Dynamics of Chinese-American Churches in the
2008-10-R13
(Copyrighted 2008
by Don M. Tow)
How they address and resolve certain key issues
that are commonly faced by Chinese-American churches (CACs) in the
Major Constituents:
The
most important issue is who are the major constituents of these CACs?
Should they be oversea-born Chinese (OBCs), or
American-born Chinese (ABCs) with the latter including those who may be OBCs
but came to the
When the Chinese first came to the U.S., either as
immigrants or as foreign students, for various reasons such as language,
culture, and racism, they established their own churches.
Initially the issue of the major constituents
of CACs was a non-issue, because essentially all the church founders were
OBCs and
the large majority of the Chinese in the
The CACs began to
address this issue by adding an English service, in addition to the Chinese
service.
The children and the young people would attend the
English service.
In order to be with their children, some of the
parents with children would also attend the English service.
Some of the other parents with children would
send their children to attend the English service, while they attend the
Chinese service.
The older members of the congregation would of
course attend the Chinese service.
Thus, most CACs became hybrid churches,
offering a Chinese ministry mixed in with some kind of English ministry.
With the continuing changing
demographics, the English ministry has become more and more important.
As a matter of fact, some people even argue that as the CACs move forward,
the English ministry should be the most important.
In my opinion,
for the next 15-20 years, CACs should essentially put equal emphasis on both
the Chinese ministry and the English ministry. My rationale is based
on the following. For the next 15-20 years, there will still be
substantial immigration of Chinese into the
Major
Decision Making Authority:
A corollary to the issue of the major
constituents of CACs is whether the major decision making authority should
reside with the leaders of the Chinese ministry, the leaders of the English
ministry, or equally with both?
The differences of opinion among the church
leaders could be due to genuine differences arising from different culture,
background experience, generational differences, and style, or due to
insubstantial differences arising mostly from human frailties associated
with the competition for control and power.
To be consistent with the previous conclusion that CACs in the first
one-third of the 21st
century should place equal emphasis on the English ministry and the Chinese
ministry, the major decision making authority should then reside equally
with the leaders of the Chinese ministry and the leaders of the English
ministry. This equal emphasis means that there should be a major
change in the governance structure of many CACs, since in the traditional
governance structure the decision making authority always resided with the
leaders of the Chinese ministry.
There is more than one method of implementing equal emphasis on the English
ministry and the Chinese ministry and equal leadership responsibility.
One method is equal and separate ministries
under the same roof, i.e., the English ministry and the Chinese ministry are
essentially independent churches but sharing the same church facilities.
The other method is providing some degree of
autonomy to each ministry, but expecting a lot of synergy and joint
activities between the Chinese ministry and the English ministry.
Personally, I strongly prefer the second
method, because it can provide value added from each of the other culture by
taking advantage of the dual cultures of both the OBCs and the ABCs.
The second method can also result in greater
efficiency via sharing of staff and volunteers.
Community Outreach:
The change in constituents and leadership
structure also affects the issue of community outreach.
The Bible emphasizes that Christians should go
into the community and serve the community. Church goers cannot call
themselves true Christians if they just attend church services and involve
in only church activities, but ignore what is happening in the community.
Although many CACs are very good in involving in the community in
Decision Review/Appeal Mechanism:
Most American churches are members of a larger
church hierarchy, e.g., a member of the Presbyterian denomination, Methodist
denomination, Baptist denomination.
Decisions made by the leadership of a local
church can be appealed or reviewed, when necessary, by the leadership higher
up in the church hierarchy.
However, many CACs are independent churches;
they are not member churches in a hierarchy of churches.
Therefore, there is no obvious review or appeal
process.
Church decisions are usually made by a small
leadership board [e.g., the minister(s) and the elders] which in principle
could be reviewed and overturned by the general membership.
However, it is impractical and unrealistic to
expect the general membership to be knowledgeable about the details of the
many issues faced by their church.
Therefore, it is important to set up a larger
review or oversight board consisting of, e.g., the minister(s), elders,
deacons, and other key influential and active members of the church, to
review or receive appeals from the general membership when necessary.
This
of course does not remove the ultimate authority from the general membership
as a whole.
Unanimity Versus Majority in Decision Making:
Another issue that CACs need to address is
whether unanimity is required in making decisions; a corollary of that is
how quickly decisions need to be made.
Until
recently when the need for change in the CACs was not as urgent, it was not
as critical in delaying the decision making process.
If unanimity was not reached, then the decision
was postponed to a future date.
However, now that CACs are facing several
fundamental issues which are critical in their continuing evolution and
their future success, I believe they can no longer afford a very slow
decision making process.
On any decision, it is of course best to have
unanimity.
But if there is no unanimity, then a decision
should still be made, because no decision is also a decision, i.e., just a
decision for the status quo.
For most decisions, a simple majority should
suffice.
On certain critical issues, a two-thirds majority may
be required.
A side benefit of a quicker decision making
process is increased efficiency, and more people will be willing to
volunteer their time to assume various leadership positions within the
church, because issues are no longer discussed again and again and again
when there is no unanimity, carrying over from one meeting to another to
another.
Summary:
Due
to changing demographics, there are at least five fundamental issues that
CACs need to address:
In this article, we propose that for the next 15-20 years, CACs should put
equal emphasis on the OBCs and the ABCs, or equal emphasis on the Chinese
ministry and the English ministry.
The decision making authority should reside
equally with the leaders of the Chinese ministry and the leaders of the
English ministry. Synergy should be cultivated between the two
ministries.
More outreach emphasis should be given to the
local community.
In light of the general independence of many
CACs and not part of a denominational hierarchy, a review/appeal mechanism
should be set up between the leadership board and the general membership.
A quicker decision making process that does not
require unanimity should be adopted.
Even if we adopt all of the above, if the people involved do not exhibit
sincerity, honesty, humility, respect, and love in doing their work and in
interacting with their colleagues and fellow church members, we will not
have a successful church.
In the final analysis, a successful church
requires both a suitable structure and a proper mental attitude.
I believe making these changes and adopting the
proper mental attitude would greatly help CACs to evolve to meet the
changing needs due to the changing demographics.
[1] For
many years until around the mid-20th century, the
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments (or questions) from readers are welcome. Please specify whether you want to share your comments with only the author of this website or with the other readers. If it is the latter, your comments will be posted in the appropriate "Comments" page. Please send them via an email to [email protected].