just another voice, equal with the others in the church—no more, no less.

Law’s book made me reflect on situations I have been in where I was the vocal white person unconsciously dominating the discussion. In classes I’m fairly vocal, and while I have been conscious of that and try not to dominate I had not been aware of the power dynamics that Law points out. Recently I have been more conscious of this, particularly in my church bible-study which is usually mostly African-American women, my wife, and myself. In this situation you have many people from the group that has the least amount of power, perceived or otherwise (African-American women) and then me, who is a white male and therefore from the social group that perceives itself with the most power. I am more careful now to not speak first and to affirm those who speak seldom when they do speak. Also, because my native language is academic and because I am rather articulate, I try to be conscious of the words I use to avoid making anyone feel less educated, less smart or otherwise inferior simply because of my words. I don’t quite adopt ghetto English, but I do tend to use down to earth metaphors, examples and basic English that we all know well.

some more questions

Do theologians, etc. who speak from the margins see more clearly than those who speak from the center (to use Jung Young Kim’s language)? I believe some liberation theologians speak of the epistemological advantage of the marginalized; and I have noted that I sense more vitality and truth in the words of the marginalized (or those from the dominant culture who listen closely to the non-dominant neighbor) than in the words of those who speak from the center and do not even realize their centrality.

For example, I have seriously wondered if our Brehm center is not counter-productive by focusing on that which is a concern and of interest to predominantly white, suburban Christians. Is this just another spiritual vineyard for us wealthy to enjoy while our neighbors and the foreigner among us starve (literally and figuratively)? That is at my most cynical moments—but I do seriously wonder at times. The people I worship with on Sundays, African-Americans, do not have much time to think about the juncture of theology and art; they are more concerned with housing their brothers and sisters, getting the young people into and through college, and helping each other get out from under the tyranny of credit-card companies. They do also love dance and music; but they have no need of an institute in which to study such things.

When in one afternoon I go from reading the theology of the marginalized to reading about “the problem of divine action,” I sense a jarring dissonance, and try as I might to assure myself that the kingdom needs people to think about the problem of divine action it sounds and feels incredibly far away, scholastic, and trivial. I have grown up in a context in which the intellectual is highly valued, yet I wonder if what truly maters is sensitivity to the least of these rather than philosophical and theological sophistication/viability etc. Would a community that ignored whether its beliefs cohered with the latest thought in science and the humanities but focused simply on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and visiting those in prison survive? Would such a community be more vital and attuned to God’s will, to the kingdom, than a community in which theological, philosophical and other theoretical concerns were eloquently and insightfully addressed but which did nothing to feed, clothe, visit, etc.? My wife reminds me that there is more to the kingdom than social justice; but this thought experiment does bother me.

I have a deep seated instinct to seek moderation, in this case to say that both (social justice and theoretical work) are needed—but is that right? Somehow I feel the community that ignored the theoretical all together and focused entirely on living out the kingdom would be better off. But perhaps this is wrong; perhaps such a community would become something like the Elks Club or the Shriners—ostensibly committed to good but ultimately rather innocuous. When I reflect on the Christians who have influenced me the most, and the leaders who I resonate most with, most have a combination of practical and theoretical insight. Theory should, in theory, lead to practice, and practices set the ponderous among us to theorizing. But I do not want to evade the pressure of these questions--I still wonder about the Brehm center.

reflections on wikis

African-American

The repression of African language, religion and tradition during the slave period, noted in the history section of this wiki, is both closely related to much of our course material and significant for understanding African-American culture. The inter-relation of language, practice and religion has been pointed out; language is culture, and furthermore shapes worldviews. By attempting to deny slaves the right to practice traditions and religions and perhaps most importantly to speak their native tongues, Anglo slave owners sought to essentially destroy African culture. But of course, something had to fill this void since African slaves were not admitted into the Anglo dominated colonial culture. This gave rise to the unique African-American culture that has graced our society with eloquent and passionate preachers like Martin Luther King, and shaped most of our music from Jazz and Rock to Rap and R&B.

However, the attempt to deny African-American culture has not been limited to the slave era. Emerson and Smith noted that when the dominant culture reflects on deviant or sub-cultural art forms, typically “white” styles (e.g. metal) are criticized for degrading individual youth, whereas typically “black” styles (e.g. Rap) are criticized for being dangerous to society as a whole. Furthermore, it is not unusual for white Americans to accuse African-Americans of trying to “live in the past” when African-Americans attempt to salvage some shreds of identity from their more than tragic past in this country. Consequently, the attempt on the part of Euro-Americans to deny African-Americans a culture is not limited to early nineteenth century Mississippi.

Euro-American

It was quite interesting to read about my own culture as researched and compiled by students from a different culture. Often what is striking or important for an outsider is assumed and subconscious to those native to the culture in question. I think this holds true for many of the observations in the Euro-American wiki, and it was enlightening to hear from an others perspective.

Family, of course, is a hot topic for many conservative white Christians, however it is still often taken for granted. The divorce rate is slightly higher for evangelical Americans than for the population at large, which suggests that even if we are aware of the problem we don’t take it too seriously. Something may be going on at the perception level; as Emerson and Smith pointed out, evangelicals tend to think individualistically rather than systemically, consequently family is defined as “nuclear” and any problems in particular families are particular problems. Thus the stock evangelical answer to the high divorce rate is to legislate or otherwise reaffirm individualistic “nuclear” family values, values that emphasize the nuclear family as the atoms of society.

Asian-American

First off, I would like to suggest that this wiki is used as an example of what a good wiki looks like next time this class is taught. After reading this wiki I feel like I have a much better grasp of what was aimed for with the wiki assignments. Excellent work folks, good job!

The history of Asian immigration very clearly demonstrates some of the effects of western and U.S. colonialism. It was pointed out that many of these groups have faced persecution and difficulty upon immigrating here; Asians perhaps more than most other immigrant groups have been viewed as suspicious, foreign “others.” However, in many cases United States imperialism and interventionism has strongly drawn Asians to this country. Koreans, Vietnamese and Filipinos in particular have been caught up in the actions of this country; in many cases the U.S. came to them before they came to the U.S. This does not necessarily mean that we should not be involved in international affairs (isolationism), but it does suggest that we should welcome immigrants from those countries we have been involved with rather than view them with utter suspicion.

The authors of this wiki do an excellent job of raising cultural practices and issues. As the authors point out, Asian-Americans have particularly struggled to maintain their ethnic identity, and often the difficulty of doing so has resulted in a division between first and subsequent generation Asian-Americans. Korean-American scholar and seminary professor Jung Young Kim has pointed out some of the positive contributions Asian-Americans (and other hyphenated-Americans) are able to make to Christian living. These hyphenated peoples know on a deep level what it is like to live in two realities; e.g. to be both Chinese and American, and as a result to be something entirely new as well. Similarly Christians are to live in a sort of hyphenated state; the kingdom is already here but not yet complete, we are in the world but not of it, and so on. Kim uses the term “marginality” to define the space occupied by hyphenated people; they live at the margins of two identities and cultures. We can learn much from this place as Christians, and particularly as Christians seeking to embrace cultural diversity and intercultural communication. To live on the margin rather than in the privileged center means one touches the margins of other cultures--if we stay in the center, comfortably ensconced in our own native culture, we will never truly communicate across those margins.