‘An Intercultural Church for a Multicultural World’ by Bishop Martyn Snow: Review and Reflection. # 153. 26/03/2024.

Out of Many, One People.

Welcome. I don’t usually send out a blog in Holy Week, but forgot to give a warning last week. But this is a convenient opportunity to post a review of Bishop Martyn’s book, which was launched at last week’s excellent ‘Anglican Network for Intercultural Mission’ conference. (And which will also source several future blogs). Next week, as busy clergy take a breather after Easter, there will be no blog.

‘An Intercultural Church for a Multicultural World’ by Bishop Martyn Snow: Review and Reflections.

Bishop Martyn’s book was launched at last week’s conference of the Anglican Network for Intercultural Mission. Below is a slightly amplified version of the review I wrote for that conference, followed by reflections on one issue that I think is worth further discussion.

Review.

Bishop Martyn’s book is sub-titled ‘Reflections on Intercultural Gift Exchange’, which underlines its running theme that the sharing of gifts – both receiving and giving, and with all being from God – has a central place in living as Christians in a God-given multi-ethnic society. It is an approach and mindset he depicts in the strap-line of ‘generous giving, radical receptivity, and transformational thanksgiving’.

The books valuable qualities can be expressed as a series of concentric circles:

* It is personal, drawing on his experience in Guinea, Sheffield and now Leicester, and crystallised as ‘learning to think and act with a greater degree of cultural sensitivity, and to receive the gifts of others’. It is not a magisterial book, dropped from on high; it is, rightly, a ‘Martyn Snow book’.

* It is contextual, ‘a key part of our learning has been the importance of context and the need to reflect carefully on what is appropriate for that specific context’. Whilst not a ‘how to’ book it does tell stimulating stories, with a concern ‘to bring about change at a local level’, including the humble readiness to learn from mistakes. A final chapter looks at how things might work out at a civic and national level. It is, rightly, a ‘Leicester book’.

* It is global, particularly focussing on the universal experience of offering and receiving gifts that has relevance for all cultures, and so points to the specifics of what we actually do rather than staying with bland generalities. It underlines that grace, giving and generosity all have the same root word in Greek. Further, it is likely that every reader will be pointed to books and resources they have not yet encountered.

The book also includes a stimulating ‘half-time talk- by Bishop Saju Muthalaly on ‘The Gift of Hospitality’, and an ‘Afterword’ by Jessie Tang on her experience of developing Intercultural Ministry.

The value of the book is enhanced by having bullet points at the head of each chapter pointing to what will be explored, and with valuable questions and a guide to further reading at the end. In a short book, readers are thoughtfully inducted into the experience and understanding that are central to living and giving in a multi-ethnic church and society.

Reflection: Diaspora church to Anglican church.

One particularly encouraging and thought-provoking passage in the bishop’s book is how the United Asian Christian Fellowship, an independent Indian and Pakistani heritage congregation under the leadership of Rev Sunny George, became the Anglican church of All Saints, Belgrave (pp 43-46). This raises important questions of both defining the essence of being an Anglican parish church, and also how replicable this process might be nationally.

The bishop writes: ‘We started by saying ‘It’s so good that you want to be part of the Church of England’, and then we said ‘and here’s a list of things that you need to change in order to become like us’’. He gives a basic list of fifteen things that this meant them taking on board and uneasily raises the question of what are to do with our ‘core identity’, and what reflects ‘cultural superiority i.e. our assumption that we know best how to do these things’. Here it would be helpful for the Church of England to get more closely engaged with the question.

For example, questions that might test out the differences between our ‘core identity’ and ‘cultural superiority’ (with my suggested answers in italics) are:

a) should Anglican churches be liturgical and eucharistic?

Yes, since they represent the wisdom of the centuries; but lightly, since most diasporic churches, give them little weight, and worship in more expressive, informal styles.

b) should a faculty be necessary for the internal and inevitably culturally specific furnishings of a church building?

No, the congregation should be free to express their particular culture, which is difficult for outsiders to evaluate..

c)  should the minister share his authority with the laity and/or PCC?

Yes, this models the servant ministry of Jesus, and counters the authoritarian leadership style of many diasporic churches. It plays down the role of dominating, inflexible personalities.

d) should two years equivalent full-time training and a curacy be required?

Yes, these are necessary elements in forming wise leadership. The recent Soul Survivor controversy, and some decades before, the Nine O’Clock Service in Sheffield, show the damage of giving authority to powerful personalities who have not had to submit to the challenges of training and a properly supervised curacy.

That is a fairly conservative response to the ‘formalities’ of Anglicanism’. But perhaps a more important challenge lies with the ‘informalities’. Bishop Martyn refers to the importance at All Saints of hospitality and food, of being family, of recognising and encouraging talents, and deeper cultural issues such as reluctance to seek support in difficulties; which are all bigger challenges to Anglican assumptions of cultural superiority.

How replicable is what happened at All Saints? (And should we be thinking of not only minority ethnic churches, but also largely white independent churches). Whilst receiving a building is a major attraction, we should also note other factors that may be attractive – greater opportunities for training, a sense of future continuity, more protection against abusive leadership, concern that an independent church can become a closed family enterprise.

Nationally, how many independent congregations are there for whom either joining with the Church of England, or perhaps devising some form of half-way status, is a possible way ahead? Greater understanding of what potential there might be in the Church of England offering an open-hearted, open arms approach to diasporic churches in particular might be worth exploring, and more specific pathways developed.