Editor’s note: We’re pleased to share this reprint from Imagine Otherwise, highlighting recent research that sheds light on a comparative study of Korean American and Chinese American churches. As these communities gathered to discuss shared challenges within Asian American Christian circles, two key themes emerged: mental health and the engagement of younger generations. In this piece, Dr. Andrew Lee offers his observations and reflections on the conference insights.
Summary Review
On July 9, 2024, approximately 80 Chinese and Korean pastors, ministry leaders, and researchers met in Gaithersburg, MD, to hear about, reflect on, and find applications for the first comprehensive baseline study involving Chinese and Korean churches in the Washington, D.C., Maryland, and northern Virginia (DMV) region. The operative research question articulated by Dao Feng He, president of the Dao Feng and Angela Foundation which sponsored this research grant, was to “find out why Korean Americans have a much higher proportion of Christian faith than Chinese Americans and why the generational transition of pastors in Korean American churches seems better than in Chinese churches.”
Over a span of two years, a team from Wheaton College addressed this question but also branched out “to understand the outreach community engagement of these congregations, framed by insights into their community engagement, leadership, and financial practices” (CKC Report). In the qualitative stage, 42 interviews with Protestant church leaders were conducted in English, Korean, Mandarin, and Cantonese. In the quantitative phase, 109 individuals participated in the survey but only data from those completing at least 75% of the survey (N=63) were included in the final results.
The Dao Feng and Angela Foundation has released these findings to the general public. Both the Executive Summary and the complete Chinese and Korean Congregations in Greater Washington, D.C. report are available for download.
The churches studied in this project did not follow one organizational pattern. Five models were identified:
- Cultural Enclaves: There is a single ethnic group focus.
- Dual or Multi-Language: At least two languages are employed in its ministries.
- Hybrid: While all are invited to these congregations, one culture is dominant in its practices.
- Multi or Pan-Asian: An expansive umbrella welcomes various Asian groups and cultures.
- Multicultural: There is a mix of peoples and cultures, with no one group exceeding 80% of the congregation.
Thirteen wide-ranging recommendations emerging from this study were shared, summarized and grouped into four categories in the following chart:
For this gathering, the conference organizers focused on two themes that surfaced from the research. One was on mental health, the other on the loss of the younger generation. The core Wheaton research team of Dr. Jamie Goodwin, Dr. Andrew Lee, and Joy Lee made opening comments about their methodology, literature review, case studies of local churches, and key findings.
Dr. Charles Liu, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Wheaton, then shared about developments in mental health. He stressed the stigma associated with mental illness, particularly prevalent in Asian society. The shame attached to mental illness hampers both understanding and addressing these needs.
In the afternoon session, Ray Chang from the Asian American Christian Collaborative, and TENx10 at Fuller Seminary, elaborated on the three major factors driving young people away. They see the church as irrelevant, unloving, and inauthentic, leading to decreased confidence in the church.
After each of these two major presentations, participants were presented with a series of discussion questions about the subject matter. After table discussion, responses were recorded and shared.
An additional late afternoon session provided opportunity for the conference participants to select an area of interest for a roundtable discussion. The five consultation tables each considered one of the following questions:
- How can we help church members practice cross-generational and cross-cultural discipleship and relationship building?
- How can we engage and empower the next generation to cultivate a healthy church?
- How can we speak on hot topic issues like LGBTQ with the younger generation?
- How can we cultivate and retain young leaders?
- How can we support the flourishing of the faith of young people?
Observations and Reflections
As noted during the event, it is rare to see Koreans and Chinese participating in a joint venture such as this, and more activities of this kind are welcomed. The church has played a far more significant role in Korean history and general society than it has in China and among the Chinese diaspora. This is one major factor that has led to the great disparity in church attendance between Chinese and Koreans.
Nevertheless, there are common concerns facing Chinese and Korean churches and members in America today. Retaining the English-speaking generation, and determining new ways to share the gospel with younger, more educated, and affluent new immigrants were mentioned during the meeting as situations facing a number of Chinese and Korean churches. Ongoing dialogue and shared learning could well be beneficial to both parties.
This one day of intense programming covered a wide array of topics. The four categories identified in the chart above merit further study and follow-up. To Learn, Steward, Care, and Empower are all worthy of consideration. Of the 13 recommendations stemming from this report, two under Care—providing opportunities to demonstrate intergenerational love, and meeting with other pastors—seem easier to implement as they fall under the direction of the pastoral staff.
A number of the other recommended actions require major shifts in thinking on the part of both members and church leadership. The third proposal to “Carefully consider if their location and facilities hinder or help their calling to a specific community of people” means entertaining the idea of physical relocation. This becomes even more challenging if a church owns its current facilities.
Item eight, also under the Steward category, encourages growth in giving. While sermons can be preached on stewardship, pastors place themselves at greater risk for congregational criticism whenever preaching about financial giving. Furthermore, will substantive changes result from these messages alone?
In their entirety, all the suggested actions in the chart are highly credible. Unfortunately, the adage “Culture eats strategy for breakfast (lunch and dinner)” remains true. These recommendations are strategic in nature, whereas churches are notorious for holding on to the sacred cows in their organizational culture. Conservatism and the status quo settle into church culture with the passage of years so that implementation can become exceedingly contentious.
When the thought of change is entertained, the resultant skirmishes between strategy and culture have left many a scar and hastened the departure of pastors and members. Thus, wisdom is needed to discern the course of action appropriate for the context of each congregation.
The two major presentations that day, the questions posed by Charles Liu and Ray Chang, the subsequent group discussions, and the late afternoon consultation table topics all yielded a rich exchange of ideas among the participants. Churches can individually cherry-pick among them to determine which one(s) they desire to tackle as too many subject areas surfaced for any individual body to undertake.
Another option is to consider the value of working collaboratively with other congregations to face common struggles. The broad interest topics of overcoming the stigma over mental health, and retaining the younger generation would be more effectively undertaken by a coalition of churches working together rather than by individual congregations. Human and financial resources can be shared. A united effort has the potential to better address these two significant issues uncovered by the research team. However, this requires a concerted commitment of time, leadership, and funding to be successful.
An alternative is to tap into seminars, conferences, and webinars from parachurch organizations when they offer programs focusing on the topics of interest highlighted in the Chinese and Korean Congregations report. Christian organizations are generally more adept and agile than churches at identifying emerging trends confronting the Christian world, and shifting their programming to meet these needs. As an example, the Asian American Christian Collaborative is actively promoting a Mental Health Webinar Series.
A final consideration is whether the results of this research into the DMV region apply to other parts of the country. Do other Asian American churches face similar circumstances or is this situation unique to the mid-Atlantic states? My hunch is that the answer is the former.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by Imagine Otherwise. It was reprinted by the ChinaSource team with permission.
Image credit: Nick Pangere
Are you enjoying a cup of good coffee or fragrant tea while reading the latest ChinaSource post? Consider donating the cost of that “cuppa” to support our content so we can continue to serve you with the latest on Christianity in China.