A Design for Cross-Cultural Communication

As the Church finds itself ministering in increasingly complex culture, the need for communication across all sorts of differences has become even more essential.[1] The rapid changes in the composition of our society have put many in it on edge. Ideological polarization, inter-generational value differences, cultural communication also belongs to complex culture, and needs to be considered cross-cultural in nature. You may, at some point, find yourself in a situation in your place of employment or community where such conversations are needed. This design can also be used proactively to intervene in managing disputes within your congregation.

1. Seek a Common Code[2]

Have you ever been in a dispute when you and the other person seem to be arguing about the same thing, but do not seem to be getting anywhere? There are several ways we can try to explain such a misunderstanding:

• People frequently use the same word and concept, but have two different definitions—a linguistic variation.
• Two persons are arguing opposing positions of the same issue without resolution – a dialectical difference.
• People of different cultures often have diverse customs concerning supervising children in the church. Conversations on that topic can go around and around.

In all three cases, any attempt to communicate further is rendered mute. In these kinds of situations, it is always good to seek a common code or a mutually agreed upon agenda at the beginning.

• Make sure to define the word you are using, so that you are certain you are talking about apples rather than Mackintosh and Golden Delicious.
• Identify and define the issue you are talking about before continuing the conversation.
• Begin the conversation by speaking about the specifics of what is happening. Do not begin with a statement about the need to “control” one’s offspring while in church.

The previous situations are only three of many illustrations of why seeking a common code can be valuable. Useful ways that help to establish a common code are to: a) encourage two-way communication, b) ask questions of each other, c) seek to clarify, and d) repeat what you think you just heard.

2. Suspend Judgments

People of all kinds can potentially rub us the wrong way. Interaction with a person from a different racial or cultural background may bring latent negative feelings to the surface. It may also be the case that your counterpart may create and/or reinforce those negative feelings. If you register such reactions, it is crucial to make a conscious effort to suspend those feelings. The same is true of disagreements, no matter how strongly you may feel them.

• Continue to make finding a common code a priority. 
• Afford your conversation partner the same dignity and respect you wish for yourself. 
• Ask questions, listen carefully, express your views honestly, and respect their answers. 
• Realize that most walls of long standing will not come down at once. 
• Rejoice in small improvements and incremental changes.

When working within the context of the Church, it is critical to address new problems while they are still small. Problems are much like a fire. A small fire is easily extinguished. However, if allowed to grow, fire becomes increasingly difficult to extinguish, and there comes a point when no amount of water will save the building.

3. Contribute to the Dignity of All by Exhibiting Genuine Respect

Have you noticed how a heated discussion over an issue can degrade into personal attacks? Nothing good ever comes from getting personal. If conflict is worked through in dignity and with respect, much good can result, and in my experience, a better outcome is achieved. Positive outcomes breed mutual respect and greater confidence in one another’s competence.

Mutual respect dictates that not only should we contribute to the dignity of all; we should protect their dignity as well. There are numerous ways we can do that:

• Search for areas of agreement.
• Listen without interrupting when others are talking. Write down any questions you may have.
• Express your desire to learn from them.
• If another language is involved, learn a few polite words or phrases in the other party’s language.
• Express appreciation for your counterpart’s history.
• Use appropriate body language.
• Show genuine interest in your conversation partners as a person.

If the atmosphere in the room is tense, genuine respect can often turn hostility into meaningful dialogue. Remember that any new understanding you receive, or agreement you make, is a gift you are giving to yourself and to those you represent.

4. Seek to Build Trust

All of the above suggestions are designed to be trust-building measures. You will not accomplish anything without first establishing mutual trust. Following through on the first three points is a good start towards trust. As we observe in diplomacy, it is always helpful to be patient, and willing to have an ongoing dialogue. Trust has to be earned, and if lost, it must be re-earned. Trust is usually only given when we demonstrate respect over time. Trust is built by being dependable, truthful, predictable, and always carrying through, and delivering on what you promise.

---

[1] Excerpted and adapted from, Kauffman, J. Timothy. Reconnecting the Church: Finding Our Place in Complex Culture. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Publishing. 2010, pp. 206-208.

[2] Hunter, James Davidson, and Os Guinness, eds. Articles of Faith, Articles of Peace: The Religious Liberty Clauses and the American Public Philosophy. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1990.

Witnessing in Secular/Post-Modern Complex Culture

The ongoing shift from a modern to a secular/postmodern mindset in the dominant culture has brought with it a shift in how the gospel is allowed to be transmitted. No longer can we assume that those to whom we witness know anything about the Bible, the plan of salvation, or the life of Jesus. This means that to do apologetics in traditional ways would be like talking to someone in a foreign language. Alister McGrath[1] has been helpful to my understanding. The chart below helps to clarify the differences between traditional apologetics and new apologetics, and their effectiveness when interacting with the secular/postmodern paradigm. A second posting on this subject will break down his “points of contact.”[2]

Secular / Postmodern	Traditional Apologetics	New Apologetics
There are many faiths – All religions are equally valid / Many paths lead to God.	There is one faith – Efforts to advocate the faith are based on knowledge and argument.	There is one faith – Efforts to advocate the faith is related to an experience base.
Do not force your faith on others. To claim that Christianity is the only way to God is the height of arrogance.	The Constantine Effect – The belief that the culture is and must remain Christian.	Relationships and trust are a key part of this apologetics. An alternative to the culture is being offered.
Proof is demanded / Each person’s religious experience has validity.	Logic and argument which responds to the demand for proof.	The proof is a life lived with complete integrity. Then a genuine, and credible witness.

These changes raise additional questions: “How do we witness in this new context?” or “What can we use to help us formulate a witness?” In the Modern Era, dominated by the scientific method, Christianity was challenged to prove its basic tenets. The old apologetics tools are knowledge-based arguments, used to answer that challenge. Although still helpful, they are no longer our best option. A sincere witness is often much better. McGrath suggests that we need three sets of tools. We need to:

·     Knowledge of theology — When we want to give a reason for the hope that is within us, our witness needs to be biblically and theologically sound (exegesis). Good theology is based on good exegesis.

·     Understand the culture of the secular mind — It is also necessary to add the knowledge of our context to our biblical knowledge. A good understanding of how our society thinks, what it values, and dislikes, increases the effectiveness of our witness.

·     Sympathetic listening — The third tool that brings our first two points into play is sympathetic listening, which has two features: a) being a good listener, and b) someone who listens without judging. Jesus always listened non-judgmentally. He comes to us, He knows who we are, and loves us anyway. Sympathetic listening means genuinely loving people and allowing relationships to develop; it means to listen to someone’s story without interjecting judgmental comments. For example, allowing them to talk about a failed live-in relationship without telling them it was wrong; coming back with, “That must have been very difficult for you.” Show sympathy no matter what is said. This kind of listening will build relationships. If we learn to build relationships using McGrath’s tools and listen sympathetically, several possibilities will tend to present themselves moving forward:

o   We will be able to build trust and gain a friend,

o   We will build meaningful relationships with people who are hurting and need a friend and the comfort of Christ,

o   We will become aware of point(s) of contact which we have in common with our new friend, and most importantly,

o   We will then have earned the right to tell our own story; witnessing to the grace of God in our lives at that particular point.

If we begin with listening, it happens naturally, and the focus is not on us. I hope this helps you, as you move out into and engage the world around you. Focus on loving people where they are.

Is McGrath correct in his analysis?

Is there someone in your acquaintance to whom you can listen?

Could you practice on your family?

In the next post we will explore McGrath’s seven “points of contact.”

---

[1] McGrath, Allister. Intellectuals Don’t Need God and Other Modern Myths. Oxford: Oxford Press, 1990.

[2] A “point of contact” is a term McGrath uses to describe seven areas of need that are common to all humanity. According to McGrath, everyone has a need in at least one of these areas. More about points of contact in an additional post.