The God Who Speaks The Church Who Listens

Christians are called to engage in culture, representing the reign of God in each sphere of society. The grace that the Lord bestowed upon His elect demands the whole of them, it is a total transformation of being to be lived out. More specifically, it plays a role in their spiritual development and knowledge of God. For the purposes of this paper, an understanding of the following philosophies will be assumed and the merits of which will not be discussed: speech act theory, Calvinistic common and saving grace, Dooyeweerd’s non-reductionistic modal aspects and Abraham Kuyper’s sphere sovereignty. From these philosophical positions on interpreting scripture and understanding Christian spirituality, the paper will begin by laying out the philosophical foundations and relevance of Wolterstorff’s double hermeneutics and Kuyper’s sphere  sovereignty. Upon defining these terms, the paper will transition into the integration of these philosophical understandings of biblical interpretation and sphere sovereignty. The position this paper will take is the double hermeneutic approach to biblical interpretation and Christian engagement within the sovereign spheres facilitate each other in gaining knowledge of God. 

Modern hermeneutics reduced the Bible to a human made text that could be understood through human designed systems and structures. Biblical scholars typically tried to address issues of authorial intent, original audience’s interpretation and the historical events to which the text refers. Theologians then came along and selected certain passages that supported the general theologies that they supported. Each of them did there own thing without much intermixing.[1] In response to this reductionism and division, Wolterstorff responded, in a series of articles, with a double hermeneutic approach. Wolterstorff’s double hermeneutic combined the interpretation of each text on its own terms with the theological pursuit of treating the Word of God as one book. Wolterstorff focused much of his attention on the issue does God speak and how do Christians interpret this speech. Wolterstorff, started by arguing that God speaking is different from God inspiring the biblical author (as it would just be God inspiring and the author speaking) or God revealing himself to the author (as most of what is revealed is not spoken but implied). [2] Wolterstorff then argued from speech act theory that, even though God does not have a body, he can still speak, while not through locutionary speech but through illocutionary speech.[3] The speech act that God participates in takes on a double agency with the speech of God being proclaimed through deputized speech and appropriated speech.3  The contemporary audience in seeking to interpret God’s speech at the first hermeneutical level interprets each biblical writer and work separately; however, because humans are fallible a second level is needed in which the work is compared with other works in the Cannon.[4] Interpreters should still read scripture with a hermeneutic of trust rather than suspicion. However, only in the broader narrative is God’s infallible speech distinguished from the authors. Wolterstorff goes on to argue that knowledge of God is necessary for understanding God’s speech.[5] Specifically, when it comes to whether one interprets the text to be literal or figurative. For instance, ones conception of God will play a role in whether they believe God literally has wings or if such passages are to be seen more symbolically. One comes to this knowledge of God through living faithfully with God and through faithful theological and philosophical reflections; each shaped by the church, both past and present, and multiple other factors that make up ones worldview.  The interpretation process then goes as such,

“We interpret in the light of convictions we already have about God. In the course of our interpretation we then learn new things about God—and we find that some of the things we already believed don’t work out in the process of interpretation. With these new and corrected beliefs in mind, we go on to interpret other, perhaps more difficult passages. Thereby we learn more things and again get some of the convictions we already had corrected. And so it goes. It’s more like a spiral than a straight line.”[6]

            One potential pitfall for the theory came from Merold Westphal. Westphal argued that even illocutionary speech still required a body.[7] He argued that Wolterstorff, through speech act theory, only confirm what Maimonides and Schneider argued for the necessity of a body for communication. In order to prove God speaks requires going beyond speech act theory to an ontology of participation and analogy.[8] Humanity is made in the image of God; therefore, human speech forms are miniscule in comparison to the speech of God. God’s speech does not fit human categories. Westphal argued this is exactly how it should be, a God who is both idiosyncratic (independent from human social conventions) and personal (able to relate with creation).[9] With this caveat to Wolterstorff’s theory, the double hermeneutic is preserved and made even more relevant.   

As Christians learn to hear God, what they learn from God must be put into practice, not just in the church but also in all spheres of life. Early in church history dualism between sacred and secular aspects of life emerged, reducing all things into polarized aspects of life. Kuyper’s sphere sovereignty and Dooyeweerd’s modal aspects sought to end the dualisms and reductionism. They declared that by the common grace of God all things are good and useful for God’s kingdom purposes. Sphere sovereignty is an interpretation of scripture, which argues that every square inch of creation belongs to God.[10] Catholic theory of subsidiarity is similar to sphere sovereignty; however, under subsidiarity theory there is a hierarchy of authority. In sphere sovereignty, on the other hand, Dooyeweerd argued that the differences between the spheres are more a difference of complexity, with each sphere building on the others, rather than of authority.[11]   It is important to recognize the skills associated with a specific mode of authority within a particular sphere do not automatically transfer to other spheres.[12]  

While not every mode of authority transfers between spheres, there are many parallels and connections between biblical interpretation and Christian spirituality. Herman Bavinck a contemporary of Abraham Kuyper pointed many of these connections out.  Bavinck argued from an antievidentialist position when it came to matters of transcendence. God graces the interpreter with knowledge of Himself. [13] God gives the interpreter faith and testifies that scripture is the Word of God. The interpreter ultimately must go back to a sense of divinity or a divine instinct when interpreting a text. This knowledge comes from the Christian life and the environment in which God places them. The truth of this is rooted in faith, and cannot be proven through human made systems as it goes beyond human understanding. 

Karl Barth took a similar stance. While he took seriously the historical interpretation approach of modernism, he understood that scriptures transcendent matters require God’s Word and Spirit to make its meaning understood.[14] His recognition that scripture is a human witness to divine revelation accounted for the modern questions of historicity and the spiritual questions of divine inspiration. He saw scripture as a testimony to God’s action throughout history proclaiming the good news of God’s salvation through the incarnate Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The attitude one should take to biblical interpretation is one of faith and obedience, depending on God to reveal the mystery in the text. Exegesis therefore starts with a texts relationship to the themes as revealed by the Spirit. For Barth both Christian life and biblical interpretation relies upon total dependence on God. There is no natural knowledge of God by which just anyone can interpret the text, but only when God makes Himself known to an interpreter are their eyes opened to the meaning of the text. Such anthropological interpretations would place the onus on humanity to try to understand the transcendent matters in the text. Proper exegesis involves an ontology of God, faith and prayer. The church’s role is not to speak as if it had an infallible interpretation rather surrender it to God to provide for them what they need to know. Barth showed the need to extend the non-reductionistic philosophies behind sphere sovereignty into biblical interpretation. Scripture cannot be reduced to the same level as other texts nor interpreted by the same hermeneutical methodologies. It also illustrates how total dependence upon God is essential for interpretation and Christian engagement.

Operating under these philosophical approaches to biblical interpretation and Christian spirituality, it becomes apparent that adequate interpretation of scripture is essential for effective Christian engagement in every sovereign sphere, such that Christians might represent the reign of God. The church represents the reign of God as God’s community, as God’s servants and as God’s messengers.[15] God created humanity in the image of God, from this a fundamental relatedness emerges that bond humanity together.[16] The Christian bond goes even deeper in order that the church might be a light to the nations. This is often done through servitude. The church is called to act as servant leaders, exercising authority “only insofar as one is under authority.”[17] The church must also testify to the reign of God with an unembarrassed boldness.[18] As a deputized agent of God, the Christian speaks on God’s behalf, proclaiming the knowledge one has received from interpreting His Word. This must be qualified with the recognition that while the church errors it remains Christ’s body on earth. The interpretation of God’s Word must occur within the church, not outside,[19] and then the message is carried outside the church.

God does speak outside of scripture. Augustine of Hippo, in his famous conversion, heard in a children’s game “take and read” which inspired him to read a passage in Paul’s letters that ministered to him and converted him wholeheartedly to Christianity.[20] Listening to God is relevant in every aspect of ones life, not just reading scripture. It is in ones daily walk that God teaches aspects of Himself. These lessons provide a lens to read His Word. Therefore, there is some back and forth between ones daily life and interpretation of scripture, with each affecting the other. With the recognition that in common grace, all of creation is God’s, this is something that to be embraced. However, it also forces a recognition of ones own fallibility. As the church proclaims the reign of God, God only deputizes and appropriates the speech. Therefore, in order to see the speech of God through the church one must look at the broader picture of the fellowship of believers throughout history. Christians in each sphere therefore speak as fallen deputized and appropriated vassals for God. However, when taken together, the speech of God becomes clearer.   

            Modern hermeneutical philosophy reduced scripture to author, audience, event, and text, it was therefore necessary to move beyond this reductionism to put the transcendent back into the picture. This is not to say that human intellect does not play a role in interpreting scripture, this comes in at the first level, but that human knowledge in and of itself is not sufficient for understanding the transcendental material in scripture. The same is true of modern Christianity’s dualistic philosophy needing to be corrected with sphere sovereignty. The neo-Calvinist reaction against the reductionism of modern philosophy shows why and how philosophy matters in these areas. There is also many areas in which Christian engagement in the world and biblical interpretation influence each other including the importance of God’s leading and directing in the lives of the elect in such a way that they grow in knowledge of Him. The growth in knowledge of God facilitates the Christian duty to represent the reign of Christ as deputized and appropriated vassals of God. Remaining as open questions are the merits of the philosophies used in the paper and a way to gauge the strength of an interpretation under the double hermeneutic methodology.

(Computer Generated Word Count: 1963)
Bibliography

Dempsey, Michael T. 2007. "Biblical Hermeneutics and Spiritual Interpretation: The Revelatory Presence of God in Karl Barth's Theology of Scripture". Biblical Theology Bulletin. 37, no. 3: 120-131.

Guder, Darrell L. Missional Church; A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. Michigan: Wiliam B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1998.

Michielin, Maico 2008. "Bridging the Gulf between Biblical Scholars and Theologians: Can Barth and Wright Provide an Answer?" Scottish Journal of Theology. 61, no. 4: 420-434.

Mouw, Richard J. Abraham Kuyper A Short and Personal Introduction. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2011.

Newbigin, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1986.

Van Til, K.A. 2008. "Subsidiarity and Sphere-Sovereignty: A Match Made in . . . ?" THEOLOGICAL STUDIES. 69, no. 3: 610-636.

Westphal, Merold. 2001. "On Reading God the Author". Religious Studies. 37, no. 3: 271-291.

Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 25 September 2000. “The God Who Speaks.” The Banner. 26-28.

9 October 2000. “How Can God Speak.” The Banner. 26-28.

23 October 2000. “Interpreting God’s Speech.” The Banner. 26-28.

6 November 2000. “Knowing God and Interpreting God’s Word.” The Banner. 22-24.    

2010. "Herman Bavinck--proto Reformed epistemologist." Calvin Theological Journal 45, no. 1: 133-146.

---

[1] Michielin, Maico 2008. "Bridging the Gulf between Biblical Scholars and Theologians: Can Barth and Wright Provide an Answer?" Scottish Journal of Theology. (61, no. 4) 420.

[2] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 25 September 2000. “The God Who Speaks.” (The Banner.) 26-28.

[3] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 9 October 2000. “How Can God Speak.” (The Banner.) 26-28.

[4] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 23 October 2000. “Interpreting God’s Speech.” (The Banner.) 26-28.

[5] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 6 November 2000. “Knowing God and Interpreting God’s Word.” (The Banner.) 22-24.

[6] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 6 November 2000.  “Knowing God and Interpreting God’s Word.” (The Banner.) 23.

[7] Westphal, Merold. 2001. "On Reading God the Author". Religious Studies. (37, no. 3) 272.

[8] Westphal, Merold. 2001. "On Reading God the Author". Religious Studies.( 37, no. 3) 273.

[9] Westphal, Merold. 2001. "On Reading God the Author". Religious Studies. (37, no. 3) 276.

[10] Van Til, K.A. 2008. "Subsidiarity and Sphere-Sovereignty: A Match Made in . . . ?" THEOLOGICAL STUDIES. (69, no. 3) 624.

[11] Van Til, K.A. 2008. "Subsidiarity and Sphere-Sovereignty: A Match Made in . . . ?" THEOLOGICAL STUDIES. (69, no. 3) 635.

[12] Mouw, Richard J. Abraham Kuyper A Short and Personal Introduction. (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.) 2011.

[13] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 2010. "Herman Bavinck--proto Reformed epistemologist." Calvin Theological Journal (45, no. 1) 133-146.

[14] Dempsey, Michael T. 2007. "Biblical Hermeneutics and Spiritual Interpretation: The Revelatory Presence of God in Karl Barth's Theology of Scripture". Biblical Theology Bulletin. (37, no. 3) 120.

[15] Guder, Darrell L. Missional Church; A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. (Michigan: Wiliam B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1998.) 102-109.

[16] Newbigin, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1986.) 118.

[17] Guder, Darrell L. Missional Church; A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. (Michigan: Wiliam B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1998.) 105.

[18] Newbigin, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1986.) 94.

[19] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 6 November 2000. “Knowing God and Interpreting God’s Word.” (The Banner.) 24.

[20] Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 25 September 2000. “The God Who Speaks.” (The Banner.) 26.

Heart of Worship, Rejoicing Amidst the Horror of Marginalization

            It was September 11, 2011, the ten year anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center. On this historic date, I would also be attending a historic church, Pilgrim Baptist, in the first day of its revival services. Leading the revival was Reverend Ian Bethel. This is the story of my interaction with this African American church service, noting the areas of cultural similarities and differences.

            I stood outside my building at ten minutes to nine, dressed in my Sunday’s best, a black suit, a white button down shirt and tie with black dress pants and black dress shoes, waiting for the rest of the group to arrive. I did not know what to expect of the day ahead of me. We were going to be traveling into Saint Paul to attend Pilgrim Baptist Church. As a country boy, unfamiliar with the area, I did not know if I would have to fight traffic and/ or watch for armed gunmen and gangs on the sides of the streets.  I would be taking this journey with Charles, his wife, Britney, Rahul and his friend, Rebecca. We took two vehicles to the church, Charles, Britney, and I took one, while Rahul and Rebecca took another. As we approached the church, the conditions of the infrastructure worsened. The building itself, while having some age to it which was to be expected given it was established in 1863 by escaped slaves[1], however,  it did appear to have a newer addition added to it recently. Somewhat symbolic of the service that we were about to partake in. My vehicle arrived first to the church and as we waited outside for the other vehicle to arrive, other churchgoers greeted us. It was a bit surprising that African Americans would greet a Caucasian man, having read James H Cone’s book The Spiritual and the Blues, which portrays a high level of animosity and resentment that African Americans have toward Caucasians[2]. However, none of that was at Pilgrim Baptist church, there were even a few Caucasians that attended the church regularly, one of which that sang in the choir.  I saw there greetings as genuine, without any ill feelings towards us. We were worshippers of God with them, not serving another God, as Cone suggests, but in communion with them.

I was a bit concerned that I would be overdressed and stand out like a sore thumb. I felt this way for two main reasons first the other members of my group were only dressed semi-formally and second African Americans are typically poor, which might not allow them to have such clothing. There was a mix in clothing amidst attendees of the church. Many women had on dresses and fancy hats while many men had suits and/or button down shirts.  A smaller number did have on things like Viking jerseys or a tee shirt and other less formal clothing.  In this way, they were very similar to the clothing mix present in my home church. I was instead overdressed physically which helped be to understand why African American pastors have to wipe sweat from their foreheads. I always thought it was because they really got into their message and that might be some of the reason. The other part is that it was warm in the church. Many of the women were fanning themselves; some men had handkerchiefs to wipe sweat from their face. While I was not sweating, I did get a little light headed during the service. It was a distant cry from the air-conditioned sanctuary of my home church. The focus of my mind during part of the service was on my own well-being rather than worshipping God or noticing what was going on around me.

At 9:45 a.m., the church service began and to my surprise, a woman was leading the service. It is not that I am against women leading church services or speaking in church, it is more that every church I have ever attended a man has led the service. It showed a level of progressivity and liberalization for that church to take the step of allowing a woman to lead the service. Especially while so many other churches are dragging their feet to a degree in this regard, holding to a literal interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14:34. On this account, the church displayed an egalitarian stance by allowing a woman a place of leadership. She opened the service with a responsive call to worship. Again having experienced this in other churches, I was familiar with the process and it did not catch me off guard. In the call to worship was an emphasis on unity, an appropriate enough theme given the fact that it was the first day of a revival and the fact that it was on an anniversary of a traumatic event in United States history. This unity is not only in a common faith but also in a common purpose and goal of fulfilling the Great Commission, as they understand it. Therefore, there seems to be a collectivism cultural trait embedded in the selection of the verses for the call to worship. Collectivism is the cultural trait that seeks to incorporate the totality of the people through mutual interdependence, oneness of unity and loss of self. Community played an essential role in the church service making it one of the fundamental values for the church.  

Following the Call to Worship was prayer. In this prayer is displayed a dependence on God, thanksgiving to God, praise of God, petitioning God to help those who are hurting remembering especially those who died in the World Trade Center. During the prayer, congregational members would respond and interact with the speaker with a variety of utterances. They were active participants within the church service rather than just onlookers as is often the case in Caucasian churches. Some congregation members would use nonverbal signals like pointing at the speaker to show support. One phrase in the prayer that caught my attention was the use of Mathew 5:37 “but let your yes be yes and your no be no” (NKJV). Amidst all the struggles that the slaves endured, was the struggle of masters lying to them. During the service, some people said, “tell the truth” all of which illustrates the importance of honesty in African American culture.

Following the prayer was the singing of hymns.  Hymns were the only thing sung in my home church, and I have enjoyed listening to white gospel singers like the Gaither Vocal Band and the Cathedrals, so I was comfortable with the hymns. The first one, “Glory be to the Father”, I even knew. The second hymn “Revive us Again”, I was not familiar with but like all hymns it does not take very long to get the harmony. During this hymn, the leader would state the verse and than the congregation would sing it. I would imagine very similar to the time when many African Americans could not read and the leader said the words and the congregation would sing it. This allows the entire community to participate in the church service. There is also a call and response component to this as well. All of which shows the importance of their ethnic roots and ways in which they have sought to incorporate their history into the service. They therefore have in part a past orientation. Past orientation is the cultural trait that seeks to preserve the history and traditions through incorporation of them in the present. While Pilgrim seeks to preserve its rich heritage there are ways in which they have sought to progress and adapt to a changing world.

In one of the verses of “Revive Us Again”, it talks the cleansing of every stain. Indirectly this might have a greater meaning to them, as many of them were cleaners in the days of slavery and some I would imagine still are in hotels, upper class homes or at the very least their own homes.  Stains are next to impossible to remove, as they know from experience. The God who cleanses the stains in the lives of His elect had to pay the ultimate price, His own life. Incorporation and identification with the teachings was something that was very important throughout the service and shows pragmatic influences within the culture. Pragmatism is the belief that things should be simple, straightforward, and practical; there should be a clearly defined problem and solution without the need for intense analysis. 

There was then what was listed as a praise period. Although the specific song is not listed in the bulletin, they sang “Because of Who You Are”.  This song speaks of praising and worshipping God because of who He is; in essence, because of His status, reverence is required. This therefore plays a role in the unique dynamic of power distance or the respect given to those in authority in the African American church. While they seek to be egalitarian seeing God as a friend they also revere Him because of His stature. Along side the song leader, was a woman who was signing the words to the song. Following this song, the children came up for what they called a ‘Fine Arts Ministry’ and they signed the song “Praise on the Inside”. The incorporation of bodily movements in the worshiping of God was something that was new to me and is expressive of their holistic approach, worshipping God through word and action. Holism is the belief that there is unity between things, as opposed to a dualistic view that separates things into spheres like flesh and spiritual.  The children had painted their faces white, which I assumed is a traditional African custom. Therefore, there was an appreciation of there African heritage and history.  The song itself speaks of emotions that they cannot keep to themselves. Emotions were free flowing during the service from the congregation and speakers; therefore, the song seems to be representative of African American worship and the emotional nature of their lives and communication.

They then had a time for acknowledgement of visitors. During this time, they had all the visitors stand. As we stood, the congregation applauded. We were given visitor information forms to fill out. It was nothing out of the ordinary for a smaller church to have a greater level of community and objective of expanding while serving the needs of the congregation. While perhaps in a Caucasian church, they might not make them stand up but might have some level of acknowledgement, greeting, and information gathering that would occur.

The church choir made up of mostly African American men and women with one Caucasian woman began to sing. The chorus of the song was particularly identifiable for the African American community. “I’ve been through a lot. I had to press my way through. But I’m going with Jesus all the way.” Many African Americans lived amidst the poverty, racism, and other struggles. Endurance was required on a regular basis. In the end, they did endure and press their way through with Jesus, never losing the hope they have in Christ.

This endurance with Jesus embodied itself in the testimony part of the service. Mr. and Mrs. Robinson told their story of how the Lord comforted them in their time of need. Mr. Robinson’s foot was infected and they had to make the choice either take it off and have a fifty percent chance of survival or leave it and die. They were reliant on Jesus to keep Mr. Robinson alive. God did have everything in place for them, their daughter who had left the state for twenty years had moved back to the area recently and the surgeon was on hand. Mr. Robinson even had a dream telling him that he was going to live. Mr. Robinson did survive and was able to stand before the congregation bearing testimony to God’s unfailing love. Mr. Robinson also resumed many of his functions within the church and as he put it, “the Lord has put me back to work”. This was a personal story and therefore an exposure of vulnerability. My church does testimonies mainly at baptisms and before acceptance of prospective members for membership. For a few months when the Karen, who are Burmese refugees, began coming to the church gave testimonies of the persecution they endured in Burma.

They then gave the announcements of upcoming events. The first was Sunday school. They handed out forms for each age group to sign up and rides were available to bring the children to Sunday school. They were very passionate about insuring that the children have a passion for the Lord. In this, there is some concern for even the young in the community as well as a future orientation insuring that the young maintain the faith.

The second announcement was for faith factor. This is a program to encourage healthy eating. The church is brining in a nutritionist to insure against as they put it ‘digging their graves with their mouths’. In this, there is an expression of the holistic qualities of the church; caring not only about the spiritual wellbeing of the individual but the physical as well. The announcement for the food shelf also shares a common concern for the wholeness of the person. Those who have plenty of food are encouraged to donate some to the food shelf to help those that are struggling.

Another announcement was for the revival that was starting in that service, led by Dr. Ian Bethel. He would be speaking in the evenings through Wednesday, the fourteenth. While the food announcements were the physical side, the revival is the spiritual side that makes it holistic. While at my own church there was a revival back when it was just getting started in 1873, however, it is something the church abandoned. The Caucasian church is in need of a revival like never before, as numbers dwindle, times are getting tough and half-hearted Christianity is on the rise.

The final announcement was a golf tournament to benefit the Mission and Benevolence Fund. They are using hedonistic secular games to glorify God through building relationships and using the eighty dollars per person to play toward their missions and benevolence within the church. The whole event is to serve God within the community and to nurture the community.  There is also a holistic component in incorporating a secular game to into Christian fellowship.

            The children then gathered in the front of the church for a children’s sermon. Again, this shows the importance the church places on children as members of the community and for the future of the church. The children’s sermon was on the two greatest commandments but it was a rather strange way of teaching it. The leader had left his bag in the pew and asked the kids the best way to go and get it. The children wanted him to just walk in a straight line towards it and pick it up. However, he felt the best way was to go in the opposite direction out the sanctuary through the choir to the other side of the sanctuary retrieve the bag and go all the way back the way he came. Therefore, he raced one of the children, he going his way and the child going their own. The child won easily. The point was that simplicity is better than complex. Therefore, remembering the two greatest commandments love God and love your neighbor is what is important because all the other commandments fall under this. In this it also illustrates the keep it simple mentality of African American Christianity. They did not have complex philosophies and theologies as is present in many Caucasian churches[3]. They do not question how three can be one or how Jesus can be both God and man, but accept it based on faith. There is pragmatism within this approach to Christianity that is representative of their culture. Being more analytical I can both respect the approach and at the same time cannot understand why there is not a push to learn more, growing in knowledge of God. Following the children’s sermon was a prayer then the children left for their own service.

The congregation then sang the chorus of “Have A Little Talk with Jesus”. I knew this song via the Oak Ridge Boys rendition of it. This song was not listed in the bulletin showing a willingness to adapt to the spirits leading. The song itself expresses a close and intimate relationship with God. In the song chorus, a conversation between God and man occurs, where man tells Him all about their troubles, God hears their faintest cry and answers the prayer. With the understanding that just a little talk with Jesus makes it right. It would seem as if God were just a genie in a bottle, giving them all the desires of their hearts. At the same time, there is an intimacy between the communicator and God with the hope of God continuing sufficiency amidst struggle.

Before the offering, the leader read from Psalms 92:12-15, which speaks of the righteous flourishing. She was using scripture as a tool to elicit emotion from those who attended in an effort to encourage the giving of money.  Scripture was used throughout the service to elicit emotion this was one of those occasions where I wondered about whether it was ethical to elicit emotion for the giving of money to the church. 

As we penetrated deeper and deeper into the heart of worship, the choir began to sing. W The song spoke of God as a cleaner of the church, cleaning this house, sweeping this house and other things in which many of them could identify with, they personified God and made Him similar to themselves. God comes to embody some of the same struggles they are going through but has the power to clean the church so to speak using the indirect communication in the song. Therefore, we see an awe and reverence given to God as well as a personal nature applied to God in His dealings with the church.

As the offering concluded, the church sang, “Praise Him from whom all Blessings Flow”. The congregation then stood for the reading of scripture. Standing for a scripture reading is a practice that a year ago, I would have found to be strange but since learning of the Jewish practice and having it incorporated into my home church, am beginning to understand it. The standing during the reading of God’s word is in reverence, honoring the status that God and His word have in the church. It would be liken to rising when an elder walks in the room in Asian cultures. The scripture verses came from John 13:1-17, which is the washing of the disciple’s feet.

Before, Dr. Bethel delivered his message on the text. “Lift Him Up” was used as a meditation hymn. It was certainly the most up beat meditation hymns I have ever heard. The message of the song comes from John 12:32 where Jesus says that when he is lifted up from the earth he will draw all men unto himself. The verses speak of living Christian lives, in essence, being good examples, as the sermon would emphasize. Another verse spoke about not exalting the preacher or pew but preach the gospel simple full and free. This verse has imbedded in it an egalitarian stance of not exalting the preacher, a stance for honesty in preaching the gospel, but also being pragmatic in its preaching.

            Doctor Ian Bethel came with a musician Antwan Carter from New Beginnings Baptist Tabernacle. This was a bit strange for me that a preacher would be traveling with a musician. Music played an important part in every aspect of the service including the prayers. It never really occurred to me for a musician to travel with the pastor. The music during the sermon and service established a particular emotional reaction that went along with the words. I find it hard to believe that it is just coincidental that they line up. However, Costen, in her works on African American worship emphasized the leaning on the spirit for especially prayers[4]. It would seem as if the church has moved towards preparation for the service and coordination between the musician and leader for the purpose of the establishment of a particular emotional reaction.  

Doctor Bethel emphasized that Jesus set an example in the sermon text. Therefore, Christians ought to be an example of the saviors love. Jesus loved even of those who betrayed him and disowned him. Therefore, Christians ought to love unconditionally, even when it seems impossible to love a person. He argues that often Christians like to choose the capacity and people that they serve.  Instead, Dr. Bethel argues that as Jesus humbled himself to wash the disciples feet likewise Christians need to humble themselves. Finally, he looks at Jesus example of servant leadership. He argues that no one earns the right to lead until he/she has learned to serve. The servant is not greater than their master. Here he establishes an egalitarian connection between humanity, disregarding status within society and rejecting power structures in which the leader is not also a servant. He ended the sermon with a lot of energy and repetition. He continued to repeat the verse before each of his sermon points. Repetition was a way of emphasizing the point that the speaker was making. The high level of energy also established an emotional response from the congregation.

Throughout the sermon, Dr. Bethel used jokes used as illustrations his points. One story illustrated conditional love by using a professor who could love except in the difficult times. Another joke incorporated the Burger King motto “have it your way”, to illustrate the attitudes of many Christians that want things their way. These stories were very relatable for the crowd. They overall flowed well with the rest of the sermon. The jokes also served to lighten the mood, and had an emotional effect. African American sermons have a lot of energy and emotion; speakers design the message to get the congregation involved. Therefore, like a Shakespearean play, comic relief is sometimes necessary in order that emotion might again rise when the message continues. The crowd seemed to respond well to the jokes and stories that Dr. Bethel told. Often when jokes were incorporated into my home churches service they do not flow well with the rest of the sermon and somewhat deviate from the main message.

Following the sermon was an alter call. A young boy and middle-aged woman responded to the call and came forward to receive the Lord. The deacons of the church prayed with them and took their information to get them signed up for classes and baptism. The church applauded as they came forward and voted to accept their call without dissent. The community gathered around them as they took this step of faith. Alter calls have not been practiced in my church for some time and when they were practiced I do not know of anyone that responded and came forward.

As the service came to a close the whole church joined hands in prayer. This illustrates most of all the community and standing in solidarity with one another. Symbolically, the whole church was linked to one another, boldly approaching the throne of God. Second, it also illustrates a tactile cultural component to the African American worship service. Holding each others hands, embracing one another, and many other forms of touching were accepted as it brought them together and connected them. Too often in Caucasian churches people worry about if the person sitting next to them have germs or simply do not want to be touched.  Hence, they attend church with bubbles of comfort surrounding them, unwilling to get close with those around them. However, for two prayers at Pilgrim the church joined hands. Before church hugs and kisses were exchanged, touching each other through affectionate means seemed to be an essential part of what brings them together as a community.   As we left the sanctuary and church, congregation members invited us back and greeted us. They were very accepting of us and welcoming of us regardless of our race or creed

Pilgrim had a unique blend between contemporary American culture and traditional African customs. They have moved towards a great degree of planning in their services but have also incorporated hymns, African face painting and bodily movements into their worship service. Too often churches are caught in their own traditions and are slow to adjust to a changing world. Pilgrim is an example of how to balance a deep history and culture with contemporary worship.  Another important aspect of church worship is community. In an era when churches are getting extremely large, congregations are getting impersonal with each other. Community, as displayed in the example of Pilgrim Baptist, must be a central element of any church service.

We entered the heart of worship at Pilgrim Baptist church and met a culture different from our own. In this culture, we participated in their holistic orientation, communal orientation, egalitarianism, indirect and emotional communication, pragmatic, tactile, and task orientation. These cultural traits were displayed in a variety of ways throughout the service. Many of these traits were present within my home characteristic but there were also some definite differences. Nevertheless, the common faith bonded us together in Christ. For that one church service, our ethnic and cultural differences did not matter. We were one in heart and mind, participating together in worship.

Bibliography

Bethel, Ian. “Revival Week”. Sermon, Church Service from Pilgrim Baptist Church, Saint Paul, MN, September 11, 2011. 

Cone, James H. The Spirituals and the Blues. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2008.

Costen, Melva W. African American Christian Worship, 2^nd ed. Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2007.  

Gudykunst, William B. Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communications, 4^th ed. Thousand Oaks California: Sage Publications Inc, 2004.

Jandt, Fred E. An Introduction to Intercultural Communications: Identities in a Global Context, 6^th ed. Los Angeles California: Sage Publications Inc, 2010.

Lingenfelter, Sherwood, and Marvin Mayers. Ministering Cross Culturally: An Incarnational Model for Personal Relationships, 2^nd ed. Grand Rapids Michigan: Baker Academic, 2003.

Matson-Daley, Richard, Gerald Dodd, Denise Loving, and Aaron Rupert. “Pilgrim’s History”, Pilgrim Baptist Church, http://pilgrimbaptistchurch.org/about/history/ (accessed September 22, 2011).

---

[1] Matson-Daley, Richard, Gerald Dodd, Denise Loving, and Aaron Rupert. “Pilgrim’s History”, Pilgrim Baptist Church, http://pilgrimbaptistchurch.org/about/history/ (accessed September 22, 2011)

[2] Cone, James H. The Spirituals and the Blues. (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2008), 4-5, 23-26.

[3] Costen, Melva W. African American Christian Worship, 2^nd ed. (Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2007), 66.

[4] Costen, Melva W. African American Christian Worship, 2^nd ed. (Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2007), 94

Epistemology and Being-for-otherness Relationship with Culture

First, epistemologically, people are the product of a-posteriori encounters interpreted through innate mechanisms within us. For instance, before me is a horizontal square connected to four vertical parts in each corner holding it up, because I have seen this object before and someone has linked the word “table” to it, I understand this object to be a table. My experience of the criterion for an object to be a table, when applied to the object classifies it under the heading of table. Other people through their experiences might classify it as other things, based on the unique features that they see in the object.  For example, in Eskimo culture, they have 24 words for snow[1]. This is because they pick out different qualities in snow, its shape, size, etc. that distinguishes between different forms of what we call snow. Cultural and linguistic filters enable us to notice certain things about an object and not others. The language of a culture therefore contributes to the perspective members of that culture have with regard to reality. Therefore, because I always lived in United States culture, it has skewed my view of reality to be in conformity with it, through a variety of ways dealt with in this paper.  However, because of innate mechanisms within me, to a certain extent I can be a unique person within the culture and transform the United States culture.

Second, with regard to human relations, embedded within our very existence is a being-for-otherness. “The Lord God said, “It is not good for man to be alone” Genesis 2:18 (The JPS Bible), people were created to live in community with one another, caring for one another to the very extent of denying oneself for the purposes of the other. These relationships make us who we are, as they are a part of our a-posteriori encounters, but also in that, they show us who we are in the comparison. I can only know that I have a particular quality if another person has a quality that is different from my own. These relationships provide meaning to life as people seek to serve others in what they do.  Everyone therefore has a need to belong, to have a relationship with another human being. Often in order to meet the need a commonality must exist between the parties, perhaps this might be a common interest or experience.  In the United States, the unifying factor is the “American dream” myth; this is the belief that anyone can make it in the United States if one just tries hard enough. Therefore, to participate in the culture of the United States one must be individualistic, working towards their own betterment by investing their time to a particular task.  There is a constant push towards progress and productivity. One has the choice either to participate and belong within this culture or fall under a culturally derogatory label and left behind (ex. welfare recipients). Culture, therefore, plays an essential role in our epistemology and relationships. Such an essential role that the values of the culture often become values we find in ourselves.

---

[1] Fay, Brian. Contemporary Philosophy of Social Sciences. (Malden Massachusetts.: Blackwell Publishers., 1996)  78

Worship’s Cultural Values, Christian African American and Latino American’s Cultural Values Displayed in their Worship

 

        African American’s, Latino’s and Caucasians each has a unique style of worship that comes out of their cultural values. In their books, The Spirituals and the Blues and African American Christian Worship by James Cone and Melva Costen respectively, describe African American churches and worship. While Justo González in his books Santa Biblia and Mañana looks at Latino’s history and theology. Analysis of the worship styles displayed in these works exposes some of the cultural values of the group. The objective of this work is to summarize the arguments made in each book, analyze the cultural patterns of each group noting similarities and differences and reflecting on my own cultural values, learning and relational growth.

            The Spirituals and the Blues by James Cone looks specifically at African American songs. He argued that music acted as a unifying force for the community. Cone argued that because of the holistic approach taken by African American’s in not separating the sacred from the secular, blues music and the spirituals compliment each other. This music expressed the emotional state of African Americans living under slavery. They longed for divine liberation from their slavery, identifying with the Jews in Exodus. Because of their bondage, family and marriage did not have legal bonding, nor was scripture philosophically analyzed or read, instead faith was on an experiential basis. He emphasizes the separation between African Americans and Caucasians with regard to the relationship between human rights and scripture, even arguing the God of white music is not the same God that is in black music.  

            African American Christian Worship by Melva Costen looks at the development of African American churches or what she called the “invisible institute”. Because of laws limiting the ability of African’s to organize, African slaves formed invisible institutes, or undercover organizations in which they were able to worship God in their own way. Often services had a lot of emotion in them, from the crowd in its response and from the speaker in the message. Support for the message was shown through nonverbal signals like pointing and waving. The whole service was devoted to worship through word and action. Kinship was a key component of the services, people coming together and fellowshipping with each other made it something people looked forward to each time. Like Cone, she emphasized that African slaves did not have a predetermined theology but operated mostly from experience.

            Santa Biblia by Justo González shows how Latinos interpret scripture from the perspective of the marginalized. He tells of the marginalization of Latinos through poverty, being of a mixed race, and exiles or aliens in the United States. Latinos, therefore, identify with the marginalized characters in scripture. He, therefore, emphasizes a stand of solidarity with the oppressed and marginalized in the world.  

            Mañana by Justo González looks more at the theology in Latino Christianity. He argues that the purpose of theology is to discover the purpose of God. He argues that the best way to do this is through cataphatic discourse and recognizing the historic viewpoints of the church fathers. He argues for a holistic approach without the dualism of soul and body therein recognizing the goodness of creation. He argued that the creation started in the beginning and continues in sustaining the existence of created matter. They see God as dynamically involved in the affairs of man but do not hold that God is impassible, infinite and omnipotent. They hold that the trinity is to be an example for the church to live in community with one another, mutually giving and sharing that all might become one. Faith is something that we are part of and something that we carry out through a kingdom orientation, continually pushing toward perfection.

            These worship styles and theologies have been shaped by the cultural values of each group. Both Latino’s and African’s share a feminine culture, a holistic worldview, and  a collectivistic mindset. African American’s however tend to have more of an individualist focus than Latino’s, they are spontaneous, emotional and indirect communicators, and are past oriented. Latinos, on the other hand, are family and people oriented which is incorporated into their task orientation and are present oriented. These are some of the major cultural values that can be drawn from the texts; many more do exist that are not treated directly in this work.

            Feminine culture was expressed in many ways in African American worship, including that African slaves did not see themselves as different from their masters. Their theology saw no justification for slavery. For them, all men were created equal endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights regardless of color. They confused freedom in God with freedom from any authority in the egalitarian stance that they took to the issue of slavery. Caucasian interpretations of Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-21 were distortions of scripture. Instead of bearing “the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God” 1 Peter 2:19b (NIV) they escaped through the underground railroad to the North. The egalitarianism and concern to stand up for the rights of the oppressed, themselves, prompted them not only to escape but to underperform in their work for their masters.

            Similarly, feminine culture was expressed through Latino Christianity through their concern for the marginalized in the world. Latinos identify with the poor, the exile, and the mixed raced outcasts of society. They are therefore compassionate to those who have become marginalized in society. They also favor egalitarianism but not to the extent of removing all authority as was seen in African American egalitarianism. Some of this is due to the Catholic roots in Latino culture with the hierarchical system of the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, there is a mutual respect that they have for each other. They are willing to listen to Caucasian theologians throughout history as well as evaluate from their own perspectives. González argued that Christian theology is like a landscape in which everyone looks upon from varying perspectives, each of which provides a unique and equal view to the truth. They are willing to enter into discussion about the truths in scripture and are respectful of others views.

            African American Christians do not separate between the sacred and profane but hold to a holistic worldview. In Cone’s treatment of the spirituals and the blues, he argued that they compliment each other. The blues from a more secular perspective and the spirituals from the Christian perspective both come together to show the emotional distress and crying out of African slaves. Cone argued that aspects of the spirituals were references to worldly things. For instance, in certain spirituals home for them is the North or Africa where they have freedom in the world. He also connects chariots and trains to the Underground Railroad bringing fugitive slaves to the North. African slaves in many ways saw themselves as the Israelites in the Exodus looking for a literal promised land on the earth rather than a kingdom that is not of this world.

            Latinos also deny dualisms in favor of a holistic approach to the world. They see the goodness of all things. A case in point of this is their views of the incarnation. They deny the Gnostic view that the flesh is evil and the Platonist divide of soul and flesh to assert that Jesus was wholly God and wholly man. They believe that God became man and dwelt among us, particularly among the marginalized and oppressed. They see this as something to be imitated and are lead, through their kingdom orientation, toward living in this world in such a way that their faith and hope might be lived out.   

Collectivism and group orientation is also a major aspect of African American Christian worship. Each of them comes from a shared struggle of trying to survive in a Caucasian dominated society. The church acted as a unifying force for African Americans to come together for fellowship, hope and to organize themselves. Baptisms, particularly baptisms by immersion, were major events in the African American community, and they would travel from miles around to witness one.  All of them shared in a kinship that formed based on their mutual interdependence and shared experience. As a group they would worship together, even their shouting became a ritualized group activity.

Latinos also were very collectivistic. Family is particularly important for Latinos. This makes it incredibly difficult for Latinos to leave their home countries to come to the United States and when they do get to the United States, why their church family is so important to them. As Latinos, they have a shared history of living on the margins that bonds them together as a community. Latinos look at the doctrine of the Trinity as an example for the church to follow. As the Father, Son and Spirit share in their being so to the church should become one, sharing with one another. The best theology they argue is a communal enterprise made up of everyone’s views. They are therefore very ecumenical and accepting of other Christians. 

There are certain traits that are more characteristic of African Americans that make them a unique group. While they are collectivists, they are more individualistic than were Latinos. Much of this is due to their history. Marriages at the time were not legally binding and it was common for spouses to be broken up and parents from their children through the slave trade. While others in the community might be there for them in these times, they were forced to accept a level of individualism apart from blood relatives. Individualism is also seen through the use of the Underground Railroad. Individuals who thought that they would rather risk dying than live in bondage tried to escape through the Underground Railroad abandoning the community in their own pursuit of freedom in the North.

African American’s are also very spontaneous and emotional communicators. This is done particularly through songs, shouting during the services, and preaching. In the spirituals, blues and gospel songs the singer expressed their feelings and emotions. They expressed what they were going through and how they were suffering. These songs were a release for the singers from the problems they were going through. The shouting also is the outpouring of emotion from African American worshipers. Stating whatever is on their mind and responding to the presenter is a form of expression. These emotions from the singers and congregations were often personal, and displayed a willingness to expose vulnerabilities through these forms of communication. Preachers through their style try to elicit emotion from their audience, carefully selecting words and tones, repeating certain phrases, all were used to create a particular atmosphere in the church. Another aspect of their communication is the indirectness of it, often communicating through metaphor. In the days of slavery, trains and chariots were symbolic for the Underground Railroad, and home often meant the North or Africa. These indirect forms of communication kept slave owners in the dark about what was taking place, but allowed African Americans to communicate with each other through coded songs.  A high level of context was therefore required to understand fully African Americans communication. 

African Americans are also very past oriented. They are very aware of the bondage of their ancestors and cannot bring themselves to move beyond it. A resentment of Caucasians exists in Cone’s work to such an extent he does not believe Caucasians and Africans are serving the same God and that Caucasians have distorted scripture. They often look for areas in which Caucasians marginalize them and to a certain degree embellish it. This perceived persecution is what unifies them as a community. History, to a degree, is circular for the African American, having repeated patterns of persecution.

Latinos are particularly family and person oriented. It is particularly difficult for Latinos to leave their home countries because of the closeness they have to family and friends. Family for Latinos extends to distant relatives that are treated like immediate family. Therefore, when Latinos do get to the United States church families are particularly important. Being for others is particularly important to Latinos as they seek to stand in solidarity with the marginalized of the world. Standing with the marginalized is the task that Latinos seek to accomplish. In this, they are very task oriented. Through their kingdom orientation they seek to live out their faith in the here and not yet of the kingdom of God.  They are dedicated to completing the tasks that God has called them to do, and work hard to see them accomplished.

This way of seeing the kingdom of God also makes them present oriented. While avoiding triumphalism they seek to make the most of what they have in the establishment of the kingdom of God here and now. They believe that following the death and resurrection of Christ the resurrection has already begun. It is not a future resurrection, as many Caucasians believe, but a resurrection that is currently taking place. All of these things point to an immediacy of particular elements of eschatology that comes out of their present time orientation. The sovereignty of God also plays a factor in their present orientation. While they do not hold to an impassible, infinite, omnipotent God, they do believe that God’s creation continues through His sustaining of the world. Because God is in control, tomorrow will take care of itself, there is no need to worry about tomorrows problems today.

How then do these cultural perspectives on scripture compare with the Caucasian Christian church of which I am a participant? Caucasian Christianity in the United States often have a dualistic understanding of Christianity separating the sacred from the profane. There are traditions like the Neo-Calvinist tradition that takes a more holistic approach, finding no separation between body and soul or sacred and profane. From this tradition, I went through undergrad and was shaped in my Christian views. Therefore, Caucasian Christianity is divided on many issues and it is difficult to classify the whole into any particular category. Which tradition within Caucasian Christianity one comes from contributes to which cultural trait they hold on this issue and many others.

Most Caucasian Christians are very task oriented. Church is done like a task and not experienced. Many learn how to go through the motions of church. Children in particular learn to be seen and not heard when they go to church. Any noise is disrespectful and embarrassing for the noisemaker and the family. Tradition is what is important in the Caucasian church. The Caucasian church also takes on the task to spread its views of scripture to the heathen in the rest of the world. This task is accomplished through systems and strategies designed to address different elements of “evangelism”. While I fall under task orientation, I place my trust in God and not human made systems.

I tend to have a moderate level of context. I am moderately aware of what is going on in the Middle East, South Asia, North East Africa and Europe in terms of their politics and culture. However, the Caucasian church also tends to be very low context. They focus only on what is going on in their small localities and do not care about other countries and cultures. When missionaries come to give updates they do not care as much about what is going on in the country but rather whether their money is being put to good use. The question is how many souls have this missionary saved not questions about how God is at work. This also illustrates the achievement focus of the Caucasian church. While I have an achievement focus, I do not see it as what I have achieved but what God has achieved through me.

The Caucasian church is also time oriented. If church goes longer than the allotted amount of time people are not happy about it. Church is supposed to start at a particular time and end at a particular time. They follow a strict monochromic time system as if worship can only happen within certain time constraints and therefore must be limited to a specific time span. In the bulletins are specific schedules to keep leaving no room for a movement of the spirit to step outside of these structures. In part because I have lived in monochromic time my whole life, and the fact that I live in an entertainment era it is difficult for me to sit for a long time in any one place, however, I am trying to change to be more adaptable to the movement of the spirit.

While it will vary from tradition to tradition, most Caucasian Christians are future oriented looking towards to the triumphal reign of Christ. Neo-Calvinists take a past, present and future approach. They look to the past at the workings of God throughout history, to the present for His workings now in the restoration of the world and to the future for the final restoration to occur. This goes with the holistic approach taken by Neo-Calvinists arguing that the past, present and future are so interrelated that they compliment each other. I often, like the African Americans tend to dwell in the past and project it upon the present. For instance, in United States history, I look at the Tuskegee syphilis study and the many other similar studies going on during the time, the Japanese concentration camps, Hiroshima  and Guantanamo Bay as indicators of what the United States really thinks about the right to life and liberty.  Unjust wars like the Revolutionary War, the Spanish American war and the current occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan only further confirm the wretchedness of the culture and the government that the culture has bred. Militarism, materialism and hypocrisy are fundamental to the United States internationally and domestically. The pure pride and patriotism of the people of the United States is even extended into the language. The people who live in the United States call themselves “Americans”, claiming for themselves alone, a title that could belong to the entire Western Hemisphere. What makes the people of the United States more American than the Canadians, Mexicans, Cubans, or Chileans that they can claim the title to themselves? Do not they also belong to North, Central and South America and are therefore American? 

Regardless of these aspects of United States culture, the goodness of creation still extends into United States culture in some capacity.  While I struggle to see it, God has placed me within this culture for a reason and undoubtedly, I have become part of the culture. It is not necessarily bad to be individualistic or time oriented but rather it is how these traits are used. The God who is sovereign over all things has allowed these traits to be used in the way that they have, and though I might not understand it, God can use it for His purposes.

Learning it and actually applying and living by it are two different things. To a certain degree it becomes more of an intellectual exercise rather than a life changing experience. I have especially tried to avoid ad homonym arguments being respectful of their person, culture and family. However, the way I perceive things is not always the way that they perceive it or the way that it actually occurs. Often times my time orientation and perceptions within it is perceived as coldness by those who are event oriented. For instance, when I passed a fellow Caucasian in the hall and they gave greeting, I give greeting in return and continue on my way not perceiving it as an attempt for further communication. What I perceive from my vantage point as a simple friendly greeting is not the same as what they perceived from their vantage point, a call to further communication. The problem becomes when I come across someone how do I know which cultural values they hold. There is not a sign that accompanies people telling others what cultural values that they hold. Ethnicity is not always an indicator, as was shown in the example.

Cone and Costen through their treatment of African American Christianity and González through his treatment of Latino Christianity paint a picture of each group’s cultural perspectives on scripture. African Americans and Latinos have taken the scripture and contextualized it to their particular culture and situation. Through identification with different biblical characters and stories they see hope amidst the despair and marginalization. While Caucasians often look at scripture from a perspective of affluence, Latinos and African Americans provide a unique view from the perspective of the marginalized. Each perspective has something to contribute to Christianity. At the same time, each comes at scripture from a particular bias that clouds their reading of scripture. Culture has a way of highlighting certain portions of scripture and distorting others as was seen from the Caucasians and African Americans during the time of slavery with regard to slave rights and authority. Therefore, cultural values act as both a facilitator and inhibitor of ones reading of scripture. Latinos and African Americans have so much to contribute to Christianity. An ecumenical approach, taking into account all of the different cultural vantage points is needed now more than ever. There is so much to learn from each other to allow our differences to divide us.

Bibliography

Cone, James H. The Spirituals and the Blues. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2008.

Costen, Melva W. African American Christian Worship, 2^nd ed. Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2007.

González, Justo. Santa Biblia: The Bible Through Hispanic Eyes. Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1996.

González, Justo. Mañana: Christian Theology from a Hispanic Perspective. Nashville Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1990.  

Gudykunst, William B. Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communications, 4^th ed. Thousand Oaks California: Sage Publications Inc, 2004.

Jandt, Fred E. An Introduction to Intercultural Communications: Identities in a Global Context, 6^th ed. Los Angeles California: Sage Publications Inc, 2010.

Lingenfelter, Sherwood, and Marvin Mayers. Ministering Cross Culturally: An Incarnational Model for Personal Relationships, 2^nd ed. Grand Rapids Michigan: Baker Academic, 2003.