Towards an Asian American Theology of Youth Ministry (Part 1)

Unexpectedly, I was awarded the Asian American Ministry Award upon my graduation from Princeton Theological Seminary.  I thank the faculty and staff who have selected me to be the recipient of this award.  The award, however, has a stipulation that I intend to follow: the recipient must conduct research on Asian American Christianity for the next academic year.  I shouldn't be surprised: this is an Asian American award, after all.

I think it is quite apropos to begin putting together my thoughts on "Asian American" ministry in general, particularly as it has to do with youths.   But we must be precise regarding our definitions.  A theology of Asian American ministry is not a blueprint on how do to ministry.  It is much like economics; economics is not the study of how to make money (contrary to popular belief), but it is the understanding of the unseen and underlying social forces that translate to economic phenomena we witness today.  It can be informative to making money, but if economics were a study on moneymaking, then all economists would've be unbelievably wealthy!  The same applies to theology; theology is not a "how to do ministry" manual.  Certainly, theological insights and reflections can be useful for ministry, but the purpose of theology is not to do ministry.  If we think that way, then theology becomes a reflection on ministry, and we will let our reflection on God and the things of God be dictated by our spiritual whims, some of which may not be spiritual at all.   Theology and ministry work in some sort of tension in order that they both can occupy the liminal space between transcendence and immanence.  Let us not forget that Christian theology/ministry must strike that balance; if it focuses entirely on the transcendent, it loses its practical hold on those not trained in the theological sciences or ministerial practices.  But if it focuses entirely on the immanent, then hope may be compromised; after all, we must remember that we believe in the doctrine of original sin.

A wrinkle in this space is that Asian American ministry must negotiate the hyphenated identity of "Asian American."  Now, why that is the case may not be obvious; after all, what exactly is so "Asian American" about theology or ministry anyways?  Is not all theology or ministry the same?  Let us be more specific and address Asian American ministry, of which its existence is not contested.  Asian American ministry is ministry within an Asian American context.  Several questions need to be raised however.  What is that context, and what are the "units" it is measured in?  Asian Americans are now starting to attend White churches (and, to a much lesser extent, Black churches).  Are the pastors, by virtue of having an Asian American in their congregations, practicing Asian American ministry to that one Asian American? Or is Asian American ministry applicable to Asian American churches?  If the latter, how Asian American must the church be for it to be sufficiently Asian American?

These are difficult questions, no doubt.  English Congregations in many Asian American churches have parted ways with the immigrant-generation congregations as the former gravitated towards multicultural ministries, to the displeasure of the latter.  But in the kernel of these difficult questions is a much more difficult question: what does it mean to be Asian American, anyways?

Few Asian American theologians and ministers have reflected on this ontological problem.  It seems extraneous to ministry.  After all, isn't the point of youth ministry to bring teenagers to a fuller worship of Jesus Christ?  Well, of course, but worship is contextual.  In other words, the how and why we worship draws heavily on our environment.  Modern youths gravitate towards the idea that one comes to worship without pretentions - we come to church as we are.  There is, in other words, an emphasis on authenticity.  But many in the older generation in many churches (Asian or not) come from a time when one worships without laxity - we come to church in the presence of a holy God.  There is an emphasis on transcendence.  Now, I don't mean to claim that authenticity is sublatory to transcendence, or the other way around.  What I mean to claim is that the how and why we approach the Throne of Grace is dependent on our context.  This is because none of us have seen God, and have constructed a systematic theology based on an objective conversation with God from our context.  The Scriptures comprise a story of the Israelites experiencing God from their contexts, which are very, very different from ours.

That said, much of what we know as systematic theology has been done from a Western point of view. That is why the Trinity is a difficult concept to get around; the first systematic theologians were thinkers steeped in Greek philosophy.  Approaching God from a Chinese philosophical point of view is less troubling because Chinese philosophy emphasizes the interrelatedness of ontologies.  Again - I must keep being annoying and clarifying, because some of my readers may be tempted to write me off as a heretic without any form of considerable thought - I am not in favor of rejecting the traditional formulation of the Trinity.  I am in favor of bringing that in conversation with non-Western ways of considering how three distinct identities can irretrievably constitute one Identity.  Again, I must repeat, we are contextual beings.  That is why contextual theologies are important; when we do not take them seriously, we must then insist that Western cultural interpretations of God is the only valid cultural interpretation.  This is not orthodoxy, but "theological imperialism."  It is only orthodoxy if the Church Fathers have actually seen God and, therefore, can objectively describe and articulate God.  (Then again, such a God would not really be God...)

So what, then, is a theology of youth ministry?  A theology of youth ministry locates God in some tangible aspect of human existence.  This location is important!  Every theological system locates God somewhere.  This location can be employed strategically against evil.  Karl Barth employed this to excellent effect in fighting against the Nazi Church (by locating God above culture).  But a purely transcendent God is irrelevant to humanity.  Thus, Paul Tillich locates God in the fine interweaving of culture - as the "Ground of Being."  Locating God in human existence makes God very present.  Consider what happens when we say, "God is our best friend."  There!  We have located God within a specific social and cultural context.  And there's a reason we make that location, otherwise, why bother doing it?  When we sing "Be Thou My Vision," we are locating God within a different cultural context and personal situation.

An Asian American theology of youth ministry, then, locates God within a socio-cultural context that addresses the struggles of the Asian American youth community.  Now, at the outset, it seems like I'm just complicating what is really a simple task.  Suppose a struggle is academic success - well, just tell them that God is not impressed and that we should focus on the eternal, not on the temporal, right?  But people don't just desire academic success out of a cultural void.  Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, and other super-wealthy business leaders were not really known for their academic successes, and so many of our crummy politicians were great students.  For the Asian American theology of youth ministry to have bite, it must critically analyze the socio-cultural context Asian American youths find themselves in and locate that context within the broader sense of history.  In other words, we must first trace "academic success" to its originating catalyst so that we can properly address it theologically.  Otherwise, all we'll do is address the superficial, while the underpinning cultural baggage is not addressed, leading to reappearing problems.