Christiana Cha
Dr. Brady Bryce – Foundations
A Church for All People
Some of the main characters in this case are:







Bruce Derr (pastor)
Ansa (angry caller, church member, African)
◦ Ansa's deceased mother, uncle, and infant niece
Church leaders – elders, staff, ministry committee chairs
◦ Susan (no church for one month, was angry, Ansa helped)
◦ Fred (sympathizes with and values Ansa's spirituality)
◦ Jonathan (mission committee, frustrated and defensive about Ansa)
Ansa's pain and unmet expectations
250 church members representing 18 nations
Cultural differences and lack of understanding
Dominant white Americans
In the case “A Church for All People,” brief as it is, we can see that there are plenty of cultural
misunderstandings, and perhaps more troubling than that is an evident lack of communication about the
cultural values and differences of the eighteen nations represented in the church body. It is easy to cite
the Great Commission in Matthew 28 and preach that we should make disciples of all nations and
evidently not so easy to do so because the nations are all so different. We see in the bottom half of the
first page of the case that pastor Bruce Derr seems to be aware of these conflicts but also seems to not
have communicated with anyone about these conflicts. He has, however, observed that they happened
and happen regularly. Pastor Bruce notes in his thoughts that there have been culturally-based conflicts
in worship style as well as interpersonal relations between “liberated” Western women and Latino men
with their machismo. Church members even grew heated over what hymns to sing. Nowhere in the case
is there any evident conflict resolution or cultural competency training for the church members, that
they might better function with eighteen different nations represented.










The timeline is roughly as follows:
2 years prior to the present, Bruce Derr begins preaching at A Church for All People.
Ansa comforts Susan in her time of struggle.
Ansa's mother dies.
Ansa goes to Africa for her mother's funeral.
Ansa returns to the USA.
Ansa's uncle and niece die.
Ansa grieves; Bruce and two others visit her.
Jonathan calls Ansa about church business.
Ansa calls Bruce.
Monthly church leadership meeting, Bruce tells other leaders about Ansa's phone call.
Factors Inhibiting Flourishing
Some possible factors that are inhibiting the flourishing of A Church for All People are the sheer
lack of understanding between different cultures and either the lack of awareness of or the lack of
representation for the various demographics in the church. There is white middle class dominance,
especially in positions of power in the church, and as pastor Bruce notes, the non-majority voices tend
to remain silent rather than expressing their thoughts, expectations, and desires. Knowing this, it is not
surprising that there are stylistic and cultural incompatibilities in worship with members who are not
white and middle class. A Church for All People also seem to lack a concept of conflict resolution, and
one that they could use as a framework is the model in Matthew 18 of going directly to the brother or
sister who sinned against you rather than a more childish tattle-tale style of conflict. This is the model
of conflict resolution that we decided to practice in our Rule of Life in MRNA. I strongly believe that
as brothers and sisters in faith and as well-informed adults, this is our best route. It is better for us to
speak in private with one another in a constructive, honest confrontation than to sow dissension in the
community by gossiping about each other, and I think this verse is a safeguard against that. The model
of Matthew 18:15-17 also keeps a conflict from escalating unduly. This is something that Pastor Bruce
could introduce to A Church for All People. In a similar vein is Matthew 5:21-26, the passage that talks
about reconciling with a brother or sister before offering sacrifice to God. Though we no longer offer
physical sacrifices to God, we still offer up our worship, and it takes a level of guile to worship as
though nothing is wrong when one in actuality has a conflict with a brother or sister in Christ. How can
I hold something against my sister and at the same time claim to have a pure heart and worship God? It
would be an empty claim.
One way to address these factors is to research the demographics of the church – percentile,
gender, age, etc. – and then educate the church on those numbers. From the awareness of demographic,
the church can move on to various “for dummies” sort of cultural crash courses for the church led by
members of each demographic or nation. Understanding is a key factor in being able to foster mutual
respect, and this is something I am learning about in the Conflict Resolution course I am currently
taking. If we are unaware of another person's culture, it is easy for us to offend someone of another
culture unknowingly. Sometimes all it takes is a little bit of cultural education to avoid the conflict that
springs from ignorance.
The church can also work harder to encourage and make space for non-white members to
become more involved, both by seeking out those people and by seeking issues of relevance to
members of the church. The leaders can choose to at least occasionally adjust the worship style to
accommodate different demographics within the church, and there can be an open-invitation churchwide meeting every quarter or so where people are given the chance to voice any discomforts or deep
frustrations they might have and church leaders can work as mediators in conversation (this would also
require some brief training in mediation).
In Scripture we see that the Gospel message transcended cultures – apostles and disciples
carried it throughout the world – but we also see that Jesus appealed especially to those who were not
of the powerful majority, so it makes sense for the church to have a similar platform. Therefore it is
important for the church in this case to reassess their power structure as well as whom and what
purpose they are serving. As mentioned before, the church could draw examples from the Bible of
appropriate Christian conflict resolution per the model of Matthew 18, going to one's brother or sister
before escalating a conflict.
Possible Reasons for Perceived Failure
1. A lack of understanding of non-white, non-dominant cultures – there are eighteen nations
represented but a heavily white-dominant leadership who does not understand or seem to want
to understand the values of different cultures. This is evident in Ansa's case, the other African
woman who sat with Ann, and the American career women and Latino men. In Ansa's culture,
to simply sit with another person during his/her grief is the appropriate response, and this was
the case for the woman who sat with Ann as well. Ansa felt the church had failed her because
people did not come to sit with her in her grief, and the woman who sat with Ann did what she
knew in her cultural framework to be the best thing she could do for a friend who was grieving.
Meanwhile, the American career women did not feel flattered by the Latino men's flirtatious
behavior because their culture led them to believe this sort of machismo was objectifying and
lewd rather than flattering and a sign of appreciation.
2. The lack of representation of other nations in the church leadership, partly due to many nonwhite members working two or more jobs and thus feeling unable to spare the time (perhaps a
systemic economic problem here, as well). This is a larger problem that A Church for All
People probably could not solve on their own because the reason their non-white members give
for not being able to serve on church committees is a lack of time due to long work hours. They
would have to be able to get higher-paying jobs, which is not necessarily something the church
can help with much.
3. A lack of communication and seeking understanding from the members of the less forthcoming,
outspoken cultures. American culture is fairly low-context and direct; a good illustration of this
could be the popular saying, “Say what you mean and mean what you say.” In some African
cultures, though, communication is very indirect. They do not say what they mean but rather
subtly hint at things. This is also the case in some Asian cultures. It would take a specific
environment and some patient coaxing and most likely an established relationship of trust for
members of such cultures to diverge their true opinions.
4. The defensiveness of white American ways rather than openness to change. Some of the
committee members at A Church for All People were resistant to the very idea of change. This
is not surprising, as change is something that humans seem to naturally resist. However, in a
church so diverse, absolutely everyone needs to be open to change, particularly those of the
powerful majority.
5. The instinct to vent frustration among the white Americans rather than going directly to Ansa
and asking for understanding of her part and her culture. This is where they could have
employed the Matthew 18 model; Pastor Bruce could have encouraged Ansa to speak directly
with her church colleagues, and those who ended up being frustrated with Ansa could have
spoken directly with her about their frustration and asked for understanding rather than venting
to Pastor Bruce, who ended up being stuck somewhere in the middle. As someone who
understood both sides, he had a responsibility to help them understand one another.
6. A lack of communication of expectations on what it means to be church – this lack of
communication is evident in the example of Ansa's and the other African woman's desires and
responses during times of grief. To them, being church in a time of grief means sitting and
mourning with another. To white Americans, this feels burdensome and not private enough. To
an African, it is normal, healthy, and communal. During my time in MRNA I found that even in
a group of six students, we had different ideas of what it meant to be church, and so it was
essential for us to discuss what church meant to us so that we could be there for each other in
ways that communicated care to one another.
7. A lack of of directive leadership and unifying vision, theologically and otherwise. Pastor Bruce
is clearly of a sound mind and is has some intercultural experience. He is, from what we know,
the most well-equipped person in the church in this matter. However, he has a tendency to hang
back and be more passive. Meanwhile, the church members bicker among themselves when he
could be putting his expertise and position of authority to constructive use. He is someone who
can credibly set an example for the church to follow or at the very least facilitate a conversation
within the church, but instead he sat and thought.
Perspective Prescription
A homogeneous unit is clearly not sufficient for such a diverse community. It is impossible to
fully cater to every aspect of each represented culture. There are perhaps ways to unite the church over
certain basic tenets of faith (Jesus as Son of God, Jesus' command to take the gospel to all peoples,
etc.), but stylistically worship would either have to be an interesting amalgamation of styles or would
have to rotate each week between different styles or some other compromise. In the letters of Paul from
what we can tell the early church is fairly diverse, and there is some cultural clashing between Jews and
Gentiles, but Paul gives them counsel on how to work things out with each other. Why would Paul have
given such counsel if it were not possible to learn to communicate and coexist, putting less significant
matters aside and focusing on the common goal of growing into Christ?
Some theological and biblical concepts that would support the vision of A Church for All People
are the fact that Jesus died that all might be saved and Peter's vision of the sheet being lowered down
from heaven (Acts 10). In Peter's vision, what had previously been called unclean God deemed clean,
and this supports the idea that diverse groups can mix and unite in Christ. Jesus' own example was one
of upsetting cultural norms and creating an entirely different culture that consisted of following him.
This is a promising example for the Church for All People to be able to respect the different cultural
views and values within their church while creating a new counter-culture to link the cultures together
in some common ideologies and practices. This is something we talked about some in MRNA; we each
have our own cultural backgrounds, but we take on a chosen “Jesus culture” when we make the
decision to follow Christ.
A Church for All People also needs both more diverse leadership and a unified stance for its
leadership. This is clearly not an easy thing otherwise the New Testament writers would not have had to
write so much on problems with unity, but it is nonetheless necessary. While the leaders are at least
focused on problem-solving (which is a problem in and of itself), they argue amongst themselves and
no one steps up with a constructive action. Pastor Bruce could be instrumental in facilitating these
meetings and giving the leadership a sense of unity, purpose, and vision if he would be more assertive.
A shepherd should feed his/her sheep, just as Jesus asked Peter to feed his sheep, but Bruce instead
seems to be forever lost in thought and using neither the experience nor the wisdom he has gained from
his life and travels. I think Pastor Bruce needs to be more assertive and in so doing lead the other
members of the leadership team to agree upon a clearly written statement of purpose after some time
reading about leaders in the bible.
Something else that might change their perspective is prayer; I am just as guilty as anyone else
at wanting to think through something and figure it out with my own mind, but we have a God who
listens to our prayers. Pastor Bruce needs to set a precedent for his leadership team both to dwell in
scripture and to spend time in prayer, not only argument! As I think of prayer, I think of both private
and corporate prayer. Corporate prayer is still something I am struggling with because I often feel like
people try to sound the most eloquent or use the most flowery language in their prayers, and it seems
like they are trying to put on a show or impress people. I especially feel this way when people write out
their prayers and then read them. This makes me think of the Pharisee who stood in front of everyone
and prayed that he was glad he was not like the sinner who was near him (Matthew 6). It seems like
practicing piety before others when people say long, intricate, and yet fairly meaningless prayers. It is
probably also not for me to judge because I do not actually know the reason why people choose to do
this. Perhaps they are not naturally good public speakers.
For me the kind of corporate prayer that is meaningful is praying over and for one another. It is
purposeful and attentive to the needs of the body. This is something Pastor Bruce could encourage in
the church as a whole but also among the leaders specifically. He could also spend time privately in
prayer and encourage his leaders to do the same. Ever since I was a little girl, the passage on prayer in
Matthew 6 is something that has stood out to me. The idea of going away from the public and praying
to the Father in secret struck me, and the kind of intimacy that we seek with God seems to ask for that
sort of privacy. It is our time to be alone with the Lord, completely frank in both our strengths and
weaknesses. It is a time for us to talk with God. This sort of private prayer has been much more
meaningful to me than any corporate prayer in a church service has ever been. I think it is also a time to
intensely and intentionally engage the spiritual discipline of listening to the Lord, and that is something
that Pastor Bruce most certainly needs in a church as complex as the Church for All People (and all
church leaders need this!).
What is the Church?
In the case Ansa asks, “What is the church for if not to be with you when you are grieving?”
This calls for some definition of terms and purpose.
Having majored in French in my undergraduate studies, I am certainly nothing near a Greek
scholar, but in one of my classes with Kent Smith we discussed the term oikonomia. Kent explained
that this term signified a household economy. If the church is a household, then the church should live
life together, function together, and support one another. If one part of the church suffers, all parts
should at least be aware of that suffering. When one part of the body suffers, the body focuses its
energy on healing that one part – this is the biblical model of church and one that Ansa would be able
to support. In the early church there was even financial support given freely among members of the
“household”.
In terms of what the church can and should be for Ansa in this particular situation of grief, they
should certainly have been there for her and loved her in ways that she is able to receive love. The
church members attempted to love Ansa, but for the most part they did so in ways that did not translate
into love for her. Love must given in ways that it can be received. Ansa's part in this would have been
to communicate how she receives love and support, though that conversation could certainly have been
facilitated by pastor Bruce asking her what he and the church could do for her rather than simply
visiting her and leaving it at that.
Pastor Bruce and His Role
Pastor Bruce seems to understand his role in the church as a messenger and facilitator of the
monthly leadership meetings. He also strongly believes in the vision of a Church for All People, so he
sees himself as someone working to help that happen. His visit to Ansa shows that at least to some
extent he sees himself as a pastoral figure. However, he seems to be too passive and limits the
effectiveness of his own expertise rather than fully giving of his gifts. As someone who has spent time
abroad, he is likely much more informed and culturally aware than the majority of his congregation,
and he could mentally prepare them for culture shock and the fact that there are always differences
between culture.
Pastor Bruce appears to be a clear communicator when he brings Ansa's complaint before the
leaders in the meeting, so if he stepped up and took a slightly more assertive stance, he could be a good
mediator or facilitator in conversations between different cultural groups within their church. As the
pastor he is in the perfect position to be able to speak to the body at large, so he can promote seeking
understanding and give everyone a voice.
A strategy that Pastor Bruce might be able to use is something called Dynamic Governance. It is
a decision-making tool based on the concept of consent over consensus – deciding on something that
will work for everyone rather than the one “right” answer. Dynamic Governance creates a system of
rounds in which all voices are given a turn to speak, which is highly beneficial for containing the
louder, more outspoken voices and giving space to the quieter, less assertive voices. Everyone has the
chance to speak and to consent or withhold consent.
Speaking from a Scriptural standpoint, Galatians 3:28 is the classic passage that says there is
“neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female...”. All become brothers and sisters in Christ,
equal in Christ's love and in the pursuit of becoming more like Christ. Later on in his letters to Timothy,
Paul also tells Timothy to not let anyone look down on him because of his youth. So age is not an
object either. Our greatest point of unity as Christians is Christ; if pastor Bruce can bring the focus back
to unity and build a solid and relational base there first and then venture out to explore the detailed
differences, perhaps things would go more smoothly. People first need to see each other as people and
as brothers and sisters in Christ, not as someone who has different beliefs or is annoying.
The basis of Dynamic Governance gives a nod to this scriptural concept; it considers all people
and all voices equal and the basic structure gives that equality. Everyone speaks during his or her own
turn but not during anyone else's turn, and there are multiple rounds to give people multiple chances to
speak. People also do not immediately respond to each other, giving all parties time to think. First,
everyone states their input. Then the facilitator makes another round until everyone has given all the
input they feel necessary. Only then does the facilitator move on to asking for feedback. This can seem
tedious at times, but it is generally not used for simpler or less important decisions. DG is, however, a
great tool for heavier decisions that affect large numbers of people. This would also be great for
indirect communicators because it would give them multiple chances to speak their minds, and the
facilitator would be directly asking them for their opinion in a safe, structured setting. We tried this in
MRNA and it was wonderful and relieving for those of us in the group who were less assertive and less
dominant in conversation. At the same time, it provided a check for those who otherwise tended to
dominate conversation.
I appreciate DG in part because I wholeheartedly believe that everyone is equally a child of
God. As a young Korean-American woman, I am a child of God just as much as is a middle-aged white
American man. My friends in VOICE are just as much children of God as is the Pope. Each human
being is uniquely created and uniquely gifted, and though some in the Christian tradition would
condemn my friends in the LGBTQ community (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer), my
extensive time with them has only convinced me of the beauty of the Imago Dei in them. They are
some of the most compassionate, enemy-loving, merciful, and high-integrity people I know, and they
deserve a voice just as much as a pastor or an immigrant.
Bruce and Ansa
The simplest, most basic answer to how Bruce can minister to Ansa and empower the church to
minister to her as well is communication. What does this mean, and how does one implement this
communication? As the pastor of the church, Bruce is in a unique position where people will come to
him with their concerns and feelings, so he is a pivoting point between individuals and the body. As the
confidant, he knows in this case Ansa's feelings, expectations, and issues, and therefore he is equipped
on a knowledge basis to help her address her concerns. He can also ask her what she needs or what
conveys love and support to her, which will help him in being able to minister to her and being able to
relegate information and delegate other members of the church to reach out to her as well.
Bruce should most certainly be Ansa's advocate; he should help others to understand her, that
they might learn to love her. He should also sit with her and validate what is healthy to validate because
he knows that for her, coming and sitting with her conveys support in a time of grief. Bruce should also
facilitate communication between Ansa and those by whom she feels unloved. He also hopefully knows
some of the gifts of the church members and can allow someone who is gifted in the necessary areas –
perhaps someone who is good at empathizing, listening, and being comfortable sitting with another
person in silence (maybe another African in the congregation) – to be the one to continue comforting
Ansa once Bruce has done his part as the pastor.
Bringing Peace
The first thing that needs to happen in the situation is clear communication between the various
parties involved. Pastor Bruce is in a good position to be able to mediate and/or facilitate this
communication. He is a trusted, more neutral figure in the conflict who is able to see the range of
viewpoints of his church. Pastor Bruce is able to help people feel understood and able to help them
understand each other; he can remind them of their mutual good intentions and bring the conflict from
blaming one another to better communication of expectations.
Pastor Bruce can also remind the church of their unity in Christ and God's mission to reconcile
the world to God-self. It would also stand to bring to light again that one of the greatest commands that
Jesus laid out was that we love one another. Pastor Bruce can bring to the forefront of people's minds
that first and foremost, we are to love one another and recognize each other's humanity and
personhood.
A possible conflict resolution model that pastor Bruce could endorse is that of Matthew 18; first
speak to the person by whom you feel misunderstood; is s/he does not listen, then bring an advocate
with you; if s/he still does not listen, appeal to elders, and so on. This encourages direct
communication, which will be uncomfortable at first, especially for non-confrontational East Africans,
but in the long run could very well encourage a deep trust in one another (I know it has done that for a
friend of mine with me). Other possibilities include consulting a professional therapist.