We’ve got to go bilingual…

church buildingIt’s a firm conviction of mine that the only way churches in places like Texas will be able to really serve their communities in the future is for them to be bilingual. Not necessarily having bilingual services (I’ll talk about that in a minute), but being bilingual.

Why not just plant more Hispanic churches? That works well with an immigrant population, but over time Hispanic families want to be a part of “regular” society. Typically you have one generation that barely speaks English, their kids that are functionally bilingual, and the third generation that might understand some Spanish, but no longer speaks it. 60% of Hispanics in the United States were born in the U.S.; 60% of those consider English to be their primary language. Eventually, even Hispanic churches have to go bilingual, or they will lose their youth.

I’m convinced that Anglo churches need to be preparing themselves to go bilingual as well. That may mean holding a separate bilingual service. There is a church in Escondido that has “separate but equal” congregations of Hispanics and Anglos; they have separate auditoriums and say that the Hispanic auditorium is actually the nicer of the two. Or congregations can go the way that the Stockdale congregation has gone, being bilingual. [Another example is the Inland Valley congregation near Los Angeles which does EVERYTHING bilingually, including singing every song in two languages simultaneously]

In a future post, I’ll share my opinions about how we go about preparing ourselves to be bilingual.

11 thoughts on “We’ve got to go bilingual…

  1. laymond

    It always amazes me how we use concave spectacles, to see what the Lords work is, then require everyone else to ware our glasses.

  2. Mark Edge

    Tim,

    I appreciate you addressing this subject.

    I liked the way we did it in our congregation in Brownsville. For context, there were five Spanish speaking only churches, and then ours, which had originally been English only.

    To meet the needs of the blended family speaking primarily English or headed that way, we had Bible classes in the two languages for adults on Sunday morning, all kids’ classes in English, and then an English speaking worship service.

    Sunday afternoon, I preached the same sermon twice. I preached at four PM in a totally Spanish speaking assembly; I preached at six PM at a totally English speaking assembly. All worship assemblies took place in our main auditorium. Because of this, there was no need for the language of equality. Everyone used the same facilities. Often times, people were English speaking would cross over to the Spanish speaking assembly and vice-versa. Sometimes, a person would attend both.

    Incidentally, English only did not mean Anglo. Some of our Hispanic brethren spoke only English, as you have alluded in your blog.

    As for activities, as I recall, we would have common meals where you picked your language, and occasional activities outside the assembly that were in either language, depending on who was organizing and what the strategic intent was.

  3. Tim Archer Post author

    Mark,
    I like the sounds of that. My guess is that churches in the Valley of South Texas have had to face this reality sooner that other parts of the state.
    Grace and peace,
    Tim

  4. nick gill

    Mark Moore says, only half-humorously, that fellowship meals are the key to unity in blended-culture congregations. Once the Anglos discover the deliciousness of Hispanic home-cooking, they’ll never risk splitting the church!

  5. Doug Young

    Tim,

    Same holds true here in Clovis. Granted, we’re only 8 miles from the Texas border. LOL. But seriously, today I baptized two hispanic men who work for one of our hispanic members. I am excited about this. I am actually pumped to be able to revisit the Spanish language. I grew up in South Texas, and over the time I’ve lost a lot of what I knew growing up, but my wife and I both want to purchase RosettaStone to learn the language.

  6. Danielle M.

    I don’t understand why Americans living in America should assist immigrants to America in NOT assimilating to U.S. culture….do you not realize this eventually means the death of the American culture and potentially our entire nation and country if immigrants can keep coming here, keep their culture and language displayed in public? Are you aware demographers are predicting Hispanics will become the most numerous ethnic group in the U.S. about or shortly after 2050? Many Hispanics have their eye on making this a full-fledged Hispanic nation by infiltrating our society…look up “Latinization of America” in your computer search engine and see how many articles come up. If you read long enough you’ll find their goals are to make this country nearly unrecognizable from what we’ve always known it to be…they want Spanish to replace English as the language that holds us together, and they want to “Latinize” our culture. Nowhere in the Bible does it support any nation allowing immigrants to that nation to replace the national culture and language with their own as dominant. This is a human rights issue!! The only exception should be indigenous Native American/Hawaaiian/Alaskan languages….but I rarely hear of any church body having services for the indigenous peoples of the 50 states except the few of their own people who have become Christian. At least that would be a sort of restorative justice for the indigenous and possibly a bridge between them and us. The other is allowing the old “Spanish Empire” to take over, as 90% of Hispanics did not have ancestry within the 50 U.S. states prior to Spain coming to the Americas in the 1400’s, and most of them prefer Spanish and the culture of mainly Spain over the culture and languages of their Amerindian ancestors-though many of those old languages still exist in Latin America. Bottom line, there are other ways to make Hispanics feel welcome that don’t divide our earthly nation and empower Hispanics to replace us. Stand up for the righteous thing!

  7. Tim Archer Post author

    Danielle,

    Well spoken as a promoter of the Kingdom of America. I promote the Kingdom of Heaven, so your view is totally foreign to me.

    I can only serve one Master.

    Grace and peace,
    Tim Archer

  8. brian

    I don’t understand why (Christians) living in America should assist (Americans) in America in NOT assimilating to (Christians) culture….do you not realize this eventually means the death of the (Christians) culture and potentially our entire (spiritual) nation and country if Americans can keep coming (into the church), keep their culture and language displayed in public? Are you aware demographers are predicting (the church will be dead) U.S. about or shortly after 2050? Many (Americans) have their eye on making this a full-fledged (worldy church) by infiltrating our (church)…look up (“Secularization of the Church”) in your computer search engine and see how many articles come up. If you read long enough you’ll find their goals are to make (the church) nearly unrecognizable from what (the bible teaches)…they want (worldliness) to replace (spirituality) as the language that holds us together, and they want to (“secularize”) our culture. Nowhere in the Bible does it support (the church) allowing (americans) to replace the (Kingdom culture) and language with their own as dominant. This is a (God-rights) issue!!

    The other is allowing the old (“man/self empire”) to take over, and most of them prefer (USA) and the culture of mainly (USA) over the culture and languages of (the Bible).
    Stand up for the righteous thing!

    (seriously, I definitely agree with that last sentence. AMEN!)

  9. Simply Robert

    Interestingly enough, you have only to look as far as the life of Christ to find precedent for reaching out to those outside your culture and who may not even have your best interests at heart. Take Jesus’ treatment of Romans as example.

    More than once in the gospels, we see Jesus reaching out to Roman officials, even centurions, offering them and theirs healing and restoration. Did the Romans “belong” in Jerusalem? No. Did the Romans necessarily respect the language and customs of Judea? No. Did the Romans particularly care for Jewish culture? No.

    Still, of one of these idolatrous Romanizing invaders, Jesus says (in Matthew 8:10), “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith.”

    These same Romans would actually invade Jerusalem a few decades after Jesus’ death. They would destroy the temple central to Jehovah worship in Jewish religion. They would destroy the cultural center of Israel and continue to try to Romanize the Jews. Do you think Jesus, with the prophetic knowledge of deity, would have been ignorant of this? Still, Jesus cared for their souls more than their politics, their agenda, or their nationality.

    Even if you believe the fear-mongering over some supposed Latinization agenda, it makes not one iota of difference to our responsibility to their souls.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.