Building a Thriving Church Health Ecosystem Part 8: Facilitate healthy monocultural & multicultural churches, & all churches to transition, partner and outreach all cultures

THRIVING TOGETHER BLOG INTRO

For many years, I have shared both the pain and joys of those who work with churches. Like many of you, I have often wondered if there are better ways to thrive together and make a missional impact on our world. It’s not about trying harder; it’s about doing different things in new ways. This involves interrupting our routines and reflecting on our practices.

As a pastoral supervisor, trainer, lecturer, and consultant for churches and non-profits, I strive to provide valuable insights. I hope my posts serve as refreshing water for those planted in churches and leading denominations so we can thrive together.

Please let me know your thoughts in the comments. Or you can reach out to me through my website: www.ianduncum.com.au.

Building a Thriving Church Health Ecosystem Part 8: Facilitate healthy monocultural & multicultural churches, & all churches to transition, partner and outreach all cultures

dr Ian Duncum

1 Introduction

Australian churches have embraced migration as an opportunity for hospitality and evangelism, engaging with multicultural communities through:

• ministry to migrants in the church and community

• supporting/partnering with mono-cultural churches from CALD backgrounds

• partnering with migrants in international/multi-cultural churches

This post will explore migration and multiculturality in Australia, addressing debates on church growth and structure. It concerns denominational officials, missiologists, theological educators, pastors, and church leaders as they consider the implications of this research to empower local churches for missional connections in multicultural communities.

The main purpose is to explore what contributes to church health and vitality in Australia by comparing different church models and examining their strengths and areas for growth.

1.1 Definitions

Culture is "the more or less integrated systems of ideas, feelings, and values and their associated patterns of behaviour and products shared by a group of people who organize and regulate what they think, feel and do" (Hiebert, 1985, p. 30). When a person moves from one culture to another they are termed a migrant (Calvert, 2006, p. 1).

Multicultural refers to the juxtaposition of a number of distinct cultures. Homogeneous or monocultural refers to the limitation of a particular group to one particular culture (Naylor, 2006, p. 6).

2 Migration and the Church 

2.1 Introduction

Migration, and the involvement by Australian churches in ministry to migrants, is a significant factor in the shaping of both Australian society and the Australian church. Many Australians have been directly impacted by the migrant experience:

Australia, with 27.6% of the population born overseas, ranks second behind Luxembourg as the most multicultural nation in the world. 51.5% of Australians were either born overseas or had at least oner parent who was born overseas. (ABS, 2021)

Churches can potentially offer a sense of belonging and friendships for migrants who may be feeling displaced, an opportunity to explore or strengthen faith in Christ, and practical and pastoral support in settling into a new country and local community.

3 Migration and Models of Church

3.1 Methodology

This research compares different church models in multicultural Australia, examining their strengths and growth areas. A church is multicultural if 20% or more of its members differ from the dominant cultural group, a threshold where minority presence significantly impacts the group. A church is monocultural if over 80% of attendees share one cultural background. This was assessed using church names and the NCLS attender survey, considering 60% by birthplace to approximate 80% of a cultural group.

The study categorized churches as:

• 'Monocultural Anglo' - 80% or more Anglo-Celtic background.

• 'Monocultural non-Anglo' - 80% or more from one non-Anglo background.

• 'Multicultural' - less than 80% from any one background, comprising multiple cultures.

The research explores the effectiveness of these models on church health, newcomers, and young adult retention. Limitations include not distinguishing service language or leadership structure. The dataset is skewed due to underrepresentation of low English proficiency groups and lack of language-specific survey forms.

3.2 Literature Survey

Particularly for an Australian context, Yang's literature survey and groupings are a useful starting place in terms of thinking through various multicultural frameworks of church, drawing on the models of multicultural church described by Geoffrey Blackburn, Manuel Ortiz and Jeannie Mok:

•        Monocultural Model

•       Friendship Model

•        Partnership Model

•        Integrated Model (Yang, 2012, pp. 19–30)

Monocultural Model

A monocultural congregation is homogeneous in language, ethnicity and culture. Blackburn uses the term ‘mono-ethnic’ and Mok uses ‘ethnic’ as her label for such a church (Blackburn, 1991; Mok, 2004).  Such a church provides migrants with a connecting point with those from their source country and worship according to their own customs and (usually) in their own language (Yang, 2012, pp. 23–24).

Friendship Model

The Friendship model refers to a congregation that has some kind of cross-cultural relationship with another congregation. The host congregation provides migrant cultural groups with facilities, primarily for Sunday worship, either free or for rent. Each church retains its autonomy and its own leadership, and the relationship between congregations tends towards being more formal and transactional than interactive. Potentially, the relationship can develop toward a greater sense of mutual partnership and shared ministry.

Partnership Model

The Partnership model reflects a mutuality between various cultural groups, and a sharing of ministry and mission. This value of diversity within unity is expressed structurally, but not necessarily in the same way in each context. So because this model often entails multiple congregations, often with different language in each, Blackburn labels this type the bilingual church and Mok multicongregational (Blackburn, 1991; Mok, 2004). The Partnership model can be a context for the second generation of a NESB church to attend English speaking youth groups and services, which may not be available to them otherwise.

Integrated Model

The Integrated model is made up of diverse cultural groups including those of Anglo-Celtic culture in Australia, with services in English. The value of willingness to integrate with other cultures implies the openness to setting aside one’s own cultural preferences for the sake of Christian community, ministry and mission. So churches in this model not only have people of various cultural backgrounds but also seek to ensure that such cultures have equal voices and are able to influence the life, leadership and ministry of the church. On one level, this model is more challenging as it involves cross-cultural communication and inevitable misunderstandings. However, the richness of fellowship forged in such a context, along with the witness to the wider multicultural community in Australia of a diverse and intentionally culturally inclusive church can be compelling.

Classifying churches is challenging due to their complexity, influenced by three interwoven strands: their position on the monocultural to multicultural continuum, their relationships with other churches (autonomous to shared ministry), and their structure (unicongregational to multicongregational). These strands allow for diverse church models.

Naylor highlights the need for both homogeneous and multicultural churches, emphasizing their dynamic nature and the importance of adapting models for relevance. In the monocultural vs. multicultural debate, advocates like Sheffield and DeYmaz support multicultural churches based on biblical principles, citing the early church's diversity.

DeYmaz notes that most U.S. churches are segregated and stresses the biblical call to break cultural barriers. However, not all see a scriptural mandate for specific models. Volf values diversity without enforcing uniformity.

McGavran recognised that "[People] like to become Christians without crossing racial, linguistic or class barriers" (McGavran, D. A., 1970, p. 163). He saw it "primarily as a missionary and an evangelistic principle," rather than a pragmatic guide for planting and growing churches. McGavran prophetically writes, "There is danger, of course, that congregations (whether established according to the [homogenous unit] principle or not) become exclusive, arrogant, and racist. That danger must be resolutely combated" (McIntosh, 2005, p. 1).

Sadly, in many cases this is the very thing that has happened: instead of McGavran's original intention of the homogenous unit principle as an evangelistic and missionary principle, it has been misapplied as a church growth principle, with the result that churches often focus on those of similar culture, class, and educational background.

To underscore McGavran's intent, research in US churches questions the efficacy of the homogenous unit principle being applied to the growth of churches when 61 percent of multicultural churches, versus just 31 percent of principally Anglo-Celtic congregations, had experienced growth (Hadaway & Marler, 2006, p. 14).

In multicultural Australia, effective church models should prioritize God's mission and adapt to changing contexts.

3.3 Biblical Survey

An initial reading of Scripture may seem to support the homogeneous unit principle, as seen in God's covenant with Abraham (Gen 15) and His promise to work through Abraham's descendants to bring salvation to the nations (Isa 2.1-4; Jonah). Jesus' mission initially targets Israel (Mat 10.5-6), but His ministry reveals God's concern for all peoples (Mat 8.5-10, 15.24-28; Mark 7.24-30; Luke 17.16-18; John 4.9). Jesus eventually commissions His followers to disciple all nations (Mat 28.18-19). The New Testament letters expand on this theme (Rom 1.16; Gal 3.28; Eph 2.14; Col 3.11), showcasing the gospel's transcendence across ethnic, religious (John 4.39-42; Acts 2), class, and cultural barriers (Acts 8.27-39). Non-Jews are increasingly recognized as part of God's salvation plan, especially as persecution and diaspora challenge Jewish believers to embrace cross-cultural evangelism, prompting guidance from the Jerusalem church (Acts 8.14-17, 11.1-30, 15.1-16.5). This culminates eschatologically with diverse peoples from "every tribe and language and people and nation" (Rev 5.9) gathered around the Lamb of God.

4 Comparison of Vitality by Cultural Type 

Analysis of vitality of churches across the three cultural types was undertaken:

·        'Monocultural Anglo' - churches which have 80% or more of those from an Anglo-Celtic background.

·        'Monocultural non-Anglo' - churches which have 80% or more of those from one cultural background (non Anglo-Celtic).

·        'Multicultural' - churches which have less than 80% from any one cultural background, and therefore are comprised of two or more cultures.

The results are represented graphically as follows:

4.1 Comparison of Monocultural Anglo Churches with Multicultural Churches

A comparison between Monocultural Anglo churches (which have 80% or more of those from an Anglo-Celtic background) and multicultural churches (which have less than 80% from any one cultural background, and therefore are comprised of two or more cultures) reveals the following:

·        Health or vitality is lower for Monocultural Anglo churches across all core quality indicators except Vision and Service.  Service is significantly higher for Monocultural Anglo churches than for multicultural churches.

·        Generally, these results are spread across denominations.

·        Kruskal-Wallis pairwise comparisons across all core quality indicators reveal that these variations are statistically significant to p<0.05 for all indicators except Belonging, Vision, and Leadership.

Account needs to be taken of lower migration patterns in rural, rather than urban, areas, and the consequent higher representation of monocultural Anglo churches in these rural areas.

Any particular cultural type of church is neither a guarantee of health or of unhealth: as churches of all types pursue vitality there will be individual churches that are more vital and those that are less vital. However, generally monocultural Anglo churches are less vital than their multicultural counterparts. This is an encouragement towards social and cultural diversity for monocultural Anglo churches, where that is appropriate in the context of their local community.

4.2 Comparison of Monocultural non-Anglo Churches with Multicultural Churches and Monocultural Anglo Churches

This preliminary research, based on a smaller sample size, would benefit from a larger sample. Monocultural non-Anglo churches excel in Faith, Worship, and Belonging, showing higher vitality than monocultural Anglo and multicultural churches. However, only 45% of participants in monocultural non-Anglo churches engaged in three or more service actions, compared to 58% in monocultural Anglo and 56% in multicultural churches. Monocultural Anglo churches focus more on community service (32%) than monocultural non-Anglo (25%) and multicultural (24%) churches.

 4.2.1 Faith-Sharing

Faith sharing involves attenders who have invited someone to church in the past year. Monocultural non-Anglo churches show significant strength in evangelistic activities (51%) compared to multicultural (37%) and monocultural Anglo churches (36%). Individuals seeking faith-sharing opportunities are more prevalent in monocultural non-Anglo (27%) and multicultural churches (19%), with monocultural Anglo churches trailing (14%). Monocultural non-Anglo churches also engage more in evangelistic and outreach activities. Their strength lies in active community evangelism and attenders' eagerness to share their faith.

4.2.2 Newcomers

Some 10% of monocultural non-Anglo attenders were not attending any church five years earlier. While migration may buoy this figure, it underlines the impact that faith-sharing activities by these churches and by individual attenders are having on the levels of newcomers. It is reasonable to infer that similar efforts by multicultural churches (7%) and monocultural Anglo churches (6%) would reap comparable results.

4.2.3 Young Adult Retention

DeYmaz highlights common perceptions regarding generational involvement in monocultural non-Anglo churches: first-generation members are fully engaged, second-generation members are partly engaged, and third-generation members are mostly disengaged (DeYmaz, 2010).

Despite a small sample size, research shows slightly higher young adult retention in these churches. The retention rates vary significantly, with some churches doing well and others less so. Young adult retention is notably higher in monocultural non-Anglo churches when comparing those over 15 still living at home attending the same church as their parents (65%) versus monocultural Anglo (39%) and multicultural (45%). However, when considering those attending a different church, the differences narrow (18%, 14%, and 17% respectively), reflecting the outward drift mentioned by DeYmaz. Although monocultural non-Anglo churches retain more young adults, they also see many attending elsewhere. Cultural factors, such as parental expectations and the age of independence, may explain why a larger percentage of those over 15 in these communities live at home without attending any church (18% compared to 46% for monocultural Anglo and 37% for multicultural).

5 Conclusion

The ministry landscape in Australia is rapidly evolving with increasing urban migration, presenting both opportunities and challenges for churches. Churches have been increasingly engaging in multicultural ministry, with a significant rise in participation. More partnerships between churches and NESB/CALD churches, such as shared services and community ministry, would be beneficial.

Debate exists over the preference for multicultural versus monocultural church models. NCLS research highlights strengths and weaknesses in each, suggesting further study of monocultural non-Anglo churches could be useful.

Initial research suggests monocultural non-Anglo churches excel in faith, worship, belonging, and faith-sharing, but struggle with community service and providing for the next generation. Monocultural Anglo churches excel in community service but lag in leadership, innovation, and youth attendance.

While multicultural churches face challenges in establishment, they perform well across core qualities and often surpass monocultural Anglo churches, though they may lag behind monocultural non-Anglo churches in some areas. However, multicultural models strengthen service and generational faith growth.

Yang and Naylor affirm that all church models are valid if they remain relevant and impactful in their context. Churches should evaluate and possibly transition along a continuum to adapt to changing contexts.

The way forward for all churches lies in values and attitudes that are marked by welcoming, integrating, and reaching out. These characteristics can be expressed within any model, whether monocultural, friendship, partnership, or integrated. A recognition of the strengths and areas for growth of each model, along with a church’s demographic context, and discernment of where God is taking the church on the next stage of its unfolding journey, will be important resources for pastors, church leaders, and for all who equip pastors and churches to realise their full potential.

KEY SOURCES

Duncum, I. & Powell, R. (2016) " Baptists Responding to Cultural Diversity" in Cultural Diversity, Worship, and Australian Baptist Church Life: New Wineskins Vol. 2 (D Cronshaw & D Jackson eds.). Morling Press, Macquarie Park.

Duncum, I., Powell, R., & Hancock, N. (2013) Local Church Engagement with Non-English Speaking Churches: NCLS Fact Sheet 1.13010. NCLS Research/Mirrabooka Press, Sydney.

Duncum, I., Powell, R., & Hancock, N. (2013) Migrant ministry involvement by churches: NCLS Fact Sheet 1.13009. NCLS Research/Mirrabooka Press, Sydney.

Duncum, I, Powell, R, Pepper, M and Hancock, N. (2013) Embracing Migration and Multiculturalism in Australia: Towards A Church of All Nations, Occasional Paper 24. Catalogue Number 2.13010. NCLS Research/Mirrabooka Press, Sydney.

© 2026 Ian Duncum. All rights reserved. No reproduction without written permission.

The content provided on Ian Duncum Consulting is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice for your own situation. Please consult with a relevant professional in your country and state before making any decisions based on this information. Reliance on any information provided by us is solely at your own risk.

I sometimes use AI tools to support my ideas and writing.

Rev Dr Ian Duncum is a trained and accredited church consultant with over 20 years of experience with non-profit enterprises and churches across several denominations. This includes denominational leadership in church health, church planting, consultancy training, and adjunct lecturing & research in the tertiary education sector. An accredited minister with a track record of growing churches, Ian trains church consultants, facilitates training for ministers and leaders, and supervises pastors and other leaders. Ian can be contacted at ian@ianduncum.com.au.