Copyright holder: Tyndale University, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2M 3S4 Att.: Library Director, J. William Horsey Library Copyright: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Copyright license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Citation: Leung, Koon Kau. “Introducing Kenotic Conversation and Assessing its Impact Among Cantonese and English Generations in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Canada.” D. Min., Tyndale University College & Seminary, 2016. ***** Begin Content ****** TYNDALE UNIVERSITY 3377 Bayview Avenue Toronto, ON M2M 3S4 TEL: 416.226.6620 www.tyndale.ca Note: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Leung, Koon Kau. “Introducing Kenotic Conversation and Assessing its Impact Among Cantonese and English Generations in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Canada.” D. Min., Tyndale University College & Seminary, 2016. [ Citation Page ] Tyndale University College and Seminary Introducing Kenotic Conversation and Assessing Its Impact among Cantonese and English Generations in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Canada A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Ministry Tyndale Seminary by Koon Kau Leung Toronto, Canada April 2016 [ Title Page ] Copyright @2016 All rights reserved [ Page ] iii ABSTRACT This study demonstrated how Kenotic Conversation (KC) could improve the trust relationships between the leaders from an older Cantonese generation and members of a younger English generation at the Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC). The project was action research using a qualitative phenomenological approach. A structured, mutual, and in-person conversation program was designed and introduced to the participants as a tool to practice Kenotic Conversation for six sessions within a period of three months. Qualitative data were collected from interviews and responses written by six participants - three elders from the Cantonese generation and three members from the English generation. Based on the data collected, three qualities of the Kenotic Conversation were found in improving trust relationships among participants: openness in communication, seeking for common ground in resolving conflict, and providing support for empowering the next generation. Results of this project were two-fold: first the participants indicated a perspective change in improving their understanding, relationship and trust and second the participants demonstrated behavioural change toward partnership in ministerial work. [ Page ] vi DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my deepest love Agnes. Besides Jesus Christ my Lord, you are the greatest grace God give me that worth me to thank Him all the days of my life. Agnes, you demonstrate Christ-liked characters with sacrificial dedication in our marriage and our family. My life is blessed because of you. [ Page ] vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many thanks to the staff of Tyndale College University & Seminary, particularly Dr. Paul Bramer, Dr. Mark Chapman, Dr. David Russell and Dr. Kevin Livingston, for your guidance, wisdom and patience along the way of the program and the project. It was not possible to complete the project without the approval of the Session in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, the participation of Cantonese, English and Mandarin members and the encouragement of my pastoral friends. I thank my two wonderful daughters Tammy and Kathy for your supportive words and deeds when your daddy doing exhausted. Again, my godly beloved wife Agnes walks with me in the life journey that I never felt lonely. Thanks mom-in-law Dorothy for you always reserve good food to me. Other family members in Canada and in Hong Kong support me to go along the way. All thanks to God who led me and changed me through the project. I pray for the work done will be beneficial to develop next generation to become future leaders in His church. [ Page ] viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .... xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .... 1 Chinese Culture and Thought .... 2 Chinese History .... 2 Chinese Systems of Thought .... 4 Confucianism .... 4 Daoism .... 7 Buddhism .... 8 Chinese Understanding of Conversation .... 8 Contemporary Chinese Churches in Canada .... 10 Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church Context .... 12 Opportunity .... 16 Response .... 17 Why Conversation? .... 19 Introduction to Kenotic Conversation (KC) .... 22 Self-Emptying .... 22 Stepping In .... 24 Concern for Others .... 25 Structured .... 26 In-Person .... 27 Mutual .... 27 Purpose .... 28 Research Question .... 29 Methodology and Design .... 29 Limitations .... 32 Delimitation .... 34 Assumptions .... 34 Definition of Key Terms .... 35 Brief Overview of the Study’s Findings and Conclusions .... 36 Outline of Chapters .... 36 Chapter Summary .... 37 CHAPTER 2: THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE .... 39 Communication of God to People .... 39 Purpose of Communication .... 39 God's Ways of Communication in the Bible .... 40 Creation .... 40 Dreams and Visions .... 41 Conversation through Intermediaries .... 42 A Specific Way of Conversation .... 43 Kenotic Conversation .... 44 [ Page ] ix Definition (Innovation) of Kenotic Conversation .... 44 Features of Paul’s Portrayal of Jesus’ Method of Kenotic Conversation .... 45 Self-Emptying .... 46 Stepping In .... 48 Concern for Others .... 49 Summary of Paul’s Portrayal of Jesus’ Method of Kenotic Conversation .... 50 Examples of Jesus’ Use of Kenotic Conversation .... 51 Rich Young Man (Mark 10) .... 51 Nicodemus (John 3) .... 52 Peter (John 21) .... 53 Thomas (John 20) .... 54 Samaritan Woman (John 4) .... 54 Summary of Jesus’ Use of Kenotic Conversation .... 56 Examples of the Apostles’ Use of Kenotic Conversation .... 58 Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) .... 58 Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8) .... 61 Election of the Seven (Acts 6) .... 62 Summary of the Apostolic Church’s Use of Kenotic Conversation .... 65 Features of the Apostles’ Use of Kenotic Conversation .... 67 Self-Emptying .... 67 Stepping In .... 68 Concern for Others .... 69 Kenotic Conversation’s Format Characteristics .... 70 Structured .... 70 In-Person .... 71 Mutual .... 72 Outcomes of Kenotic Conversation .... 73 Increased Understanding .... 73 Conflict Resolution .... 74 Relationship Building .... 74 Stimulation of Behavioural Change .... 75 Selected Examples of Attitude Change and Conflict Resolution through Kenotic Conversation in the History of the Church .... 75 Formation of the Chalcedonian Creed (AD 451) .... 77 Formation of Heidelberg Catechism (AD 1563) .... 78 The 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference .... 79 The Second Vatican Council (AD 1962-1965) .... 80 Chapter Summary .... 82 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW .... 85 What is Conversation? .... 85 Definition of Conversation .... 87 Components of Conversation .... 89 [ Page ] x Models of Conversation .... 91 Linear .... 91 Interactive .... 92 Transactional .... 93 Kenotic Conversation is an Effective Way of Conversation .... 95 Features .... 96 Self-Emptying .... 96 Stepping In .... 98 Concern for Others .... 100 Formats .... 103 Structured .... 103 In-Person .... 105 Mutual .... 108 Primary Concerns in Applying Kenotic Conversation .... 111 Gender .... Ill Language .... 113 Culture .... 115 Generation .... 117 Personal Dimensions of Kenotic Conversation .... 119 Physical .... 120 Intellectual .... 121 Emotional .... 125 Social .... 127 Benefits of Applying Kenotic Conversation .... 130 Conflict Resolution .... 130 Empowerment .... 133 Chapter Summary .... 135 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .... 138 Methodology .... 138 A Project .... 139 Action Research .... 139 Qualitative Phenomenological Approach .... 142 Study Design .... 144 Scope of Study .... 144 Selection of Participants .... 144 Sampling Method .... 144 Sampling Criteria .... 146 Sampling Size .... 146 Features and Process of Kenotic Conversation .... 148 Period, Place and Schedule of Conversations .... 148 Settings of Conversations .... 150 Format of Conversations .... 151 Topics of Conversation .... 155 Data Collection .... 156 [ Page ] xi Interviews .... 156 Session Feedback .... 159 Data Analysis .... 162 Ethical Considerations .... 166 Chapter Summary .... 167 CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION .... 169 Demographic Analysis .... 170 Description of the Six Conversation Sessions .... 173 Session 1 : Chinese Culture and Canadian Culture .... 173 Session 2: Communication Patterns .... 176 Session 3: Conflict Resolution Pattern .... 179 Session 4: Empowerment .... 180 Session 5: Implementation Strategy .... 182 Session 6: Wrap Up .... 183 Acknowledgement of the Project .... 187 Kenotic Conversation Findings .... 188 Elements in Kenotic Conversation (KC) .... 188 Openness .... 189 Involvement .... 190 Open-mindedness .... 191 Respect .... 193 Empathy .... 195 Summary of Openness and Its Significance .... 195 Common Ground .... 196 Confessional Aspects .... 197 Body of Christ .... 197 God's Will .... 198 God's Way .... 198 Biblical Authority .... 199 Summary of the Confessional Aspects and Their Significance .... 200 Common Ground: Interpersonal Aspects .... 201 Passion to Resolve Conflict .... 201 Being Factual .... 202 Commonality .... 203 Summary of the Interpersonal Aspects and Their Significance .... 204 Support .... 205 Encouraging .... 205 Accept Change .... 206 Taking Action .... 208 Summary of Support and Its Significance .... 209 Impact of Kenotic Conversation .... 210 Impact on Change of Perspective .... 210 Understanding .... 210 Relationship .... 214 [ Page ] xii Trust .... 217 Summary of Impact on Change of Perspective .... 220 Impact on Action .... 220 Fellowship .... 221 Stewardship .... 222 Mission Project .... 223 Summary of Impact on Action .... 223 Application of Kenotic Conversation to Further Research .... 224 Chapter Summary .... 225 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .... 227 Achievement of the Project .... 228 Three Key Conclusions .... 228 First Key Conclusion: Elements Found Valuable for KC in MCPC .... 229 Second Key Conclusion: Impact of KC on Changing Perspectives among Cantonese and English generations in MCPC .... 232 Third Key Conclusion: KC aids in bringing Impact on Action among Cantonese and English Generations in MCPC .... 233 Contributions of the Study .... 235 Recommendations .... 236 Personal Reflections .... 238 APPENDICES .... 241 Appendix A: MCPC Average Sunday Attendance 2002-2010 .... 241 Appendix B: Informed Consent .... 242 Appendix C: Intake Interview Questions .... 245 Appendix D: Exit Interview Questions .... 246 Appendix E: Session 1: Cultural Patterns .... 247 Appendix F: Session 2: Communication Patterns .... 251 Appendix G: Session 3: Conflict Resolution Patterns .... 254 Appendix H: Session 4: Empowerment Patterns .... 257 Appendix I: Session 5: Implementation Strategy .... 259 Appendix J: Session 6: Wrap Up .... 261 REFERENCE LIST .... 262 [ Page ] xiii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Outline of Components of Kenotic Conversation Program Table 2: Kenotic Conversation Demonstrated by Jesus Christ Table 3: Jesus Christ's Use of Kenotic Conversation Table 4: Kenotic Conversation Demonstrated by the Apostolic Church (Features of the Apostolic Church's Kenotic Conversation) Table 5: Apostolic Church Examples of Kenotic Conversation Table 6: Project work plan Table 7: List of data sets Table 8: Details of Each Participants’ Participation in the Project Table 9: Meaning of Abbreviations Table 10: List of the Sixteen Codes in Three Themes Table 11: Demographic of Participants - Age Range Table 12: Demographic of Participants - Age to Canada Table 13: Demographic of Participants - Years in Canada Table 14: Demographic of Participants - Years in MCPC Table 15: Displays participants' age range, age to Canada, years in Canada and years in MCPC Table 16: Overall Rating of Effectiveness of Conversation Table 17: Elements Found Valuable for KC and their Significance Table 18: Summary of Three Perception Changes and their Significance Table 19: Summary of the Project’s Three Impacts on Action Unless indicated otherwise Scripture quotations are taken from New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005) [ Page ] xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION This thesis is about the experience of introducing a conversational concept called "Kenotic Conversation" (KC) and testing its value for improving trust in the relationship between the leaders and members in a Chinese church in Canada. The study’s participants were drawn from among the leaders of the older Cantonese generation and the members of the younger English generation in the Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC), Ontario where I have been the pastor since 2004.1 designed and introduced a structured, mutual, and in-person conversation program to the participants as a tool to practice Kenotic Conversation. The program involved six sessions within a period of three months. One objective was to explore and understand how KC can improve trust in relationships among the participants. A second objective was to assess the impact that such conversation would have upon the study program’s participants. The study used a qualitative phenomenological approach to explore and understand how Kenotic Conversation worked among the participants. Data were collected from interviews and conversation feedback. This study was also an action research project in collaboration with the leadership and administrative office of MCPC with whom I worked in different phrases of action research: [ Page ] 1 planning; taking action; evaluating the action; leading to further planning (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, ix). A hoped for result of this study was that through applying Kenotic Conversation as an action that the knowledge obtained and learned from it would be beneficial in leading to further planning in improving the trust relationship between the leaders and members in Chinese churches. This chapter provides details of this study by introducing and discussing the contemporary Chinese church in Canada, the MCPC context, needs affecting the congregation, the opportunity that can be used to solve the challenges affecting the Cantonese and English generations, purpose of the study, research question, methodology and scope, definition of key terms, a brief of project findings and conclusions, chapter outlines and a chapter summary. Chinese Culture and Thought This section describes a back drop of Chinese culture and how Chinese behave in community, such as in a church in Canada. Two ways to understand Chinese custom are through Chinese history and Chinese teachings from sages which shaped Chinese people. Chinese History Chinese history presents two contrasting examples of official attitudes toward cross-cultural communication: the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty. H.L. Law (1961, 334-336) argues that Genghis Khan, having found the Yuan Dynasty, intentionally opened conversation with western countries by establishing [ Page ] 2 land and water routes through which the trading of goods, interchange of knowledge and sharing of technology encouraged cultural exchange. Law talks that the travelogue The Travels of Marco Polo written in the Thirteenth Century was a seminal work which introduced East Asian culture to Europe in its description of Italy’s trade relations with China. The Yuan Dynasty accepted foreigners, such as scholars and military people from Persia and Arabia and empowered them to participate as government officials. This affable communication in mutual manner established a positive relationship between China and other countries (Law 1961, 334-336). The Qing Dynasty, however, demonstrated a negative example of communication. Chan (1989, 480-482) argues that because the conservative mindset of the government officials and slow economic development in China caused fear, the Qing government in late Seventeenth Century adopted a closed door policy to restrict conversation and interaction with other countries. This decision led to a deterioration of the situation, increased hostility and, eventually, it triggered armed conflict. After being defeated by the Great Britain in the Opium War (AD 1839-1842), China was compelled by military force to open its borders. Chinese people expressed their shame and anger against external power through violence, such as the Boxer Rebellion in AD 1900. It spurred European countries to form the “Eight-Nation Alliance” and invade China. The latter suffered further great loss (Chan 1989, 499-502). In all these disasters, as well as other political and economic turmoil, lack of communication played a role. [ Page ] 3 When I was young, my teachers taught me that Chinese history demonstrates that when people adopt conversation, it can connect people by promoting harmony. It benefits all; if not, destruction ensues. A Chinese idiom explains, "Know yourself, know others. Engage in a hundred battles and win a hundred times” (知己知彼,百戰百勝). It means people should know about their own culture and thinking patterns and learn that of others. Then people on both sides will understand and will win the game. Chinese Systems of Thought Besides historical factors, Chinese people were shaped by teachings from sages. There are three systems of thought shaping Chinese culture, namely Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism. Confucianism First is Confucianism. Hpsu (1962, 135-143) claims that Confucianism is a system of thought and behaviour for the purpose of achieving and maintaining social stability. People should do things according to “humanity," ren dao (仁道) (Hsu 1962, 155), that is, respecting people and the social system. It is expressed in its four core values to different people. Chung (忠) (Hsu 1962, 131, 137-138) is faithfulness to people of higher rank, like kings, monarchs and other leaders. Xiao (孝) (Hsu 1962, 331-332) is filial piety to people of higher status, such as one’s parents. Ren (仁) (Hsu 1962, 15-16, 155) is kindness to people of lower status, like the younger generation. Yi (義) (Hsu 1962, 155) is righteousness to people [ Page ] 4 and within the social system, such as maintaining fairness and justice. The rule of thumb for practicing the above is zhong yong (中庸) (the doctrine of the mean). It means not to do things in any extreme way; keeping to the medial way is good and will not hurt others (Hsu 1962, 123-124). The second of these core Confucian values, Xiao, has particular significance for and impact upon Chinese churches because of its implications for the creation and continuance of intergenerational conflict. As a result, Xiao merits more concentrated discussion in terms of MCPC’s expressed desire and vision to become a place where all members, regardless of age or culture, can engage not only in Christ-centered worship but in leadership roles. The church desires to follow the Apostolic churches’ example of building up a unified community in which all of its members are active in supporting each other, despite their differences. Wang (2003, 32) points out that the “generation gap” in today’s Chinese churches is largely due to a conflict of cultures. Notably, Overseas Born Chinese (OBC) want Canadian Born Chinese (CBC) and Canadian Raised Chinese (CRC) to show deference and obedience, whereas the CBC and CRC want more independence and respect. The OBC desire to pass on their Chinese language and language to their children, whereas the second generation prefers creativity and liberty. There are conflicts between Chinese ways of fostering personal relationship and Western ways of managing church business” (Wang 2003, 32). [ Page ] 5 In the most severe applications of Xiao, Sun contends, this second core Confucian value promotes a distinctive culture of “killing children” (Sun 2004, 198-211). This culture worships senior people, honoring their status and treasuring their experience to the extreme that it prefers to destroy newly-emerged life and nurture the life which will shortly die. This attitude is revealed in the story “Guo Chu buried his child," found in a Chinese classic, Twenty-four Xiao (Sun 2004, 199). Mr. Guo had both senior parents and a baby. When a great famine came, he was so determined to make sure his old parents, who would die anyway in the not-too-distant future, had sufficient food that he chose to bury his newly-born baby. This kind of Xiao allegedly “touched the sky” and later he was rewarded, the story then concluding with a “happy ending.” This is one of many ancient Chinese stories used to promote a culture of “killing children.” Of course, senior leaders understand that they will pass away sooner or later and necessarily pass the leadership baton to next generation. They are concerned, however, about those to whom they will entrust the baton. Obviously, they would not pass leadership to “those who are no good and those who are not listening to them” (Sun 2004, 199). Those of younger generations who stand and challenge senior leadership rarely achieve positive results. So in Chinese culture, the standard criterion for passing the leadership baton is that it must go to the younger ones who are obedient and listen to the older generation. In some instances, young people who are otherwise capable are blocked and never allowed to be leaders if they have questioned their elders (Sun 2004, 200). Even when the next generation achieves adulthood the older generation still regards them as [ Page ] 6 children. This mentality that treats the next generation of adults as if they were not yet weaned is subconsciously deeply rooted in Chinese culture. Sun addresses comments by a French educator that Chinese culture “regard[s] children as adults and adults as children” (Sun 2005, 208). He explains that in Chinese education, children must learn how to respect seniors and follow rules of Xiao and other Chinese virtues. Such content is hard for children, requiring adult maturity to grasp, yet the elders expect Chinese children to comprehend like adults. Yet when these children come of age as adults, people regard them as still not yet grown up, denying them autonomy and ruling them like children (Sun 2004, 208-209). This mentality and approach are popular within Chinese families and communities, as well as Chinese churches. Daoism The second ancient Chinese system of thought is Daoism. Hsu claims that Daoism is a philosophical exploration of the relationship between people and the universe. People should respect and do things according to the course of universe, Tian Dao (天道) (Hsu 1962, 52-54). Ching and Kung (1995, 116) claim that the main thought of Daoism is Wu Wei (無為), which means non-action. It is not that one does nothing. It means not pushing any action which attempts to work against or interfere with the natural universal order, Dao (Ching and Kung 1995, 116). The essence of this non-action, better referred to as non-interference, is to let nature take its course. Ma argues that this non-interference concept, that had been [ Page ] 7 introduced thousands of years ago, is similar to the western concept of laissez- faire. the government that governs least, governs best (Ma 2002, 138). Buddhism The third system of thought is Buddhism. Hsu (1962, 269-275) claims that Buddhism addresses life and death. Buddhism emphasizes kong (空), emptiness. It means all things, including human beings, are illusory and phantom-like. He argues that the core belief of Buddhism is yin guo (因果), cause-and- consequence, which is expressed by lun hui (輪迴). All lives are without beginning and ending. Hsu explains that lun hui (輪迴) is a concept of merry-go- round that the present lives (which are causes) are going to their next lives (the consequences), taking one of the six different forms according to what they have done in their previous lives (the causes). These six forms, from high to low, are the divine form, human form, angelic form, animal form, devil form and hell form. This lun hui (輪迴) concept can become a form of coercion to urge people to do good deeds and govern their moral behaviour in their present lives, otherwise they will go to a lower level in their next life (Hsu 1962, 54-57). Chinese Understanding of Conversation Learning from history, Chinese people acknowledge the need of conversation. On the other hand, shaped by the sages’ teachings, they are accustomed to behave according to hierarchical status. There are three core concepts commonly entrenched in Chinese cultured people. First is face (面子). [ Page ] 8 Bond (1986, 243-248) and Sun (2004, 170-177) argue that as Confucianism focuses on human virtues and social hierarchical structure. People should honor and respect others according to their status in order to preserve face. Face is vitally important in Chinese culture. It has shaped personal moral conduct in Chinese people and Chinese social ethics. Second is harmony. Sun (2004, 153- 154, 160) claims that harmony is the result of mixing Daoism, which emphasizes harmonious relationship between people and the natural universe, with Confucianism, which honors harmony in interpersonal relationships and social systems. He remarks that when Chinese are doing things, they bear a mindset of hui wei qui (和為貴), which means harmony. The third concept is relational thinking. Stewart (1991, 42-43) claims that the Chinese thinking pattern is analogical and is shy, ambiguous and fugitive. They prefer an indirect, relational, and circular movement of thought in all-embracing, relating all possible elements when considering a situation or making a decision (Stewart 1991). Ling argues that Confucianism and Daoism shape what Chinese people emphasize in attaining harmony with others (Ling 1999, 146). Their main concern is people asking questions, such as: "How can we avoid offending someone? Will anyone lose face? How can we have harmony between the concerned parties?" Whereas people in Western culture focus on "Is this the right thing to do," instead people in Chinese culture would look for "Is this the best way to do it?" (Ling 1999, 146-147; emphasis added). Eric Law argues that since the Chinese look at elements, such as human factors and interpersonal relations as a whole, they [ Page ] 9 usually require more time to get into the issue and are slow in the decision- making process (Law 1996, 104-105). So people in Western culture, such as Canadians, consider Chinese slow in action, hesitant in making decisions, shying away from challenges and difficulties, as well as even wanting to escape from the issue (Law 1996, 105). Contemporary Chinese Churches in Canada According to the Toronto Chinese Evangelical Ministerial Fellowship, more than 130 Chinese churches are in the Greater Toronto Area (TCEMF Directory 2013). Chow claims that most of the churches were established during 1980s and 1990s to reach immigrants. The first generation immigrants dominated the church, spoke Cantonese and had traditional Chinese values (Chow 2015, 103-104). Yang argues that Chinese immigrants are eager to keep their Chineseness in a foreign land. They become more aware of their racial and Chinese identity than when they lived in their homeland. These Chinese Christians indigenize their Christian belief into their Chinese culture (Yang 1999, 55, 193). Dzubinski notes that first generation Chinese immigrants who came to Canada have to struggle to overcome barriers like language and culture. It is the new society that urges them to be hard working to develop new skills to live in the new land. Gradually, they develop strong and determined personalities. These qualities are brought into their church life, resulting in opinions dominating within congregations. (Dzubinski 1988, 10-11). [ Page ] 10 Yang suggests that Chinese Christians’ maintaining of their ways of doing things in Chinese church connects with their social and personal needs when living in a foreign land: The Christian church has some unique structures and functions that other ethnic Chinese organizations and associations do not have. The structure of congregations and an emphasis on fellowship groups help new immigrants find social belonging; weekly meetings provide opportunities for frequent and intimate interactions with compatriots; the proclaimed teachings help to create a loving and harmonious community where new immigrants can find spiritual peace and psychological ease; church activities and youth programs help to foster a moral environment for nurturing the growing second generation....These features of the church are attractive to many new immigrants. (Yang 1998, 245) Yang postulates that the adherence of Chinese Christians in the United States to church can help them to reconstruct their national, cultural, and religious identities (Yang 1999, 193). Other scholars support this view of the ethnic church (Chow 2015, 103; Ng 2002, 195; Tan 2010, 50-51). Church can be considered an important place for Chinese to exercise and realize culture in relation to their ethnic self-identification. Chow studied religion and ethnicity in Chinese churches in Canada. A finding shows the largest percentage (75.4%) of respondents viewed church functions as playing "an important role in preserving the Chinese culture and maintaining the Chinese language" (Chow 2015, 103). According to Todd, almost all Canadian Chinese churches administer their English congregation as a “'parent-child model,' in which the Chinese congregation is the parent and the English congregation is the child" (Todd 2015, 2). This illustrates the hierarchical nature of the leadership and the challenges that the younger generation will face. Carlson argues that the Chinese church wants to [ Page ] 11 embrace the dual-language family solely in terms of the parent-child model. The English congregation challenged this assumption because its members were unwilling to accept or adopt a submissive posture toward those of Cantonese culture, as if that group should be unquestionably dominant. An impasse had been reached. Carlson claims that “many Chpinese churches are content to remain this stage for a long time, even decades” (Carlson 2008, 123). Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church Context The Kenotic Conversation study was conducted in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC), a Chinese immigrant church established in 1989 with a Cantonese service. The church was comprised of mainly Cantonese speaking first generation immigrants from Hong Kong who later became church leaders. The church continued to grow as the family grew. Three additional services were incorporated in subsequent years - the English, the Mandarin and the Children. The average Sunday attendance of the Cantonese, English and Mandarin services, extracted from the MCPC year books, may be found in Appendix A. According to the polity of The Presbyterian Church in Canada, MCPC is governed by the Session. The Session is the top level of leadership. It consists of pastors, elders and the chairperson of the Board of Managers. The Session is responsible for supervision, oversight, policy making, spiritual guidance and pastoral care to the congregation (The Presbyterian Church in Canada 2012, Section 109). The Board of Managers (BOM) is the second level of leadership. It [ Page ] 12 is responsible for various aspects of stewardship, such as facilities and financial matters of the congregation. The BOM works closely with the Session in supporting the congregation's total ministry (The Presbyterian Church in Canada 2012, Section 162). Due to its history, larger size and major financial contribution, the Cantonese speaking congregation has the greatest influence in MCPC. Fourteen elders in the Session are Cantonese speaking and only two are Mandarin speaking. Ten Session elders are first generation immigrants from Hong Kong and the other four are from Taiwan and Malaysia. The Session adopts the Chinese styles of doing things, such as a top-down parental approach to leading the church (Ling 1999, 147). It makes decisions on how to run the ministries. It worked when the English congregation was small in number and their members were young. They followed the decisions without much say. When both the size and the average age of the English congregation increased, things became different and its members requested more autonomy in ministry and greater use of resources. As the senior pastor of MCPC for about ten years, I interact and take care of the English speaking members who are younger than forty years old on many occasions. I also discuss matters with those who are above forty years and listen to their concerns. They are either Canadian Born Chinese (CBC) or Canadian Raised Chinese (CRC) since they immigrated here in their very early years; while those older than forty are Overseas Born Chinese (OBC) with a vast range of years since immigrating from a couple of years to several decades. Currently the [ Page ] 13 leadership includes three out of eighteen BOM members who are English speaking, and none of whom serves as an elder on the Session. I made some observations about the congregations that triggered the idea of this study. First, the rate at which the young and middle-aged adults in the English speaking congregation were leaving the church was alarming. It happened particularly in years 2009 and 2010. According to the MCPC year books, the average attendance in English service decreased from 74 to 60 and most of them were young and mid-aged adults, while that of the Cantonese service and Mandarin services remained stable (Appendix A). The MCPC Profile 2010 shows that numerous reasons have been suggested for their departure including but not limited to, their personal life struggles, poor family relationships, interpersonal conflicts, lack of spiritual nurture and lack of role models. Their departure also uncovers a sense that their voices were not being heard, as well as lack of support, such as caring and leadership development from the Cantonese speaking generations (MCPC Profile 2010). Therefore there is need for the church to listen to their voice, provide care and develop them in order to enhance their sense of belonging and ownership. A similar situation is happening in other American Chinese churches. Helen Lee in her article “Silent Exodus” argues that cultural clashes and different views are causing the problem. “These young people, often influenced by Western ideals of democracy and equality, tend to differ with Asian cultural views on hierarchy and authority” (Lee 1996, 52). Moreover, Woo warns of the urgent need of church leaders to deal with the problem of the younger generations leaving the church (Eng 2009, 5-6). [ Page ] 14 Second, the English pastor left. In November 2008, the pastor proposed the idea of autonomy, with a model of parallel English and Cantonese congregations under the MCPC roof. The English congregation was surveyed, asking them to indicating their preference. The survey found out that there is need for greater conversation between Cantonese and English speaking generations. Communication will help the young and English speaking generation to be encouraged, nurtured and willing to take up the leadership positions in order to continue serving the church. The survey also revealed that the young English speaking generation does not like how things are and they might leave if there are no improved communication systems, a proper succession plan, transparency of the leadership and the introduction of empowerment programs that will help them proactively to take on the duties of Board of Managers and Session and actively seek out their viewpoints and support in making significant decision concerning our church. Some survey feedback from the English congregation voiced their need for communication and empowerment, noting: Need succession plan. Improved communication. Coaching future leaders. Communicate issues and share the consequences. Different ministry mode. Transparency of leadership. Empowering others. Language in official meetings. More leadership and responsibility. More opportunities to serve and to voice our opinions. More creative space for every generation....If I don't like how things are, I'll just leave. (MCPC English Ministry Vision 2009) They expected that the church leaders would listen to their concerns and voices in order to enhance their sense of belonging. However, the Session did not address the proposal and take into consideration their concerns and enhanced communication because the elders were busy in engaging other church ministries, [ Page ] 15 such as Christian education and fellowship groups. Eventually the proposal could not be realized. Third was a lack of young leadership development. At present, the age range of Session elders is from mid-fifties to eighties with an average of about sixty-five. In the past two years, four elders applied for sabbatical leave because of health reasons. The church needs to embrace and empower the younger generation who are dynamic to take leadership roles and develop the future MCPC in God's kingdom. Opportunity Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church's (MCPC) vision declares that the church strives to build each family spiritually and help them to serve and worship together as they spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. Management should work, as the Lord provides wisdom and strength, to bring into realize this vision and help the church to grow and continue to spread the gospel by building each other up as a family, implementing empowerment programs for future generations and not allowing the generational differences to affect their communication or increase conflict. The MCPC's Vision Statement states it is a family oriented church to witness Jesus Christ. Through the Education and Family Ministries, MCPC endeavors to serve our community, Spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ. As God adds to our midst one family after another, We strive to build each family up spiritually, That they may serve and worship together. [ Page ] 16 MCPC wants to have a church in which members live together as a family built of different and mixed generations. Enhancing conversation among the Cantonese and English generations can be a way to achieve this. Merritt considers that the “church is one place where we can still have multigenerational interaction” in contemporary society (Merritt 2007, 21). However, MCPC practices age-stratification activities, such as in our Sunday classes and fellowships. McIntosh encourages pastors and church leaders to build a ministry that embraces all generations (McIntosh 2002, 14). For the sake of witnessing the richness of Jesus Christ and increasing the Gospel's impact, MCPC desires to cultivate a harmonious intergenerational exchange among Cantonese and English generations so that the work of Christ might continue to be accomplished in our local church community. Response The above mentioned observations and MCPC's Vision Statement triggered my asking how to prevent a further "silent exodus" from English congregation, to relieve conflict, such as the English pastor’s leaving, and to develop young leadership. What could be done to enhance understanding and trust in the relationship between the English congregation and the church leadership? What could be done to realize the MCPC's vision to build each family spiritually and help them to serve and worship together as they spread the gospel of Jesus Christ? [ Page ] 17 To address the context, MCPC has three needs. First, MCPC needs communication among the Cantonese and English generations in order to understand each other. This is necessary because the Cantonese speaking generation are used to a non-mutual parental style and their ideas dominate the church while the English speaking second generation's ideas are not considered. This leads to most of the English congregation remaining silent, withdrawing from the ministry and starting their own ministry. In April 2009, the Session organized an informal gathering with the English congregants to improve the situation and look into the ideas raised and the proposal of a parallel church model. It was the first time in MCPC's history that these groups engaged in a mutual in-person conversation. Thirty people attended the meeting with 18 (representing 56%) of church leadership, such as Session elders and BOM members, and 12 (representing about 50%) of the second generation English members. I attended the meeting and observed that people were tense at first but the atmosphere became relaxed and they talked at ease as the meeting went on. The meeting was conducted in English and both groups agreed and concluded that communication could help in understanding each other and help in resolving conflict and more conversation should be arranged in future. However, after the meeting, once the church leaders and English members returned to their own respective ministries, the urgency of addressing the conversation needs dissipated. Nevertheless, the conversation experience convinced me that face-to-face direct conversation would be necessary and worthwhile in MCPC. [ Page ] 18 Second, MCPC needs a workable approach to conflict resolution. This is because after the above-discussed informal meeting, leaders were busy engaging in other ministries, forgetting the need to resolve the proposal of a parallel church model and the voice of the English congregation, as well as organizing further informal conversation. This left the tension unattended. The conflict gradually escalated, leading to the English pastor’s leaving the church in early 2010. Third, empowering the next generation to take leadership roles addresses the above-mentioned concerns voiced by English congregation in the English Ministry Vision Survey in 2009 and helps MCPC continue to witness Jesus Christ in our community. Pastor Woo, an experienced retired Chinese pastor in California, warns, “Without the children, their churches will have no future” (Eng 2009, 8). Why Conversation? The type of conversation requested in the informal gathering in 2009 was considered by both Cantonese and English generations to be a feasible and acceptable approach to enhance communication and mutual understanding. Vengel, founder of the Vengel Consulting Group, maintains that conversation can "bridge the gap between people who have different values, different views, and different backgrounds" (Vengel 2010, 1). Conversation is a tool in which human direct contact is possible, allowing people to learn from each other. Harkins, president of Linkage, Inc., affirms that "conversations are the medium through which we build relationships, make connections, develop understanding, and [ Page ] 19 work and live together" (Harkins 1999, 6). In Juice: The Power of Conversation, Wilson also contends conversation can bring differing parties together (Wilson 2009, 4). By conversing, people begin to understand others’ needs. This releases power and stimulates positive behaviour in a collaborative and synergized atmosphere: "Face-to-face conversation conveys the greatest amount of emotion, trust, and understanding between people" (Wilson 2009, 84). Wheatley claims: "Human conversation is the most ancient and easiest way to cultivate the conditions for change - personal change, community and organizational change, planetary change" (Wheatley 2009, 7). Another of her insights shows confidence in the relationship between conversation and change. "When we're brave enough to risk a conversation,” she suggests, “we have the chance to rediscover what it means to be human.” All of daily life becomes part of conversation, making us “become visible to one another.” Such conversation requires effort to maintain, forcing us to confront new ideas and understandings. But, as a result, we “get interested in what we can do to change things.. ..We become people who work to change our situation" (Wheatley 2009, 162). Continuing etymological analysis, I found that conversation is borrowed from the old French word, conversation, which means "a living together" and "a manner of behaving." The related verb in French converser means "to live with" (Barnhart 1988, 216). In MCPC, our members are not living in the same ordinary family but we meet regularly with each other at least on a weekly basis; Sunday services can be regarded as a sense of living together. Without conversation, people will not know and understand each other. The church needs collaboration [ Page ] 20 between different people and this cannot be achieved if there is no conversation between members. We build each other up in the Body of Christ through conversation to do the work entrusted by the Lord. Furthermore, conversation has a relational aspect. Shipley explains that the verb "'converse' is taken from the Latin word conversari, which means 'to turn about with, hence to talk with', whereas the adjective 'converse' originates from the Latin words convertere and conversus, which mean 'conversion'" (Shipley 1945, 95). Knowing the Latin root word enriches the meaning of conversation, connecting conversation with change. Further, Shipley explains that conversation carries the property of mutuality among people through which people can exchange their experiences, sentiments, views and opinions. Isaacs regards the root of conversation as "to turn together (con verser): You take turns speaking" (Isaacs 1999, 37). Its meaning supports this project’s structured way of conversation, in which participants were required to follow laid-out rules and procedures in order to converse properly and come up with decisions that will help them. This approach in the study helps us to realize the genuine meaning of conversation. This word study shows conversation can be regarded as two or more people getting together and talking together in an orderly way from which change may be possible. Therefore, conversation is a message exchanging process among two or more people in an orderly manner through their whole person involvement, which means direct face-to-face mutual interaction with verbal and nonverbal expressions. [ Page ] 21 Introduction to Kenotic Conversation (KC) I introduced a concept of Kenotic Conversation (KC) in this study to respond to the context of MCPC: first, to address the needs of conversation among Cantonese and English generations to help them to understand each other; second, to reduce conflict among them; and, third, to empower the English second generation to take up leadership positions. Succinctly speaking, KC entails conversation in imitation of the strategies found in Jesus Christ's life, His conversation while living on Earth, and examples found in the Apostolic church, which followed Jesus' example in KC. The concept of KC is based on the word kenosis, used in Paul’s Letter to the Philippians 2:5-8 to describe how Christ Jesus lowered Himself from divine to human form, how He has demonstrated the perfect kenotic approach when He conversed with people on different occasions, and how the Apostolic church followed Jesus' example in conversation. More details will be discussed in Chapter 2: Theological Rationale. The following paragraphs of this section outline the conceptual framework of KC, which consists of three features: self-emptying, stepping in, and, concern for others. Self-Emptying By encouraging the Philippians to follow the pattern of self-emptying for the sake of others in the Christian community, Paul introduced the life of Jesus Christ as the perfect example that they should follow. "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 2:5). Christ Jesus expressed a life of self- [ Page ] 22 emptying by lowering Himself from divine to human form in order to fulfill God the Father's plan to redeem people. He took human form in order to live among people and converse with them. Christ emptied Himself and "made Himself nothing" (Phil. 2:7a). The Bible says that Christ voluntarily and deliberately chose to do so: "being in very nature God, [Christ] did not consider equality with God" (Phil. 2:6a). He did have the same glory as God the Father, declaring that "the glory I [Christ] had with you [Father] before the world began" (John 17:5b). However, Christ emptied Himself by taking on the form of a servant and operating within the limitations of humanity. Doing this was making conversation possible on an equal basis with people. Jesus Christ still was divine but was moving and living completely as a human. He was both fully God and fully human. "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" (Col. 2:9). Christ did not give up any divine attributes while a human on Earth. Self- emptying was the way Christ adopted and made direct contact, such as face-to- face conversation possible with people. He was the example for the life of Christians in the city of Philippi that those wanted to practice KC must empty themselves, laying down their perceived strengths just as Christ gave up His majestic state in Heaven in order to make conversation with others possible. Bosch, in Transforming Mission, links Jesus' kenosis, His self-emptying, with people to Jesus’ "identification with those on the periphery" (Bosch 2005, 513). I borrow his concept that identification with people on the periphery implies imitating Jesus' example of voluntarily laying aside His power and status. This deliberative act of self-emptying enables people, who are in conversation and [ Page ] 23 personal interaction, readily to cross boundary of differences, such as status, generation and culture. Thus, self-emptying is the first feature of Kenotic Conversation. It is the foundational element in helping people who want to enhance understanding and interaction with others. Stepping In The second feature of Kenotic Conversation is stepping in. In order for people to enhance mutual understanding and relationship, it needs them to cross the boundary from their own perceived self-value and then assume similar value in others. Paul presents the kenotic Christ’s self-emptying as more than an inward and pious self-perception, but an outward and relational stepping in, seeking to connect with people, including conversation during His life on Earth. The Bible says that Christ was "made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man" (Phil. 2:7c-8a). Christ emptied Himself (kenaow), assumed human likeness, condescending to take on Himself the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. 8:3). His humanity was true in that it was subject to temptation, weakness, pain, and sorrow but without sin (Heb. 4:15). He experienced all that people experience in life. He voluntarily did not use some of His attributes of deity during His earthly life time (Mt. 24:36). The kenotic Christ was willing to step into the human realm by taking on humanity with its limitations in order to seek the other in their culture. This stepping in is a necessity to have a direct, personal conversation in establishing meaningful relationships with people in their languages, generations and cultures. In this study, I encouraged the participants to step into other people's [ Page ] 24 worlds, such as their cultural patterns and communication patterns by setting some basic conversation rules, such as equality and mutual respect to each other. Concern for Others The third feature of Kenotic Conversation is concern for others. Paul invites church members in Philippi to tune into the needs of others fully, to the extent that they "in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil. 2:3-4). This framing triggers Paul’s reference to the mindset of Christ (Phil. 2:5). The Bible says that Christ took "the very nature of a servant" (Phil. 2:7b). This servanthood-oriented approach can be extended to God's way of communication demonstrated in Jesus Christ. Kraft argues the descending Christ demonstrated that "God's strategy is that God is receptor-oriented, seeking to reach his receptors by entering their frame of reference" (Kraft 1991, 16). Paul presents the kenotic Christ as providing His pattern for conversation with people in His life on Earth, doing so in order to value the interests of the other over our own. Further, we first must empty ourselves of our natural tendencies in order to attract conversational energy back to ourselves. Second, we empty ourselves so we may step into their world and connect with them. Having concern for others is to start the conversation where the others are and should focus on their needs and concerns. This amounts to laying ourselves down in order to give ourselves to the other. [ Page ] 25 One learns from Jesus Christ’s example that self-emptying, stepping in, and concern for others are the three key features of Kenotic Conversation. They will be discussed in detail in Chapter 2: Theological Rationale, and Chapter 3: Literature Review. The conceptual framework of KC in this study was designed and introduced to the research participants as a structured, in-person, and mutual conversation program. It was a manner of conversation demonstrated by Jesus Christ when He interacted with people. The Apostolic church followed this style of conversation. This structured, in-person, and mutual conversation program served as a tool to practice the concept of KC. The following paragraphs introduce the practice. Details will be discussed in Chapter 2: Theological Rationale, Chapter 3: Literature Review, and Chapter 4: Project Description. Structured First, KC was deliberately structured. Participants had to follow some prescribed conversational manners, such as people acknowledging one another as equals, suspending judgement and staying open (Wheatley 2009, 33-37). These conversation manners reflect the self-emptying quality demonstrated by Jesus Christ when He conversed with people. Kraft avers that people should have to agree to "rule-ordered structuring behavior" if they want to participate effectively in interpersonal interactions. "It is, however, necessary that all participants agree to the same set of rules" (Kraft 1991, 100). In addition, structured conversation [ Page ] 26 acts as a facilitator, guiding the participants to keep their conversation on the topic (Stanfield 2000, 18). In-Person Second, KC was in-person, requiring the engagement in conversation of different senses of our whole person, including our physical, intellectual, emotional and social elements. Wheatley argues, "If we can sit together and talk about what's important to us, we begin to come alive. We share what we see, what we feel, and we listen to what others see and feel" (Wheatley 2009, 7). Jesus Christ demonstrated this fully as He personally stepped in from Heaven to Earth, entering the human frame of reference in order to meet with us. Mutual Third, KC was designed with a mutual characteristic. The research participants not only have the right to express themselves but also have the responsibility to listen to others and give feedback during conversations. Yankelovich claims that this reciprocity in conversation helps "people find it easy to express their opinions and to bat ideas back and forth with others" (Yankelovich 1999, 43-44). Jesus Christ demonstrated this strategy of mutuality when He conversed with people. From initial conversations He listened to people and started the conversation where they were rather than placing His own agenda first. My experience suggests that some other ways to create vital conversation, such as leadership programs, mentorship programs or reverse mentorship (Creps [ Page ] 27 2008) are not effective in solving the challenges of communication, conflict resolution and empowerment in MCPC's context. It is because Ling argues both generations need to be respected (Ling 1999, 203) and face must be preserved (Ling 1999,146). Mentorship programs and a top-down leadership approach are not appropriate in MCPC. Therefore, this study employed a structured, in-person and mutual manner of conversation in order to practise the concept of KC. I expect that KC will minimize any sense of a threatening atmosphere to the research participants during the conversation program. Purpose The purpose of the project was to introduce the concept and practice of Kenotic Conversation (KC) and assess KC’s impact on Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC) in Toronto, Canada. The project explored how the concept of KC works by practicing a structured, mutual, and in-person conversation program regarding communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation. The study was designed to demonstrate how KC could improve the trust relationship between the leaders from the older Cantonese generation and the members of the younger English generation at MCPC. I expected the result, whether positive or negative, would contribute some experience to professional practice in other Chinese churches in Canada, as well as add some academic knowledge concerning conversation among people in different cultures and generations in the context of the Chinese church in Canada. [ Page ] 28 Research Question The project was designed to explore solutions to the problems in MCPC through practicing KC in a structured, in-person and mutual conversation program. Further it was intended to assess the impact of the KC program in helping participants to gain some understanding of others different from their own cultures and generations. I was interested in exploring how KC works, particularly in regard to MCPC’s aforementioned communication, conflict resolution and empowerment needs. The core research question for this study (“What are the impacts of Kenotic Conversation conducted in structured, in- person and mutual manner to MCPC in Toronto, Canada?") functioned as a guide in choosing the research methodology and the design of this study. The next section outlines the methodology and the scope of the study. The details of these elements will be elaborated upon in Chapter 4: Methodology and Project Description. Methodology and Design The study utilized an action research model, adopting a qualitative phenomenological approach. The research was designed to monitor change created by introducing KC to solve communication problems in MCPC. Coghlan and Brannick (Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization) describe action research as "simultaneously concerned with bringing about change in organizations, in developing self-help competences in organizational members and adding to scientific knowledge" (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 4). The Session [ Page ] 29 worked with me during various phases of action research: planning; implementing; evaluating; further planning. Our aim was to understand how the concept of KC worked and explore the conversation program impact. The result guided further planning of adjustments to the program and further implementation at MCPC in the next cycle of action research. The site of the study was MCPC’s building. Conversation participants included elders from the Session who were first generation Cantonese and second generation English members. Six participants, three from each group, consented (Appendix B) and voluntarily took part in the study. The study’s activities consisted of a structured, in-person and mutual conversation program. The study’s three main components were interviews, conversation sessions and session feedback. The study was designed to elicit understanding of the essence of participants' living experience in the phenomenon being investigated. That is, the study sought to determine how a structured, in-person and mutual KC functioned among them, as well as to assess its impact upon them. The conversation program entailed one session per week for six weeks. Before and after the conversation program, I conducted semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions (Thomas 2009, 162-164) with each participant in a personal, face-to-face, one-on- one manner to discern their views on the issues being investigated: communication; conflict resolution; empowering next generation. Details of the intake and exit interviews may be found in Appendices C and D. Stringer claims interviews can provide opportunities for participants to describe in their own terms their experience of issues being investigated (Stringer 2007, 69). 1 designed [ Page ] 30 each session to focus on a specific topic, such as communication patterns. Details of each session appear in Appendices E to J. I facilitated the conversation to ensure the participants remained focused on the topic in order to discuss and explore it in depth. After each conversation session, each participant was requested to send his or her written feedback to me via electronic mail. Doing this was intended to increase their retention of what they had said and what they had listened to in the conversation (Woods 2011, 127). Table 1 shows the components of the Kenotic Conversation program. A detailed description of the study will be in Chapter 4: Methodology. The primary data collection method used in the study was a set of interviews in which participants shared their views and experience of the phenomenon being investigated. Interviews helped investigate any impact of the KC program on the participants. Another data collection method was session feedback from participants. Its purpose was to increase the retention of the participants’ insights through reflection upon the conversation sessions. I used abbreviations to identify participants and data sets. I coded the raw data with similar meaning using the same term as a code. There were sixteen codes developed. From those codes shared the same theme were integrated by me. Details of the study methodology will be discussed in Chapter 4: Methodology. [ Page ] 31 Table 1: Outline of Components of Kenotic Conversation Program [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 1 details ] Limitations The KC program had several limitations that were beyond my control. First, the study was limited by its small number of participants. The sample size of the Cantonese generation was limited to fourteen elders in the Session of whom some were elderly and could not speak English sufficiently, while others simply declined to take part in the study. Furthermore, the English generation's sample [ Page ] 32 size was small, for a variety of reasons. Some had newly joined MCPC and did not know the congregation’s history and the issues being investigated; some had not been baptized as members; some had not officially transferred their membership to MCPC and therefore they were not full church members; some members merely declined to take part in the study. Second, the language used in conversation limited the study. English was used because Chinese-speaking participants' English fluency was better than English speaking participants' Chinese fluency. Conversing in English was also as a friendly gesture from the Cantonese speakers to step out of their comfort zone and exercise a kenotic approach to the needs of the English generation, showing they were eager to narrow the gap. English was used to minimize the expression barrier and to facilitate the English participants’ expression of thoughts and sharing of their experiences. Nevertheless, most Cantonese speaking leaders were not able to express their views frilly and fluently in English. Third, the study was limited because it involved individual interviews. According to Creswell, one possible drawback to the face-to-face, one-on-one interview is that not all the participants are equally articulate and perceptive (Creswell 2003, 186). Therefore, possible bias was introduced in the study because more articulate and expressive interviewees gave more details in their responses. A fourth limitation regarded the validity of raw data tagging and analysis. Ideally, it would be more objective if two or more people tagged the same data to validate whether the analyzed data were accurate. I imposed this constraint upon [ Page ] 33 myself in order to protect the privacy of the project participants. Nevertheless, to validate that the raw data collected from them correctly recorded their meanings and that analysis was accurate, I sent an email to each participant. I asked whether what I had recorded from each was correct. I also sent them my analyzed data to them that any data collected has been twisted or wrongly interpreted. All their returns agreed with appreciation of my collected raw data and analyzed data. Delimitation This study only focused on how Kenotic Conversation works with structured, mutual and in-person characteristics. Other kinds of communication, such as writing, were not considered in this study. The study also applied KC to address the needs of communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation in MCPC. Assumptions The first assumption was that no significant barriers hindered conversation among participants in the conversation sessions. Their education level was the same, for example, namely that all of them had completed at least undergraduate studies. Second, participants were assumed to have sufficient intellectual and mental ability to comprehend the consent form content. They understood the implications, such as the potential risks when they gave their consent to participate the project (Rapley 2007, 28). [ Page ] 34 Definition of Key Terms The "Cantonese generation" participants in the study are elders in the Session. As their pastor for about ten years, I knew their background through my pastoral care and counselling, and also from when they were elected as elders. They are Overseas Born Chinese (OBC) individuals with Chinese cultural traditions, first generation immigrants who are native Cantonese speakers. They are members of the “Baby Boomer” generation born between the years 1946-1964 (Barna 2011, 227). These participants, according to Kwon, can be culturally regarded as somewhat in between 1.0 and 1.5 generations (Kwon 1993, 53). Nevertheless, Zhou regards "those arriving as adolescents (age 13-17)...[as] similar to first generation" (Zhou 1997, 64). Others journals consider those who migrate in their adolescence (age 13-17) as generation 1.25 (Rumbaut 2004, 1167; Waters 2014, 21). Therefore, the Cantonese generation participants are regarded somewhat close to generation 1.0. The "English generation" participants in the study are English speakers who have been MCPC members for more than five years, having gone through the challenges discussed earlier. My knowledge of them grew as I had to work more closely with and provide pastoral care in the absence of an English pastor for past three years. The English generation participants in the study are either Canadian Born Chinese (CBC) or Canadian Raised Chinese (CRC). The first language they learned is English. Generationally, they are either Busters (1965- 1983) or Mosaics (1984-2002) (Barna 2011, 227). According to Kwon, the English generation participants are considered the second generation of [ Page ] 35 immigrants because they were either born locally or migrated in their early childhood under age 4 (Kwon 1993, 52). Brief Overview of the Study’s Findings and Conclusions The study had three main findings. First, the study identified openness in communication, seeking for common ground in resolving conflict, and providing support to empower the next generation as the main factors necessary for Kenotic Conversation (KC). Second, KC impacted participants by changing some of their perspectives. Third, participants reported change in their actions. The results indicated that KC helped enhance participants' understanding of their own selves and others, promoted relationships among them and built up trust between them. The study of KC provided contributions on both academic and professional levels of pastoral ministry, bringing changes in perspective and action among both the Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. Based on the results and findings, I am able to plan further to apply KC more broadly in order to improve trust relationships among MCPC’s Cantonese and English congregations. Details of the findings and conclusions may be found in Chapter 5: Research Findings and Interpretation and Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations respectively. Outline of Chapters This chapter introduced the purpose of this study, which was to explore and understand how Kenotic Conversation works by practicing a structured, mutual, and in-person conversation program on improving trust relationships [ Page ] 36 among the participants and to assess its impact. This chapter also outlined the MCPC study site context, the research question, methodology and design, limitations and delimitations, assumptions, definition of key terms and a brief overview of the study’s findings. The theology that underpins KC, which presents how God uses conversation to communicate with people, His ways of conversation and how the Apostolic church followed the same ways, appears in Chapter 2: Theological Rationale. Chapter 3: Literature Review addresses the general sense of conversation, specific concerns of structured, mutual, and in- person characteristics of conversation related to the study, as well as the influence of elements of conversation on conflict resolution and empowerment. Chapter 4: Methodology and Project Description describes the research methodology, explaining the type of research method used, data collection and the procedure of the study. Chapter 5: Research Findings and Interpretation contains findings and discussions. Chapter 6: Conclusions and Recommendations is comprised of my personal reflections on the study’s outcomes and potential future applications of the principles of Kenotic Conversation. Chapter Summary This chapter introduces the purpose and context of the conceptual framework of Kenotic Conversation, as well as the study’s methodology. The chapter also provides a brief overview the study’s findings and outlines all chapters of this thesis [ Page ] 37 [ Page ] 38 CHAPTER 2: THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE The purpose of this chapter is to provide a theological rationale of Kenotic Conversation (KC) with its three features: self-emptying, stepping in, and, showing concern for others. A plan for guided conversation to put into practice a biblical format of KC with structured, in-person and mutual characteristics will be discussed. The chapter development will unfold with four sections: communication of God to people, the essence of KC, the outcome of KC, and historical examples of KC. The chapter will end with a summary. Communication of God to People This section discusses God’s purpose and ways of communicating with people. Purpose of Communication After finishing creation, God communicated with people, conveying, first, His desire that people take care of and enjoy His creation, next, His intention to bless them so they could be fruitful through generations, as well as, third, His concern that people follow His will by not eating the fruit of tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in order that they might not die (Gen. 1:28). This first incident through which God conveyed a message to people was a self- [ Page ] 39 expression of His thoughts, concerns and feelings. God communicated in order to create awareness, to educate, to influence and to regulate the other's attitudes, perceptions and behaviour. In this incident, God expressed His desire that people take care of and enjoy His creation, as well as to live within the boundaries set by His will. Communication served a social behaviour purpose, establishing and maintaining relationship between God and people. It allows both sides the better to understand each other and connect. However, people sinned and broke the relationship with God. They hid from God and did not communicate with Him (Gen. 3:8). God loved people. God never ceased to take the initiative to communicate with people for the purposes of letting them get to know Him and restoring relationship with Him. In the Bible, God adopted different indirect ways to communicate with people for the purpose of restoring relationship with them. God's Ways of Communication in the Bible This sub-section provides an overview of God’s methods of communication, as found in the Bible. These include general revelation through Creation, as well as more specific forms of communication, such as dreams and visions or conversation through intermediaries. Finally, God provided face-to-face conversation through the incarnation. Creation Creation is a general revelation of God, by which He communicates with people through His creation (Rom. 1:20). From the beauty of the Earth and the [ Page ] 40 magnificence of the universe people understand the greatness of God’s design and goodness of all He created. As people sinned and forfeited direct communication with God, God adopted intermediaries to communicate with people to reveal His redemptive plan to restore the relationship. Different types of intermediaries are found in the Bible where God deemed it necessary to use intermediaries to fulfill His purpose of connecting with people and restoring relationship. The commonality of all the ways of communication God adopted was that humans were capable of understanding each means of communication. Dreams and Visions When Jacob fled from his angry brother, God reconfirmed His covenants made with Jacob’s grandfather Abraham, using a dream when Jacob slept in the wilderness at Bethel, (Gen. 28:10-15). Jacob's son Joseph may be regarded as a dreamer. On various occasions Joseph connected with dreams through which God communicated with him, as well as giving him wisdom to explain the dreams, such as the dreams of the cupbearer, the baker and the king (Gen. 37:5-8; 40:8-22; 41:25-36). God gave Daniel some dreams to convey His message about human history to the kings of Babylonian (Dan. 4:5; 7: Iff). Besides dreams, visions were another way God communicated with specific individuals at specific times for specific purposes. He made a covenant with Noah by placing a rainbow in the cloud (Gen. 9:13). He promised Abraham's descendants would be as numerous as the stars of sky (Gen. 15:5). He first [ Page ] 41 summoned Moses through the burning bush (Exod. 3:3). He restored Elijah's faith through powerful natural phenomena (1 King 19:1 Iff). He conveyed His message to Israel through Ezekiel's visions (Ezek. 3:22ff). He wrote inscriptions on a wall in judgement of King Belshazzar (Dan. 5:24-25). God adopted visions on various occasions (Dan. 8:Iff; 10:Iff; Acts 10:9 ff, 16:9; Rev. 1). Conversation through Intermediaries Throughout biblical history, a common way God communicated with people was through intermediaries, usually His servants, the prophets. He gave His words to them and through them to convey the message to His people. Prophets like Samuel (1 Samuel 3), Jeremiah (ch.1-8), Hosea (ch.l), Joel (ch.l), and Jonah (ch.l) acted as intermediaries, receiving God's word and conveying it to the people. Another intermediaries were angels, such as three visitors to Abraham (Gen. 18) or the two who visited Lot (Gen. 19). God even communicated with people using animals, such as Balaam's donkey (Num. 22:28- 30). God also conversed through an audible voice (Num. 12:8). When He saw that the first man was alone, "The LORD God said..." (Gen. 2:28). On other occasions God conversed with people through an audible voice, such as when Abraham pleaded for Sodom (Gen. 18:16ff.), Moses bargained with God (Exod. 3), and some Old Testament prophets, such as Elijah (1 Kgs. 19) and Jonah (ch.4) argued with God. [ Page ] 42 A Specific Way of Conversation All the aforementioned ways of communication from Old Testament history could not totally satisfy the needs of people because people could not converse with God face-to-face. In Exodus, at the end of conversation with God, Moses requested to see His face but God refused (Exod. 33:23). Nevertheless, God loved people. He chose a specific way of communication, the physical coming of His Son Jesus Christ from Heaven to Earth to become a man, thereby achieving direct face-to-face conversation with people. In addition, even God did not consider the above ways of communication complete until His coming in the flesh and dwelling among people so that the latter could see His glory (John 1:14). If God had had a better way to communicate with people, He would have adopted it. The author of the Letter to the Hebrews argues that the coming of Jesus Christ was the ultimate way God communicated with people: "In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son" (Heb. 1 :l-2a). Jesus took on human likeness (Phil. 2:7c) and dwelt among people (John 1:14b), making direct, face-to-face conversation possible because people could see, listen and talk to Him without an intermediary. The purpose of Jesus Christ’s becoming human was to restore relationship between God and people through His atonement on the cross (2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:19-20; 1 Tim. 2:5-6). His coming made direct, mutual and face-to-face conversation possible between God and people. Kraft muses that "when he [God] unveiled his ultimate method of [ Page ] 43 communication, it turned out to be a Human Being, his Son (Heb. 1:2)" (Kraft 1991,4). In summary, the Bible records various ways God adopted to communicate with people, such as creation, dreams, visions, intermediaries and audible voices. All these ways of communication aimed to restore the relationship between God and people that had been broken because people sinned. Nevertheless, the ultimate way God adopted to communicate was His personal coming to Earth to become human so that direct, face-to-face conversation with people was possible through His physical presence. This direct conversation allowed people to see, listen, talk and touch Him with their human senses. Kenotic Conversation This section presents the definition of Kenotic Conversation, examples of Kenotic Conversation demonstrated by Jesus Christ and the Apostolic church, as well as the features of Kenotic Conversation based on study of several biblical examples. Definition (Innovation) of Kenotic Conversation The concept of Kenotic Conversation (KC) is based on the life of Jesus Christ and His demonstrated pattern of conversation with people when He lived on Earth. Jesus Christ is consistent, "the same yesterday, today and forever" (Heb. 13:8). We should learn from His perfect example, specifically how His taking human form permitted Him consistently to experience the attitudes and thoughts of the people among whom He lived and with whom He conversed. I will extract [ Page ] 44 some principles from Paul’s kenotic passage in Philippians, together with other scriptural support to develop a model of a conceptual framework for KC. In my study, the conceptual framework of KC consists of three features: self-emptying, stepping in and concern for others. KC is expressed in my study by three characteristics. It is structured, in-person and mutual manner. The following sections present its theological rationale. Features of Paul’s Portrayal of Jesus’ Method of Kenotic Conversation A main scriptural explanation of Jesus Christ’s life’s purpose and goal is the so-called “kenotic hymn” (Phil. 2:5-8) written by the Apostle Paul. It explains how Jesus Christ humbled Himself, moving from Heaven to Earth, and learned ways to approach people. Paul began by declaring: "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus" (2:5). A literal translation of the Greek “phroneite en humin ho kai en Chriso lesou” is "Keep on thinking of this in you which [attitude] was also in Christ Jesus. " The word kai, translated here as "also," carries the meanings of “likeness” and “similarity” (Robertson 1931, Vol.IV, 444). Paul narrated how Christ became human in order to urge readers to learn to be like Christ. The word phroneite (attitude) means “mind," “thinking” and “mental sense” (Robertson 1931, Vol.IV, 444; Zodhiates 1993, 1454). Germane to this discussion of KC, phroneite implies believers should have similar “thoughts or attitudes among yourselves as you have in your communion with Christ Jesus" (Bauer, and Arndt and Gingrich 1979, 866). Paul urged the Philippian church to take Jesus Christ as their perfect example and follow His life attitudes as they [ Page ] 45 lived together as a godly community. Since conversation was a vital practice in Jesus’ interactions with others it should be employed to build up relationships among Christians. John Calvin argued that Paul wrote this verse to invite the readers to resemble Jesus Christ. First, Paul "invites us to imitate Christ, because imitation of him is the rule of right living. In the second, [Paul] alludes us to it, because this is the road by which we attain true glory" (Calvin 2009, 54). If the Christian community imitates Christ’s way of living, including His conversation with people when He was living on Earth, this kind of living will become a powerful witness to glorify God. Succinctly, Kenotic Conversation is an attitude demonstrated by Jesus Christ described in the kenotic hymn (Phil 2:5-8). Those who practise KC with the goal of having genuine conversation with others different from themselves should strive to replicate the attitude of Jesus Christ. The conceptual framework of KC consists of three features: self-emptying; stepping into other's frame of reference; addressing other's needs and concerns. Self-Emptying The particular form in which the verb kenaow appears in Philippians 2:7 carries the meaning that Christ took the initiative to empty Himself. Robertson interprets that Christ "emptied himself (heauton ekenowsen)" (Robertson 1931, Vol.IV, 444), as He "made himself nothing" (v.7a). He notes that the verb "empty" (ekenowsen) is the first, singular, aorist active indicative of kenaow, the cognate verb of the noun kenos, which means empty. It is the root from which [ Page ] 46 kenosis comes. The particular grammatical form of the verb suggests that it was Christ who decided to be willing to limit Himself, giving up His rights and choosing to empty Himself. In explaining how Christ emptied himself, Robertson argues: Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on Earth retaining more of these than any mere man[sic]. It is here that men[sic] should show restraint and modesty....He (Christ) stripped himself of the insignia of majesty. (Robertson 1931, Vol.IV, 444) Nevertheless, Best argues that in emptying Himself, Christ had to retain His full deity, otherwise He could not act as a mediator between God and humanity (Best 1985, 82). It is to say that by self-emptying Christ did not abandon His self- identity and the attributes of deity. John Calvin claims that kenosis was God's self-revelation to descend, meet and talk directly (face-to-face) with people. It was "God's 'lisping' or 'baby talk' in his condescending mercy" in order to converse with us (Horton 2002, 324). The self-emptying attitude is valuable for people who want to have genuine conversations with others different from themselves, without stereotyping or having negative evaluations regarding generation, culture, gender, language and social status. This self-emptying attitude suspends one's presumptions and judgement when in conversation, respects others with different thoughts and values, and prioritizes consideration of others during ongoing conversation. The active voice in the scripture suggests Christ actively took the initiative to empty Himself. When we take the initiative to empty ourselves in conversation, we imitate Christ. [ Page ] 47 Self-emptying did not make Christ any less. As John Calvin said, Christ "laid aside of his glory in the view of man[sic], not by lessening it, but by concealing it" (Calvin 2009, 57). It sheds light that though we empty ourselves like Christ to adopt the kenotic approach during conversations, we will not lose our own identity nor lessen ourselves. Christ further demonstrated His self- emptying by becoming lowly and humble, "taking the very nature of a servant" (v.7b). Kent claims, "Our Lord could and did take on the very form of a lowly servant when he entered human life by the incarnation" (Kent 1978, 124). He argues that further to self-emptying, Christ came down from Heaven and stepped in the human world to meet with people. Stepping In The second feature of the concept of KC is Christ’s stepping into the human world so that He could converse with people directly (face-to-face), not through intermediaries, such as prophets or angels. In order effectively to step into humanity’s world, Christ was "made in human likeness" (v.7c). He involved himself in normal human life and participated in human conversation as recorded in the Bible. His stepping into the world was not in order to scare people by displaying God’s might. Rather He stepped into complete humanity in order to experience what real people experienced. He was born normally, took years to grow up, worked as a carpenter, ate and conversed with people just like any ordinary human. [ Page ] 48 Christ from Heaven stepped into our human frame of reference. Kraft considers a frame of reference to be "the culture, language, life situation, social class, or similar all-embracing setting or context within which one operates" (Kraft 1991, 15). Christ's kenotic example helps us to understand KC’s principle of “stepping in.” He is not a distant God. McGee underscores that Christ “left Heaven's glory. He came down and down and down to this Earth, all the way to where we are" (McGee 1983, 301). In the study of the kenotic passage, I regard the verb ksvoo as meaning that Christ self-emptied, leaving Heaven and stepping into the human world, in order to make direct (face-to-face) conversation possible for the purpose of restoring the relationship between God and people. That is, Christ not only emptied Himself but actively took up the needs and concerns of others. This attitude, in turn, may become a useful model for restoring relationships among Christians. Concern for Others Christ's stepping into the human world provided power for conversing with people because His kenotic approach ("he humbled himself' (Phil. 2:8b) accentuated humans’ perception of His concern for others. His self-emptying "refers to his entire life upon Earth in its devotion to the Father and the acceptance of our human lot...his humiliation in the passion" (Martin 1999, 106). The author of Hebrews expressed it with a double negative in order to emphasize Christ's empathic responses to people: "[W]e do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses (Heb. 4:15a). Guthrie described the verb [ Page ] 49 “sympathize” as meaning, "suffer along with" (Guthrie 1999, 122). The kenotic Christ concerned Himself with others, going to the houses of so-called sinners, such as that of the tax collector Zacchaeus (Luke 19:5), eating and talking with sinners. His life on Earth was marked by concern for others. Other scriptures describe the kenotic Christ as concerned not for His own needs, but for others’ needs (2 Cor. 8:9; Heb. 2:9). Isaiah prophesied that Christ would surrender His life so that He could "pour out His life unto death" (53:12). Kraft argues that Christ's strategy of communication was a "receptor-oriented" approach: "To love communicationally[sic] is to put oneself to whatever inconvenience necessary to assure that the receptors understand" (Kraft 1991, 15). As a result, the receptors could more readily interpret communication from the perspective of their own context. Summary of Paul’s Portrayal of Jesus’ Method of Kenotic Conversation The kenotic Christ consistently honoured God, even becoming “obedient to death" (v.8c). He was willing to lay down Himself to pay the price of shame and suffer "even death on a cross" (v.8d). Lohmeyer argues "only a divine being can accept death as obedience; for ordinary people it is a necessity. He alone as the obedient Son could choose death as his destiny." (Martin 1999, 107; emphasis original). Christ willingly chose to do so even though He risked losing His dignity and being rejected by those with whom He lived. The fullness of what the kenotic Christ achieved was the creation of direct (face-to-face) conversation, restoring God’s relationship with people through His self-emptying to lay down Himself. [ Page ] 50 This was achieved by stepping into the human world and concerning Himself first for others, conversing with people based on their needs and concerns. These three features became the core of the model of Kenotic Conversation applied in this study of how to restore relationships in MCPC. Examples of Jesus’ Use of Kenotic Conversation The Apostle Paul urges believers to acquire the same attitude as Christ and imitate Him as described in the kenotic hymn (Phil 2:5-8). This section presents how Jesus demonstrated His KC, engaging with people when He was on Earth. By doing so He set a pattern of KC for the Apostolic church to imitate in restoring relationships. Rich Young Man (Mark 10) One day, a rich young man came to Jesus and expressed his desire to receive eternal life (Mark 10:17-22). The young man chose the conversation topic, what he could do to receive eternal life, but Jesus guided the conversation, stepping into the young man’s desire and interest to explore how to get eternal life. Jesus did not "condemn wealth as wrong in itself, but this whole story is a poignant warning of its danger" (Cole 1999, 232). Jesus respected the young man and suspended His judgement without immediately pointing out that receiving eternal life was not by his own effort but by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9). Nevertheless, Jesus highlighted the man’s needs by starting the conversation from where he was, which was his concept of receiving eternal life by obey the commandments (Mark 10:19). In the face-to-face conversation, although this man [ Page ] 51 had a different concept about salvation, Jesus looked at him and loved him (10:21a). He challenged the young man to change by taking action to dispose of his wealth for the poor and follow Him (v.21b). Cole argues that in conversation, Jesus "tries to draw from the man the full implications of his own words...for something which is far deeper" (Cole 1999, 233). Jesus always guided the conversation partner from superficial physical understanding to inner spiritual recognition. It was direct (face-to-face) conversation for the purpose of restoring the relationship between God and people. Nicodemus (John 3) Another example of Jesus’ direction of conversation to place others’ needs front and centre is found in John 3:1-21. One night, a Pharisee named Nicodemus came to Jesus. Wiersbe argues the former "wanted to have a quiet uninterrupted conversation" (Wiersbe 1989, Vol.l, 295). More than merely being involved in the conversation as a participant, Jesus acted as a facilitator, focusing the conversation concerning the need to be born again by asking leading questions to explore a deeper meaning. Chia argues that Jesus directed Nicodemus' attention from his understanding of physical matters to spiritual matters (Chia 1967, 55). Jesus stepped into Nicodemus' frame of reference, which focused on Nicodemus’ understanding of natural birth, to direct Nicodemus to consider the invisible work of the Holy Spirit. He displayed concern for Nicodemus' need to know the basics of salvation by using illustrations from daily life, such as water and wind, illustrations that could enhance peoples’ understanding because they had likely [ Page ] 52 experienced them. Wiersbe says, "Our Lord began with that which was familiar, birth being a universal experience" (Wiersbe 1989, Vol.l, 295) and used that to demonstrate unfamiliar aspects of spiritual experience. Again, the purpose of the conversation was to help restore relationship between Nicodemus and God. Jesus challenged Nicodemus to change his concept of salvation and take action to be born again by believing in God (John 3:16). Peter (John 21) The kenotic Christ made direct conversation between God and people possible, involving various personal dimensions, such as the physical, intellectual and emotional. After His resurrection, Jesus took the initiative to approach the devastated Peter and have an honest, heart-to-heart conversation to restore Peter and free him from the deep emotional guilt resulting from his threefold public denial of Jesus three days before (John 21:15-19). Instead of condemnation, Jesus embraced Peter's weaknesses and mistakes through rounds of mutual conversation with Peter. Jesus rebuilt Peter's faith, entrusted him by providing support with encouragement to continue his work by saying "feed my sheep" and the like three times (21:15b, 16b, 17b). Wiersbe argues that Jesus "encouraged [Peter] by giving a threefold commission that restored Peter to his ministry" (Wiersbe 1989, Vol.l, 397). Furthermore, this personal conversation restored the relationship between Peter and Jesus with a powerful statement from the latter: "Follow me!" (v,19b). This genuine conversation allowed Jesus and Peter mutually to see, talk and even [ Page ] 53 touch one another in their physical presence, as well to share experientially, exchange emotionally and connect relationally. Thomas (John 20) This happened again when Thomas doubted Jesus’ resurrection (John 20:26-28). That conversation addressed Thomas' concern and the physical touch relieved Thomas' misunderstanding with his claim "My Lord and my God!"(John 20:28b). Further, the resurrected Jesus joined in conversation with the two men walking on the road to Emmaus. Jesus stepped in (Luke 25:15) and started the conversation by questioning them about their concerns: "What are you discussing together as you walk along?" (v,17a). On different occasions, such as sending the Twelve (Mark 6:7-13) and the Seventy-Two (Luke 10:1-24), Jesus habitually adopted this in-person way of entrusting responsibility and imparting His authority to support those who continued to do His work. In brief, His followers were empowered and given authority in five aspects: to forgive sins (John 20:23; Mt. 16:19); to heal the sick (Mt. 10:8a; Luke 16:19a); to cast out demons (Mt. 10:8b; Mark 6:7b; Luke 16:19b); to proclaim God's kingdom (Mt. 10:7); to teach (Mt. 28:20a). Jesus gave all these powers directly, providing support through in-person conversations with His followers. Samaritan Woman (John 4) A mutual form of conversation allows people to share their views and give feedback about the topic. In John 4:1-41, Jesus' conversation with the Samaritan [ Page ] 54 woman at the well demonstrated how KC could be done in a reciprocal way. Jesus intentionally stepped into conversation with a sinful woman who had come to draw water from the well at noon, too ashamed to interact with her own community. Chia argues while Jesus "had to go through Samaria" (v.4), He also indicated His passion to work there. Jesus ran the risk of criticism for violating social norms because He would have to break multiple barriers (i.e. Jewish laws, ethnicity, gender and social class) to converse with the woman (Chia 1967, 66- 67). Jesus emptied Himself by neither stereotyping nor judging the disgraced Samarian woman. He stepped into the woman's world and started the conversation, showing interest in her concerns by asking her for water, thereby expressing a concern He had in common with her (v.7). Jesus emptied Himself, putting Himself on par with the woman by this initial request to meet His own need. Hendriksen argues that Jesus' request surprised her, fanning "into flame her curiosity" (Hendriksen 1953, Vol.l, 161). Through the reciprocity of questions and answers flowing back and forth, Jesus guided the conversation, progressively shifting from the superficial physical water to deep spiritual water, (v.10) until the woman received living water from Jesus (v. 15). Chia argues that Jesus listened patiently and responded to the woman’s questions (Chia 1967, 67). Through conversation with Jesus, the woman enhanced her self-understanding (vv.17-19) and her understanding of Jesus and His identity as a rabbi (v. 15), a prophet (v.19), and the Messiah (v.25-26). Wiersbe argues that having conversed with Jesus, the woman believed Jesus, "put her faith in Jesus Christ and was converted and [then] immediately” went to tell others she had met the Christ (Wiersbe 1989, Vol.l, [ Page ] 55 301). The conversation changed the woman, and in turn, changed her relationship with her community. Many Samaritans came to believe "because of [Jesus’] word" (v.41 ). It is evident that conversation will led to a ripple effect of changes in relationship. God loves to seek what best benefits people. He emptied Himself by stepping into the human world, making direct (face-to-face) conversation possible and showing concern for people's need to restore their relationship with God. Kraft argues that this expressed God's love: "To love communicationally[sic] is to put oneself to whatever inconvenience necessary to assure that the receptors understand" (Kraft 1991, 15). Summary of Jesus’ Use of Kenotic Conversation Jesus Christ demonstrated KC on various occasions. He emptied Himself, He stepped in other people's worlds and He showed concern for people's needs through conversation. Below is a summary of how Jesus practised KC. [ Page ] 56 Table 2: Kenotic Conversation Demonstrated By Jesus Christ [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 2 details ] Table 3: Jesus Christ's Use Kenotic Conversation [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 3 details ] [ Page ] 57 Examples of the Apostles’ Use of Kenotic Conversation Jesus Christ modeled KC when He was on Earth. Kraft says, "Jesus crossed the bridge and stayed, even becoming touchable, hearable, observable, rejectable[sic] in horizontal relationships with his creatures" (Kraft 1991, 12). Christ emptied Himself and stepped into people's situations in equality with them. In the same way, He expected His followers to be like Him to continue His ministry in the world. As He enjoined His disciples: "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you" (John 20:21b). The Apostle Paul urged that we should have the same attitude as Christ and imitate Him (Phil. 2:5). The following examples demonstrate how the Apostolic church followed Christ's KC approach. Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) The inclusion of gentile converts portrays the Apostolic church as a multicultural (Acts 8:26-39; 10; 16:5) and multi-generational institution (e.g. in the jailor's household; Acts 16:32-34). However, Cheung argues that racial and cultural differences had blocked some traditional people from embracing the new mixture of cultures in the Body of Christ. In Acts 15, some legalistic Jewish Christians advocated that gentiles should observe the Law of Moses, such as circumcision before they fully became Christians (Cheung 2002, 118). This demand initiated a debate about whether people had to obey the Jewish tradition as a basis of salvation. Cheung claims that the decision from the Jerusalem [ Page ] 58 Council set the foundation for future mission work, determining whether or not the Gospel could advance from Palestine to the ends of the world (Cheung 2002, 121). Marshall stated that the council meeting was an open one, involving everyone: "the whole church was present" (Marshall 1987, 249). Church leaders adopted Christ's KC, emptying themselves to stoop down to ensure that all participants could engage in equal and open conversation. Fernando argues that "the theological controversy was not swept under the carpet and allow to simmer; it was brought into the open and fearlessly discussed" (Fernando 1998, 415). The council’s conversation was structured. Kistemaker states that James the brother of Jesus functioned as the moderator of the council’s conversation (Kistemaker 2007, 550), keeping it on topic and maintaining it in an orderly manner. The Bible indicates people took turns, one after another, to present their views without interruption. Peter first addressed everyone’s key concern, going "right to the heart of question" (Barclay 1976, 114). To support his argument that people were only saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, he shared his first-hand experience of the conversion of the gentile Cornelius and his family with a concluding statement “[God] made no distinction between [Jews] and [gentiles]” (Acts 15:9a). Peter imitated Christ by emptying himself, not stereotyping the gentiles, and not blocking them from Christ's salvation. Fernando argues that Peter had to exert himself to be involved in the Council meeting, "Peter interrupted his missionary work to come for this meeting" (Fernando 1998, 416). [ Page ] 59 Next, Paul and Barnabas echoed Peter, reporting the facts about cross- cultural missionary work being conducted in Cyprus and Asia Minor (Kistemaker 2007, 549). They witnessed how God had miraculously revealed His saving grace among the gentiles. The Bible notes: "The whole assembly became silent as they listen[ed]..." (v.l2a). Marshall suggests that the missionary work experience of Peter, Paul and Barnabas through God's miraculous signs and wonders astonished and challenged the council members. They were attentive to listen (Marshall 1987, 249). Then James made a speech. He honored scriptural authority by quoting the prophet Amos (9:11-12). Amos declared that God’s redemption aimed to save both Jews and gentiles by His grace. This text confirmed Peter’s claim of the fulfilment of prophecy (Acts 15:14). Fernando argues that the leaders in the conversation addressed the facts of the issue neither with finger pointing nor taking sides (Fernando 1998, 422). After hearing all the presentations, the council came to a mutual agreement that the Jerusalem church should not put the yoke of the Jewish laws on gentile believers. The outcome of Jerusalem Council strengthened the relationship between Jewish and gentile believers. Barclay notes that "within the Church the principle was established that Jew and Gentile were one." (Barclay 1976, 116). The Jerusalem Council left an example for churches today about how to resolve problem by adopting KC. Teachings on the importance of conversation, James wrote: "Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" (James [ Page ] 60 1:19b). He advised a manner of conversation wherein participants should be attentive to listen, open-minded, reflective, and respectful of others, allowing them to express freely their views and ideas. Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8) Obeying a divine call, Philip left his original ministry in Samaria (Acts 8:9, 13) to go to the desert to meet an Ethiopian official of a different race and culture. Longenecker highlights that it was a fifty-mile journey south from Jerusalem to Gaza (Longenecker 1981, 362). Philip had to step in physically to approach the Ethiopian's chariot. Buttrick argues that Philip listened attentively with "a receptive frame of mind" (Buttrick 1954, 114). Learning from listening, Philip opened the conversation with concern for the Ethiopian's needs by asking whether he understood what he read. He carefully posed a reflective question to him. Kistemaker argues that "the official responds affably to what Philip asks" (Kistemaker 2007, 314), honestly admitting his ignorance (v.31) and asking for help (v.34). Their relationship was built through conversation that was facilitated by the eunuch’s invitation for Philip to sit with him instead of walking alongside the chariot (v.3 lb). The Bible says, "Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture [that the Ethiopian had read before he met Philip] and told him the good news about Jesus" (v.35). Philip further stepped into the Ethiopian's world to address his needs by interpreting the scripture. He began interpreting from where the official was reading and enhanced the eunuch’s grasp of the scripture. Fernando argues: "we may need to start with what they recognize as needs, that [ Page ] 61 is, their felt needs" (Fernando 1998, 289; emphasis added). From that very passage of Scripture, Philip expounded the good news about Christ, which was the Ethiopian's real need. Through questions and answers back and forth in conversation, the Ethiopian began to understand the gospel and requested baptism, as Wiersbe says, "because the Spirit of God was opening his mind to God's truth" (Wiersbe 1989, Vol.l, 437). The Ethiopian's life changed because of the conversation, which restore the eunuch’s relationship with God. Regarding the conversational language used, Kistemaker speculates their conversation was in Greek, which would have been a common language for them (Kistemaker 2007, 314). Conversation is like two-way traffic. Mutuality, with response and feedback, makes the exchange of messages possible. J.B. Phillips’ translation foregrounds a feature of KC: "None of you should think of his own affairs but should learn to see things from other people's point of view" (Phil. 2:4). It advises us that in order to get along with each other, we should not to be self-centred but be self-emptied and open-minded, looking beyond ourselves and learning from others in order to gain a better understanding. Election of the Seven (Acts 6) As the Apostolic church’s rapid growth increasingly mixed Jews of different backgrounds, the Greek-speaking Jews complained to the Hebrew- speaking Jews that their widows were neglected in their daily provision (Acts 6:1). It created tension that affected the harmony and unity of the church. [ Page ] 62 Robertson claims the Greek word paratheowrounto. "being overlooked" is an imperfect passive verb. It suggests that the Greek-speaking Jewish widows had been ignored on a continuing basis (Robertson 1930, Vol.III, 72). This negligence was not a single incident but was a recurring pattern of neglect over a period of time. These were not properly addressed before they erupted in open conflict. The purpose of having an open meeting was to address the complaint and restore relationships between people in the church. The apostles imitated Christ's self-emptying, kenotic approach, laying aside their leadership positions by calling a public meeting in which "the Twelve gathered all the disciples together" (6:2a). Cheung considers the word "‘gather” at the beginning of the sentence as emphatic, that the apostles took the initiative to handle the complaint (Cheung 1999, 429). They stooped down to engage the congregation in face-to-face conversation, seeking a balanced view by engaging in interactive conversation. Longenecker argues that the apostles did not "attempt either to assign blame or to act in any paternalistic fashion" (Longenecker 1981, 330). They imitated Christ's KC model, respecting church members and taking opportunities to clarify how ministries were prioritized. They reaffirmed the need for a division of labour in the unified Body of Christ. The Greek word diakonos, translated both as “to serve tables" (v.2c) and "the ministry of the Word" (v.4) (NASB; emphasis added), means “service” (Robertson 1930, Vol.III, 73-74). It suggests that the apostles considered the ministry of provision was not an unimportant one. Fernando argues the apostles [ Page ] 63 listened to opinions seriously and admitted to overlooking the Grecian Jewish widows’ needs (Fernando 1998, 238-239). Then they proposed electing seven people to take care of the daily distribution. This KC cleared up both parties’ concerns, met their expectations and led to the creation of an action plan. While the Bible does not provide details of the conversation, the whole body responded with determination, agreeing on both the proposal and the selection criteria. They then actively chose the seven (v.5). Based on the names of the seven, Rogers argues they were Hellenized Jews who would be comparatively open, fair and objective in handling matters between members of both cultures (Rogers 2008, 96). It was a breakthrough for the Apostolic church to develop bicultural cooperation between Grecian and Hebraic Jews. Then the whole congregation presented the elected seven to the apostles (v.6a). The conversation was open and honest, respectful in manner to both the church leadership and the congregation. The apostles appointed the seven to their task in a God-honoring manner by publicly praying and laying hands on them (v.6b). Buttrick argues that the laying hands, which originated with Moses’ commissioning of Joshua as his successor (Num. 27:18-23), “symbolizes the bestowal of the Holy Spirit" (Buttrick 1954, 90). The apostles delegated their authority to the seven. Marshall thinks that the apostles accepted and empowered the seven through "the rite [that] indicated a conferring of authority" (Marshall 1987, 127). The Apostles adopted Christ's KC with the congregation by emptying themselves as leaders. They stooped down to step in and converse with attendees about their needs and concerns. The church valued, listened to and respected [ Page ] 64 people’s needs and honoured God (6:2c; 4b). KC allowed both parties to contribute to solving the problem. The outcome of this KC was to turn conflict into collaboration by means of conversation. The Apostle Paul stated that unity in diversity is necessary among believers in the Body of Christ. The challenge of diversity in terms of generation, culture, language, gender and class is less important when we are bound together in Christ who "is all, and is in all" (Col. 3:11). Summary of the Apostolic Church’s Use of Kenotic Conversation No fewer than three passages in the Acts of the Apostles relate to the Apostles’ modeling of KC. Each demonstrated the Apostles’ willingness to empty themselves of their authority, to step into the other party’s frame of reference and to show concern for others. [ Page ] 65 Table 4: Kenotic Conversation Demonstrated by the Apostolic Church (Features of the Apostolic Church's Kenotic Conversation) [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 4 details ] Similarly, those three passages from the Acts of the Apostles also demonstrate KC’s core features. Each conversation is structured, in-person and entails mutual exchange of opinion. In each instance, the core features of KC facilitated dialogue across cultural boundaries. That dialogue, in turn, diffused tension and expanded the Apostolic church’s mission by resolving conflict. Without KC, the Apostolic church’s outreach to non-Jewish cultures would have been curtailed. [ Page ] 66 Table 5: Apostolic Church Examples of Kenotic Conversation [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 5 details ] Features of the Apostles’ Use of Kenotic Conversation This section extracts KC’s features and format from the examples provided above, the model provided by Jesus and the Apostolic church. There are three valuable features to KC: self-emptying; stepping in; concern for others. These three characteristics guided and formatted the conversations, which were structured, in-person and mutual. Self-Emptying When conversing with people, both Jesus Christ and the Apostles chose to make themselves nothing by setting aside their authority and not exercising their [ Page ] 67 power. Jesus Christ chose to humble Himself by asking a Samaritan woman for water. Apostles laid aside their leadership position to listen to the Greek-speaking Jews’ complaints. Both Jesus and the Apostles humbled themselves. They suspended their judgement while engaged in conversation. When Jesus talked with the rich younger ruler, as well as with Nicodemus and Thomas, Jesus did not judge them for their errors or spiritually naïveté. Instead, He guided them, explaining the issue until they understood. Even when dealing with Peter, who had wronged Jesus, Jesus suspended condemnation, choosing to restore and reconnect Peter to relationship with Himself. The Apostles followed Jesus' self- emptying approach in handling church disputes, such as in the election of the seven and the Jerusalem Council. They chose to humble themselves and listened with receptive minds, without stereotyping or drawing negative evaluations regarding the existing differences in culture and language. Stepping In Stepping in entails identifying salient features of the conversational partner’s frame of reference and attempting to experience empathetically their world. Stepping in allows people to converse directly with one another without intermediaries. When in conversation, both Jesus and the Apostles stepped into the frame of reference of their conversational partners. While conversing with the Samaritan woman, Jesus stepped into her situation by taking advantage of their same need of water. This similarity echoes the colloquialism of “being on the same page.” Establishing a commonality could facilitate conversation because an [ Page ] 68 active link is established between both speakers. They might more readily understand each other in conversation because of the similar need. The Apostles also modeled stepping as they handled complaints from the Greek-speaking Jews concerning their widows. The problem was not confined to the Greek-speaking Jews but impacted the whole congregation. The leaders stepped in so they could understand the Greek-speakers’ needs and, in turn, they presented their own need for prayer and maintaining their primary focus on the ministry of the Word. Through conversation, utilizing this KC feature of stepping in, conversation partners were able to avoid an adversarial stance, instead drawing together to face a common issue, an approach that allowed both parties to become involved in resolution of that issue. Concern for Others In KC, concern for others leads to adopting a receptor-oriented approach (Kraft 1991, 15), allowing receivers to interpret conversation from the own context’s perspective. In conversation with Peter, the resurrected Jesus did not rebuke Peter for his threefold denial. Instead, He showed concern for Peter's feelings of guilt and shame when the latter met Him again. In order to restore Peter Jesus spoke softly, with an encouraging tone. Talking with the rich young man and Nicodemus, Jesus showed concern for their interest in finding salvation. He started the conversation from their existing understanding of the Law’s commandments and natural birth. Jesus also showed concern for Thomas’ weak belief by conversing in order to restore his faith. In the Apostolic church, Philip’s [ Page ] 69 conversation with the Ethiopian official started from the latter's point of need and concern. He explained the portion of Isaiah the Ethiopian was already reading. At the Jerusalem Council, the apostles tried to put themselves into the shoes of believers of gentile culture. They shared their first-hand experience of getting along with the gentiles. Also they clarified the plan of salvation provided by the Lord, emphasizing it was the same for both Jews and gentiles. Kenotic Conversation’s Format Characteristics Further to the preceding three valuable features of KC extracted from the biblical examples considered, there are three other foundational characteristics contained in KC’s format. KC is structured, in-person and mutual. Structured During different conversations with people, Jesus acted as a facilitator, adeptly asking questions to guide His conversation partners (the rich young ruler, Nicodemus, Peter and the Samaritan woman) to reflect for themselves. He guided His conversation partners to focus more clearly, exploring the issue and moving from a superficial to a deeper level of understanding. Yet He stayed open to others, allowing people flexibility to explore the topic in-depth, as He did with Nicodemus. Jesus acted as a facilitator but acknowledged His conversation partners as equals, even when this was a radical move, as with the Samaritan woman. During the Jerusalem Council, Jesus' earthly brother James acted as a facilitator. He regulated the meeting in an orderly manner, allowing people to take turns presenting their own views and experiences. [ Page ] 70 This structural way of conversation guided the design of my project. Participants, if they wanted effective interaction through focus on the topic, had to follow some of the conversational techniques demonstrated in the above biblical example, such as respecting and acknowledging one another as equals. A facilitator guided the conversation, keeping it on topic by following these guidelines for conversation. Kraft argues that "It is necessary that all participants agree to the same set of rules" (Kraft 1991, 100). In-Person A distinctive feature of the kenotic Christ was that He physically became a human. It let Him converse with people directly in the sense of a face-to-face and personal presence wherein people could see, listen to, and even feel Him. Jesus participated in conversation with the entirety of His person through the use of the different senses. When He conversed with the rich young ruler, Jesus "looked at him and loved him" (Mark 20:21). While Jesus spoke intellectually about the Jewish commandments, His observed His conversation partner in order to perceive his nonverbal behaviour and to love him emotionally. Similar engagement happened when He conversed with Peter. When the resurrected Jesus talked with Thomas, confirming that He was a real person, the sense of physical touch had a great impact on Thomas. Incidents in the Acts of the Apostles, such as the Jerusalem Council and the election of seven, reveal how the physical presence of leaders in those meetings with a congregation demonstrated respect for attendees and took their needs seriously. The Apostles’ involvement in the [ Page ] 71 conversation was a social behaviour. It helped to minimize misunderstandings, providing instead immediate clarification. It helped to satisfy expectations on both sides. In-person conversation was crucial in my project, providing a setting for the project participants to engage face-to-face in each other’s immediate physical presence. They could better receive any message that others conveyed by perceiving not only their verbal but also their nonverbal communication. In- person conversation allowed engagement of the full range of participants' different senses and levels of being, such as their physical, intellectual, emotional and social involvement, helping them more readily share what they saw, felt and heard during the conversation. Mutual Jesus adopted an interactive approach when He conversed with people. While He sometimes engaged through one-way preaching, He also often listened to His conversation partners, giving feedback, as He did with the rich young ruler, Nicodemus, or the Samaritan woman. In addition to feedback, He asked questions along the way and gave space to allow feedback from His conversation partners. The same pattern is found in incidents in the Book of Acts, such as Philip and the Ethiopian. In that instance, mutual participation characterized the conversation, providing a model for conversation today. I took mutuality as a valuable principle to include in the project’s design. Partners in conversation not only expressed themselves but also had a [ Page ] 72 responsibility to listen to others, giving feedback during conversation. Exchange of views, experience, feelings and emotion becomes possible among conversation partners through reciprocity in conversation. Outcomes of Kenotic Conversation In view of the biblical examples outlined earlier, we may discern the impact of applying KC. This section presents four positive outcomes from employing KC, namely increased understanding, conflict resolution, relationship building, and stimulation of behavioural change. Increased Understanding People could more easily understand each other because KC was utilized. As Jesus exercised His kenotic strategy, the Samaritan woman progressively knew more about Him. The personal reality of Jesus’ nature, as well as that of the woman herself, was revealed gradually during the conversation process. Through conversation the woman not only enhanced her understanding of who Jesus was, but also increased her self-understanding. Further, KC can promote the acquisition of knowledge. Nicodemus enhanced his understanding of the work of God the Holy Spirit in spiritual birth, otherwise beyond his comprehension, through Jesus’ conversational analogy of natural birth. Similarly, the Ethiopian increased his understanding of scripture and salvation by conversing with Philip. KC may also erase wrong perspectives. The rich young ruler believed he could receive eternal life by obeying the Law. After conversation with Jesus, he [ Page ] 73 enhanced his understanding, grasping that following Jesus and accepting His grace was the path to eternal life. This revealed his perspective of the Bible was wrong: "As this the man's face fell. He went away sad." (Mark 10:22a). KC can, however, change people's perspectives. The doubt-filled Thomas changed his perspective, accepting confirmation of Jesus’ resurrection after face-to-face conversation with Jesus. Leaders in Jerusalem Council no longer insisted that the gentiles practice Jewish law in order to become Christians. This fruitful KC resulted in advancement of the Kingdom of God to the gentile world. Conflict Resolution KC provided a way to resolve conflict in the Apostolic church. In the process of electing the seven, KC helped both sides understand each other, as well as assisting the apostles to prioritize their work of prayer and the Word, while still meeting the needs of the Greek-speaking Jewish widows. A mutually acceptable solution was achieved through application of KC, resulting in the election of the seven, specifically to handle the widows' daily needs. KC in the Jerusalem Council also resolved the hostile division of Jews and gentiles on the requirements of salvation. KC is a way to bring conflicting parties together, address needs, understand others and find mutually agreeable solutions to resolve problems. Relationship Building KC was effective in building relationship. The resurrected Jesus posed questions to Peter, not pointing out Peter's guilt, but instead rebuilding his faith [ Page ] 74 after failure. Three times Jesus entrusted Peter to "feed my sheep." The KC then concluded with a direct challenge to Peter: "Follow Me." Jesus explicitly aimed to reconnect His relationship with Peter; that relationship was restored through KC. Further, as the Samaritan woman built relationship with Jesus she then connected her community with Jesus. The KC had a ripple effect, helping a single woman build a relationship between her community and Jesus. Stimulation of Behavioural Change KC also stimulated behavioural change. The shame-bound Samaritan woman drew water at midday in order to avoid contact with members of her community. After KC with Jesus, she took the initiative to go back quickly to her community, even leaving her water jar, to report the good news of Jesus. The election of the seven turned hostility to collaboration between both parties. KC allowed them to look beyond their own interest to the needs of others, thus enhancing mutual understanding. Ironically, the healing of this division brought a healthy division of labour into the church. Selected Examples of Attitude Change and Conflict Resolution through Kenotic Conversation in the History of the Church Drawing upon both Jesus’ experience and that of the Apostolic church, God used a series of incidents to educate the church, particularly the Jewish leaders, to embrace the gentiles, who were different from them. He guided [ Page ] 75 believers, providing a process to go through when they encountered new but challenging opportunities: After the ascension of Jesus Christ, some members of the Jewish Diaspora gathered together with local born Jews into one church community. This marked the emergence of cultural diversity in the church (Kendagor 2007, 96). The Holy Spirit guided Philip to the Ethiopian eunuch, to whom Philip explained the Book of Isaiah and brought the Ethiopian to Christ. This conversation between two people of different cultures resulted in the Gospel’s extension into Africa by the Ethiopian. Later in the Book of Acts, Peter found himself dealing with a Roman officer named Cornelius. Through a vision from God and the arrangement of the Holy Spirit, Peter understood it was God's will to have cultural diversity by entrusting the church to interact with gentile people so as to bring the Gospel to them. Because of his personal experience in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), Peter supported Paul’s work and agreed that gentiles did not need to follow Jewish law to be saved. The number of people having experienced cultural diversity in the church was small at that time, but their witness was powerful when they shared their experience. The outcome of the discussion led to the preaching of the Gospel freely to the gentiles. In view of the early church incidents, Kendagor asserts: What we see here is a slow process of learning by the Church and yet God chose to work with them with patience. The lesson for us is that it takes teaching and educating the believers to accept any change. The learning can be a slow process and it is important for the leadership of the Church, during the educating period, to remain deliberately and patient in moving the Church along. (Kendagor 2007, 98) [ Page ] 76 Theological struggle and conversation concerning the place of gentiles within the church developed around the election of the initial seven deacons (Acts 6), as well as the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), leading to acceptance of gentiles of different cultures. Discussion was extended as the church’s history unfolded, with various incidents provoking not only theological conflict but also conversation that eventually benefited the kingdom of God. Through discussion and conversation when the church faced challenges from heresy, Christian doctrines were clarified, strengthened and confirmed. Here are some notable incidents. Formation of the Chalcedonian Creed (AD 451) The Fourth Ecumenical Council was called in AD 451 by the Emperor Marcian (AD 396-457; pope from AD 450) and convened at Chalcedon (Schaff (1931, 29-34). The council was called in reaction to doctrinal confusion in the Eastern Church in the wake of the Council of Ephesus (AD 431) at which teaching by Nestorius, Archbishop of Constantinople (ca. AD386-ca.45O) had been condemned. The intervening two decades had produced a range of different Christological perspectives. In response, the Council of Chalcedon was convened to open conversation in order to seek resolution. Five hundred bishops from the Eastern Church and papal representatives attended. In the first round of conversation, delegates did not consider drafting a new creed, agreeing merely to accept as authoritative only the Nicene Creed, the Tome (written by Leo the Great; ca. AD 400-461 ; pope from AD 440) and the reply written earlier to Nestorius. Nevertheless, in ensuing rounds of discussion the emergence of [ Page ] 77 profound disagreements made clear the need for the Church to draft a creed with a clear interpretation of increasingly detailed elements of Christology. After much conversation, the Council drafted a creed to address the controverted tenets. The Chalcedonian Creed was the apologetical outcome that arose after rounds of conversation, clarification and discussion between delegates that led to refutation of theological heresy. The creed eventually strengthened Christian belief (Schaff 1931,29-34). Formation of Heidelberg Catechism (AD 1563) The formation of the Heidelberg Catechism resulted from conversations in the mid-Sixteenth Century between Lutheran and Reformed theologians in Germany’s Palatine region (Schaff (1931, 529-535). The Palatinate was unusual in that both Lutheran and Reformed congregations enjoyed official support. The issue at question was the extent to which Jesus is present in Holy Communion. The Lutherans considered there to be some real presence of Christ’s body and blood in the bread and cup, whereas the Reformed theologians argued that the bread and the cup were signs and seals of Christ’s work, but Jesus’ presence was limited to a memorial of His death. To settle the conflict, the Elector Frederick III (AD 1515-1576; Duke AD 1557-1559; Elector AD 1559-1576) invited professors at the University of Heidelberg to study the issues. Through rounds of conversation and discussion, they drafted a set of questions and answers, labeled a “catechism” (meaning “Christian instruction”), for use in school, church and pulpit. Frederick was actively involved in the process. When the catechism was [ Page ] 78 completed, Frederick laid it before a synod of the superintendents of the Palatinate in December 1562. After further discussion and examination by the superintendents, the catechism was adopted at a meeting in Heidelberg in January 1563 (Schaff 1931, 529-535). The 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference Another example of the positive impact of selfless conversation was the Edinburgh Missionary Conference. Christianity, as Gonzalez admits, had come to be regarded as an almost entirely western religion. Churches from different denominations undertook mission in their own ways, in varying contexts, according to their own understanding of what it meant to be Christian (Gonzalez 1985, 321). There was little conversation among them. Dowley claims that when Christianity encountered new and different cultures, missionaries often lacked cultural sensitivity. Further, so many denominations working without any efforts to coordinate their efforts proved to be a "major hindrance to mission in the Third World" (Dowley 1987, 625). So various leaders decided to call a conference to align their plans. Leung (1998, 334) claims that twelve hundred representatives from major Protestant denominations in different countries convened a conference at Edinburgh, Scotland in AD 1910 to engage in ten days of conversation and consultation. The conference, focused on cooperative mission work, led to the birth of the ecumenical movement for Christian unity. The chairperson, John R. Mott (AD 1865-1955), confirmed the main goal of the church should be to preach [ Page ] 79 in nations where people had not yet believed Jesus Christ and argued that his era was the prime time to practice the mission. Denominations all over the world increasingly cooperated, more clearly focusing resources in order to fulfill the Great Commission. Another outcome of the conference was a 250-page report: "The Decisive Hour of Christian Missions" (Leung 1998, 334). Other results of self-emptying conversation included formation of a Continuation Committee to implement the conference’s decisions. The conference paved the way for more conversation between denominations at similar meetings in the future. Eventually the movement initiated in Edinburgh led to formation of the International Missionary Council. Gonzalez claims the 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference "was the most important forerunner of the modern ecumenical movement" (Gonzalez 1985, 332). Without conversation, churches were isolated in their own mission undertakings. After the conference, the global mission work began a new era and method of cooperation. The Second Vatican Council (AD 1962-1965) Another example of the positive impact of self-emptying conversation is the Second Vatican Council (AD 1962-1965; the Twenty-first Ecumenical Council). It addresses the relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the modern world. Dowley claims that the conclusion of the Second World War brought the age of Western colonialism and political imperialism to an end and marked the beginning of the "liberation of new nations" (Dowley 1987, 629). Pope John XXIII (AD 1881-1963; pope from 1958) knew that to "a degree the [ Page ] 80 church had cut itself off from communication with the world at large. His great task would be to restore that lost communication" (Gonzalez 1985, 351). Despite knowing that conversation among those in high positions in the church could be difficult, since not all shared a common perception that the church’s situation was indeed problematic, the pope called an ecumenical council, which he convened at the Vatican Palace on October 11, 1962. Pope John actively fostered the council’s agenda for change. Rather than merely reaffirming traditional Catholic doctrine and practice, he aimed to engage the church in a more understanding and effective role in a world marked by poverty and injustice. The church should become more compassionate and discerning in its efforts to alleviate poverty and establish social justice, rather than merely displaying self- righteousness condemnation. His successor, Pope Paul VI (AD 1897-1978; pope from 1963), continued the council, aiming to "build a bridge between the Church and the modern world" (Gonzalez 1987, 352). After many rounds of conversation and debate, the church formulated The Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World, which effectively opened the Roman Catholic Church to some of the positive aspects of modernity. One of the biggest changes in the church was the council’s encouragement of the wide dissemination and study of the Bible in vernacular languages. Dowley claims that the council led to the Roman Catholic Church’s collaboration with the United Bible Societies in over one hundred projects of biblical translation and in radio broadcasting (Dowley 1987, 632). This reversed a one hundred and thirty- six year-old policy set in place by Pope Pius VIII (1761-1830; pope from 1829). [ Page ] 81 The Council also agreed upon the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.” Among its provisions was the adoption of liturgy in local languages, opening worship to the modern world where such use of ordinary language was standard. Gonzalez uses the term "religious freedom" to describe how the Church realized its need to respect the rights of individuals and religious groups "to organize according to their own principles as long as the just requirements of public order are not violated" (Gonzalez 1985, 354). Conversations and discussions in the council opened a new epoch of the Roman Catholic Church’s history. Gonzalez claims that a ripple effect from the council was the election of Pope John Paul II (AD 1920-2005; pope from 1978) in 1978, the first non-Italian pope since the Sixteenth Century. Gonzalez argues that the church adopted a more progressive stance, becoming much more involved with social issues, such as justice (Gonzalez 1985, 355). The Roman Catholic Church’s capacity to resonate with modern changes in society was a result of the many rounds of structured, self- emptying conversation centred on others’ needs undertaken at the Second Vatican Council. Chapter Summary This chapter provided a theological rationale for Kenotic Conversation. It argues how KC can bring different people together and enhance their relationship with God, a relationship broken by sin. Jesus Christ was the kenotic God. He self- emptied Himself by giving up His right and His environment of glory in Heaven that He shared with the Father (Phil. 2:6). He came down from Heaven and [ Page ] 82 stepped in the human world. In order effectively to step into the human world, Christ was "made in human likeness" (v.7c) so that He could converse directly (face-to-face) with people. When Christ conversed with people, He "humbled himself' (Phil. 2:8b) out of concern for others' needs, conversing with them at their point of need. This chapter explored Jesus' form of structured, mutual, and in-person conversation with people. The Apostolic church, seeking to display the same attitude as Christ (Phil. 2:5), resembled Christ’s reaching out to people by adopting His KC in structured, mutual and in-person ways. The outcome of KC was discussed both in terms of examples from the Book of Acts and select instances from Christian history. As KC proved effective in the Bible, as well as those biblical principles’ proving their worth in the history of the Christian church, it is reasonable to suppose that it could also work in the Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church because the Word of God always applies to people and it can never be abolished (Mark 13:31). The next chapter will present a literature review. [ Page ] 83 [ Page ] 84 CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW The theological rationale presented in Chapter 2 argued that Kenotic Conversation was God's special way to communicate with people. KC was demonstrated by the kenotic Jesus Christ, God the Son. The Apostolic church followed Jesus' example, practising KC as it handled administrative matters. These biblical examples gave insight into how KC might help enhance understanding and resolve conflict among people of different cultures, social classes and ethnicities. This current chapter will build upon that study through an extensive examination of other peer-reviewed studies. It will discuss: understanding conversation per se; Kenotic Conversation; concerns of applying KC in designing the present project; benefits of applying KC to resolve conflict and empower the future generation in order to solve the challenges in MCPC. A summary will conclude the chapter. What is Conversation? Conversation is common activity in all human societies. It happens every day anywhere in the world, a process through which people express themselves and receive messages from others. Conversation connects one to another. A key reason that I adopted conversation as a channel in my project was to improve trust [ Page ] 85 in relationships among the participants, specifically the leaders from the older Cantonese generation and the members of the younger English generation at the Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC). I undertook the project because of MCPC’s needs, as discussed in Chapter 1: Introduction. According to Yankelovich, conversation served two main purposes: "to strengthen personal relationships and to solve problems" (Yankelovich 2001, 12). He claims that the second crucial purpose is becoming increasingly important; he argues that people today more than ever need better mutual understanding as they face problems than they did in the past. Schirmer, a research professor and project director at the University of Oslo, confirmed the powerful potential of conversation for conflict resolution (Schirmer 2007, 9). Artfully-organized conversations among those who are socially and ideologically dissimilar may serve as a surprisingly simple but not insignificant approach to conflict resolution, particularly if such conversations can create a frank but respectful space for listening to others. Writing of her experience as a peacemaker in Colombia, South America, Schirmer relates her involvement in facilitating conversation in order to bring peace between parties in a complicated, long-term internal social conflict. She elaborated how face-to-face conversation can be a constructive and interactive learning process for all parties. After many preparatory discussions with officers and civilians, she set rules for the ensuing conversations. These required each participant to listen to and respect others’ experiences and opinions, and emphasized how listening does not imply agreement to or adoption of a different viewpoint. These rules allowed [ Page ] 86 participants to view the conflict through different experiences and perspectives. This allowed them to avoid disputing with each other. Eventually they were able to analyze the conflict more objectively, so that they could formulate some possible solutions. The results of this study led Schirmer to believe that listening with a respectful and nonjudgemental perspective leads to the transformation of attitudes and social behaviour. She writes that these conversations served as a kind of ethnographic education for all parties, encouraging them to overcome initial predispositions and prejudices. This permitted them to see to the ‘other’ as a legitimate and ultimately helpful participant in dialogue about the future of peace (Schirmer 2007, 9). Schirmer's study confirms how conversation can serve as an ice-breaker which leads to lower mutual hostility, further conversation and the hope of finding solutions in conflict. Conversation connects people in different sectors. As I prepared material for the discussion sessions, I anticipated conversation would prove to be a means to improve relationships among the project participants. Definition of Conversation According to the online version of the Merriam- Webster Dictionary, conversation is "an informal talk involving two people or a small group of people" (Merriam-Webster 2015, 1). According to The English Dictionary, conversation is "talk between two or more people in which thoughts, feelings and ideas are expressed, questions are asked and answered, or news and information is exchanged" (The English Dictionary 2015, 1). This implies conversation [ Page ] 87 necessarily consists of sharing between people. It involves multiple human senses and body parts in the process of conversation, such as the mouth to talk, ears to listen and the brain to think. Barnhart, an American lexicographer, states that the English word "conversation" is borrowed from the old French word, conversation, which means "a living together" and "a manner of behaving." The related verb in French converser means "to live with" (Barnhart 1988, 216). This applies to the current meaning of interpersonal conversation because it describes how people connect and relate to one another. In Chapter 1,1 mentioned that Isaacs claims the roots of conversation means "to turn together (con verser)'. You take turns speaking" (Isaacs 1999, 37). He argues that conversation promotes relationship because conversation participants must turn toward each other, both literally and metaphorically. In conversation, participants should behave with respect for each other in order to converse in an orderly manner. The above study shows that conversation is orderly talk between two or more people. It involves the use of different human senses in which the sharing of information and emotion is possible. As a result of conversation, relationship is promoted. Concerning the present study, people in MCPC are not "living together," as Barnhart (1988, 216) defined, but they do meet regularly on a weekly basis during Sunday services and Sunday School classes. Besides these, MCPC has different activities, such as fellowships, cell groups, sports exercises, workshops, trainings, business meetings and prayer meetings on weekdays. Church people meet with each other and talk to each other on different occasions as if they are living together. They are not physically living together but their emotional and [ Page ] 88 relationship ties are vitally connected. Indeed, the MCPC vision statement emphasizes that the church is akin to a family. As there are various ministries and needs in the church, people have to talk on different scales in order to make ministries go smoothly The scale may range from involving two people or a small group or committee to the whole church’s annual congregational meeting,. Without conversations, people do not know one another and collaboration is impossible. No single person, even a senior pastor, can achieve all of the church’s work. Church people build each other up in the Body of Christ through conversation in order to do the work entrusted to them by the Lord. Conversation is a must in MCPC because it builds relationships among people. Harkins claims conversation can draw people together. "Conversations are the medium through which we build relationships, make connections, develop understanding, and work and live together" (Harkins 1999, 6). Components of Conversation Authors employ different terms when referring to conversation. Some use the term "communication" (Kraft 1991, 59-60), others use "dialogue" (Bohm 1996, 17; Isaac 1999, 19). However, in essence, each talks about direct, face-to- face conversations among people. A single person cannot achieve this social activity. Vengel described conversation as a "daily expression and exchange of individual opinions" (Vengel 2010, 2). He argues conversation as a mutual interactive flow of opinions between people. In ''Intercultural Communication," Samovar, Porter and McDaniel list eight components of conversation: [ Page ] 89 1) Sender: The one who originates the message to other people. 2) Message: The content that the sender will share and wants to be understood. 3) Channel: The means of conveying the message from the sender to the receiver. 4) Receiver: The recipient of the message to interpret its meaning. 5) Response: The reciprocal action taken by the receiver to the interpreted meaning of the message. 6) Feedback: This allows people to evaluate the effectiveness of the message. 7) Environment: The physical surrounding where the conversation is taking place. 8) Noise: Noise has different forms of interferences or distractions which hinder the conversation, such as physical noise, like a squeaky electric fan, the metaphorical, psychological noise of personal worries or anxiety, and semantic noise, created by the use of jargon and slang (Samovar, et al 2009, 8-9). These eight components of conversation served as a conceptual guide as I designed my conversation project. The conversation project involved participants. They carried dual roles as senders and receivers. They were responsible to express themselves and receive feedback and responses from other participants. The conversation channel in the project would be the verbal and nonverbal means [ Page ] 90 which participants listened to and observed in a mutually face-to-face manner. As far as minimizing interfering noises or distractions in conversations, I intentionally arranged a quiet time in weekday evenings when no other church activities were organized. Also I booked a room with which the participants were familiar where they could be relax and free to engage in conversation. Models of Conversation In light of this project’s purpose, to improve the relationship between people in MCPC through communication, questions concerning the model of conversation used in the project must be clarified. This section presents different models of conversation from which I would select the most workable option to employ in my project. There are three models of conservation, namely, linear, interactive and transactional. Linear Lasswell, an American political scientist who specialized in the analysis of propaganda, argued that conversation is a linear, unidirectional process in which a sender conveys a message to a receiver (Lasswell, 1948, 37-51). The latter passively absorbs the former's message. The linear model assumes the transmission of the message is straightforward from the sender to the receiver. It consists of five elements: sender, receiver, message, conveying channel and effect. Wood talks that Shannon and Weaver later refined this idea and applied it in the field of telecommunication by introducing the concept of noise. Noise is anything that interferes with the clarity of the message being conveyed. It distorts [ Page ] 91 the intended meaning causing misunderstanding (Wood 2011, 16). I have experience of this type of linear conversation, which was popular in Hong Kong among Chinese families of my generation. When I was a boy living in Hong Kong in 1960s, my five siblings and I had to listen to our parents, accepting and obeying without negotiation. This is also the model upon which radio and television broadcasting is based. Interactive The interactive model of conversation involves the receivers’ own feedback to the original message. Steinberg (2007, 55) claims that Schramm views communication as a circular process that the receiver’s feedback as a secondary message in response, flowing back to the original sender in acknowledgment of the primary message. Feedback helps to clarify misunderstandings in the conversation process. Interactive conversation considers the receiver as not merely mechanically receiving the message from the sender. Wood explains that feedback is an interaction in a circular loop, moving in a unidirectional manner from sender to receiver, to which the receiver then reacts to the sender, who then responds to the receiver, creating a cycle. She argues that feedback from the original receiver is the prerequisite of interactive conversation, allowing both sender and receiver to participate actively in the process (Wood 2011, 16-17). This interactive conversation happened between my father and me when I was growing up as a young adult of about twenty, studying at a university in Hong Kong. Only in a polite and respectful manner would I would dare to ask [ Page ] 92 him the meaning of his message. It may seem strange in Western culture today but it was my genuine experience in the old days. This behaviour in conversation was an expression of Xiao (孝). It displays filial piety to people of higher status like parents in family in Chinese culture. Nevertheless, I enjoyed that interactive conversation allowed me to express my thoughts and feelings in return to my father. Transactional Both linear and interactive conversation are insufficient to describe people's conversations in many real life situations. Wood (2011, 17-18) cited Bamlund’s 1970 work, in which Bamland argues that the transactional model of conversation describes how the roles of senders and receivers can change, reversing during the conversation process. The original senders will become receivers and the original receivers will become senders. Wood further explains that this is a result of the potential dynamism of the conversation process. Their roles change over time because of information raised during the conversation. The receiver provides feedback and the original sender responds to it. This changing of roles is continuous, as conversation is a constantly-evolving process. People are actively involved in a transactional conversation, perceiving each other mutually. According to the transaction flow of a message exchange, both sender and receiver adjust the message. These adjustments not only clarify but may lead to the emergence of new messages. These, in turn, shift the conversation’s content and the roles of sender and receiver (Wood 2011, 17-18). Transactional [ Page ] 93 conversation increased between my father and me when I was working after graduation. He became more willing listen to me and he considered my feedback and response. His response, in return, would encourage me to speak more to him about myself. I enjoyed the conversation as it became more friend-like than parental. Nevertheless, I still respected him because he was my father. As a corollary of transactional conversation, Kincaid developed the notion of convergence conversation. He argues that conversation involves multiplying loops of information, feedback, networks and purpose among the participants. Effective feedback in conversation creates convergence, resulting in a better mutual understanding of each other. This mutual understanding becomes "a prerequisite for collective action and the achievement of other social goals" (Kincaid 1985,90-91). Both transaction and convergence models of conversation reflect the majority of real life situations among people. As mentioned earlier, conversation should be in a mutual manner, with direct, face-to-face involvement. My conversation project involved discussion by participants of topics such as communication, conflict resolution and empowerment. It required participants to listen to others mutually and be expressive in conversation, as they realize they can be both senders and receivers, depending on the flow of the conversation by means of inquiries and replies. In order to keep conversations in focus and the process going in a proper manner, such as participants taking turns to speak, the conversations were structured with some rules participants needed to follow, such as being respectful to others. These rules will be discussed in Chapter 4: [ Page ] 94 Methodology. Conversations in this project were structured, mutual and in- person. 1 designed the project so the participants could freely share their views and ideas through conversations following an orderly framework. Kenotic Conversation is an Effective Way of Conversation In designing the conversation in my project, I did not consider linear conversation because first generation Cantonese speaking leaders would speak linearly to the second generation English speaking members without receiving the latter's feedback and response. It would not be conversation but instruction. This parental style of conversation would not be meaningful. Also, the interactive way of conversation was not suitable to my project although it allowed feedback and response from the receivers. It was because this circular loop of unidirectional conversation is not fruitful since it is the sender(s) who still dictate the general line of conversation. The role of the receivers would be just to give feedback. I adopted the transactional way of conversation because it allowed participants to be both senders and receivers in the process of KC. They could express themselves as senders, then switch roles, listening as receivers. This approach to conversation could effectively facilitate the exchange of messages among the group. Thus conversation partners could better understand each other and more likely improve their relationship. [ Page ] 95 Features Now I will elaborate the features of KC as a form of transactional conversation. KC can be an effective way of conversation because it is a receptor- oriented approach to conversation with three features: self-emptying, stepping in and concern for others. Self-Emptying First feature of KC is that it is self-emptying. If one wants to have an effective conversation, Isaacs regards suspension of self-interest to be a key. First, suspension of our own opinions about others may provide both parties new insight, perspective and mutual understanding. He argues that this suspension entails relaxing our grip on the sense of certainty with which we habitually see the world. Isaacs muses that it is often considered unsafe to admit "I don't know" because our society expects us to have answers to every problem. He argues that the power of conversation emerges from cultivation of questions to which all the conversation partners do not have answers, opening a way for all to explore the issues. Second, suspension can result in seeing people in a different light. Even though they may see the same thing, people with different perspectives often hold different views of reality. Suspension of self-interest helps us “put on new glasses” to perceive reality differently. Isaacs argues that because of suspension, "you can learn to see things that were there all the time but overlooked by you" (Isaacs 1999, 152). [ Page ] 96 The self-emptying in KC requires us to step out of our own frames of reference, such as existing beliefs, values and assumptions. Law uses the analogy of the Tower of Babel to describe how we are often defined by our own tower of ethnocentrism. He asserts that the narrowing of differences requires mutual effort, a willingness to come "down from our Tower of Babel" (Law 1996, 46). He argues that cultural ego causes people to become defensive and judgemental when they perceive differences as a threat to themselves. They will negatively evaluate and stereotype others without recognizing their own uniqueness. In order to have effective conversation, the self-emptying in KC forces us to climb down from our own tower of ego and prepare to meet others on ground level with equal and respectful attitudes. We have to be aware of our own culture so we can temporarily empty ourselves of our own culture during conversation. Self- emptying does not require we abandon our own culture and identity, but merely to set them aside temporarily for the purpose of stepping into the frame of reference of others in order to improve communication. Lane suggests we should be culturally sensitive regarding ourselves as learners and be patient to listen to another's point of view without trying to prove our culture is the best (Lane 2002, 172). We should not judge others by using our own cultural rules, remembering that our perception of the world is not the only standard and thus universally correct. We do not have the right to dismiss out of hand differing views. Instead, each person deserves to be respected and understood. We must appreciate differences as opportunities. It is necessary for us [ Page ] 97 to humble ourselves to listen to others first, instead of dominating the conversation. Stepping In In addition to our self-emptying from ethnocentrism, we are required by KC to step into the world of others in a culturally sensitive manner, not only suspending our cultural pride and judgement but showing humility in conversation with people who differ from us. I attended a two-day workshop conducted by Eric Law, "Leadership in a Diverse Changing World, " held at Knox College, Toronto in 2009. He argues that techniques for respectful listening and mutual invitation are required to step into conversation with others. Listening in a respectful manner means not interrupting others' speech. Showing such respect decreased the perceived threat to conversation partners. Mutual invitation between participants could encourage participation and inspire mutual understanding in conversation. Law also asserts that before knowing about another's culture, people first have to know their own culture. This self-awareness of differences facilitates conversation; we become aware of the cultural elements from which we need to distance ourselves. We then are able to appreciate differences as opportunities (Law 2009, handwritten lecture notes). Stewart and Bennett argue that empathy is a key to stepping into others’ lives in conversation. It can help people perceive other people’s different feelings and thoughts aboutp the world. Empathy involves using our imagination to move [ Page ] 98 us into the experience of others (Stewart and Bennett 1991, 152). It shows our interest to others, conveying that we actually do want to step into their world and synchronize with their emotion and feelings. LeBaron claims that people in conversation should show dynamic engagement "in which we make space for another in our hearts and open our minds to receive what is said" (LeBaron 2003, XIII). She argues people following this mode of conversation can provide a way to reduce conflict, thus improving relationships anpd deepening mutual understanding among conversation participants. She believes that "there will be no cultural conflict if we move beyond our ethnocentric views and blind spots" (LeBaron 2003, XI-XII; emphasis added). We should be aware of our own culture, in addition to cultures we intend to step into, so we may converse with others with a mind open to listening and perceiving others. Wilson argues that conversation occurs when "two people or groups [are] turning toward each other, using inquiry and directness to pull out each other's reality on the way to reaching common ground" (Wilson 2009, 4). He asserts that conversation requires stepping into another’s world, so we can understand them and draw them into a shared and mutual, thus more likely genuine, conversation. He suggests that we begin to converse only when we step into our conversation partner’s world, seeing and feeling their reality, then reflecting back to them what we understand. The purpose of stepping into another's world is to pull their reality into our reality. We open ourselves and invite them into our world, helping them to see our reality and asking them to reflect to us what they understand. This will [ Page ] 99 likely result in all parties’ sharing a single view on a bigger reality. We thus bring two worlds together by finding common ground and identifying whatever possible avenues for further cooperation that emerge from this augmented sense of reality. This new sense of reality prompts within us a drive to make smart decisions that will fit well with the purposes of our shared work. According to Wilson, this common decision-making conversation will lead to high-performing behaviour as people begin not only to see others’ needs but to understand the implications of those needs. This creates an intelligent energy, an energy that fosters self- emptying behaviour within a collaborative and synergized atmosphere. This chain reaction leads to high-performing behaviour that will produce sustained results which eventually benefit an organization in the long run. He emphasizes “the one feeling that is most crucial to the success of any organization: the feeling of trust" (Wilson 2009, 34). Wilson promotes the importance of stepping into another's world as crucial to understanding that world and caring for another person’s feelings. This self-emptying stepping in will encourage us to find commonality and promote collaboration. Concern for Others In addition to self-emptying and stepping in another’s world, KC’s third feature is concern for others' needs, thus starting the conversation from where they are. This is a receptor-oriented approach that adopts others’ interests as the top priority. Law employs the analogy of an iceberg to typify conversation. Both sides’ platform, what they want to share, is like the tip of the iceberg; their own [ Page ] 100 culture is akin to the iceberg’s massive submerged portion (Law 2002, 36-37). When I attended his two-day workshop in 2009 held by the Knox College, he emphasizes the need to help the powerless speak and prepare the powerful to listen. We need to invite someone else to speak their own views so that we can learn from them through our respectful listening (Law 2009, handwritten lecture notes). Harkins claims an effective conversation is "an interaction between two or more people that progresses from shared feelings, beliefs, and ideas to an exchange of wants and needs to clear action steps and mutual commitments" (Harkins 1999, 5). His focus is on the needs of others in conversation. Showing concern for others’ needs helps make connections with people so they feel free to share their feelings and beliefs, as well as express their own wants and needs. This encourages honest conversation by uncovering concealed issues or problems. It promotes brainstorming in search of creative and acceptable solutions to needs expressed by both sides. Then the conversation will lead to mutually agreed commitments and move into a clear and explicit action plan toward the goal. He argues that a relaxed and comfortable environment would help to lower the barriers of fear and mistrust, and enhance the expression of wants and needs, as well as demonstrating positive conversation attributes, such as openness, honesty, awareness and mutual connection. From these would emerge "deep empathy and understanding, a willingness to see other points of view, and a trustful rapport leading to clear commitment of effort and action" (Harkins 1999, 8). [ Page ] 101 Lasley argues that people need to be understood. He believes that awareness and concern for others’ needs can help people communicate honestly and openly. When people are understood at a deep level, they reciprocate by seeking to meet others’ needs. Awareness of others’ needs will improve conversational effectiveness through knowing each other better, which facilitates trust (Lasley 2006, 19-20). Respect is another key way to express concern for others. Its root meaning is "to look again" (Isaac 1999, 150). Isaacs claims that another personal need is to be respected. Respect is a sense of honouring that "where once we saw one aspect of a person, we look again and realize how much of them we had missed" (Isaacs 1999, 151). When we respect others in conversation, we accept that they have something to teach us. Concern for others with respect makes space for people to express freely their needs and interests. Showing concern means we will not ignore their different voices and perspectives. In designing my conversation project, I specifically took advice from Harkins’ call to be concerned for the participants’ needs by designing a relaxed and comfortable environment in which participants could be free to express themselves and share their wants and needs. Also I designed conversation rules, addressing the need to be respectful in conversation sessions, disregarding differences in age, gender, culture and language. [ Page ] 102 Formats Gudykunst argues that face-to-face conversation is effective when "we are able to minimize misunderstandings" (Gudykunst 2004, 28). Conversations in this project were conducted in a structured, in-person and mutual format. It was a focused, direct, face-to-face and interactive method of conversation. It allowed participants to gain immediate clarification about others' views and meaning, thereby deepening connections with others. Structured Conversation in the project was not arbitrary or without purpose. It aimed to improve trust in relationships among the participants, namely leaders from the older Cantonese generation and members of the younger English generation at Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC). This project arose from MCPC’s needs, discussed in Chapter 1. Bohm observes that people in a new conversation group "generally have a way of not directly facing anything. They talk around things, avoiding the difficulties" (Bohm 2004, 20). So I designed structure into the conversation sessions. A facilitator provided structure by keeping the conversation focused on the topic, without sidetracks. Stanfield argues it is necessary to have a facilitator, so participants can be led to share opinions and experience freely in a focused and orderly way. Structure works well at those critical moments when problems arise. Its rational objective is "to get everyone's mind in the same arena by discussing the origin and roots of the problem" (Stanfield 2000, 71). This structured way of conversation in order to [ Page ] 103 address problems fits MCPC’s challenges. Participants were guided in the session by a facilitator, namely me, who maintained focus on the topic. Isaacs claims the root of the word "conversation" meaning "to turn together (con verser): You take turns speaking" (Isaacs 1999, 37). He asserts conversation should be in an orderly manner. Rogers and Steinfatt share a similar view that a structured way of turn-taking is necessary in conversation, particularly when people do not share a common culture. They may misunderstand each other's subtle clues regarding when one should speak, which will lead to people’s speaking at the same time or their conversation may be interrupted by awkward silences. People may feel uncomfortable and out of synch (Rogers and Steinfatt 1999, 152). As my project conversation involved participants from a Chinese cultured first generation and a Canadian cultured second generation, it was necessary to design a method of structured conversation that regulated the taking of turns. Doing this reduced confusion, misunderstanding and embarrassment among participants. Further, everyone conversed in English. As English was not their first language, Chinese cultured participants required occasional short pauses to form their responses. This little delay was at times vaguely disconcerting to the English speaking participants. Structured conversation must be guided by a facilitator, who is responsible to maintain the process in an open, focused and serious manner. Each participant has the right to speak their own opinions. Isaacs refers to this as "voicing," the revealing of our genuine self (Isaacs 1999, 159). It is not repeating what others say but a true expression of our own voice. Many people feel pressured, both by [ Page ] 104 their own feelings and by the group context, to speak of their own true selves. Isaacs encourages that speaking one's voice, revealing one's thought, contributes positively to promoting change (Isaacs 1999, 165). Structured conversation protects the right of voicing, facilitating revelation of participants' perspectives from their genuine experience. It may lead to some possible resolution of the problems or issues. As the facilitator of the project’s conversations, I guided their discussion by asking them questions in two categories: “how” and “what.” The “how” questions sought to uncover the ways in which the participants perceive and interpret the phenomenon in MCPC in their own experience. The “what” questions aimed to elicit resolution, bringing the group’s conversation around to devising possible solution for the future. In-Person Conversation with personal presence is regarded as an effective way of conversation. In 'The Human Moment at Work, " Hallowell emphasizes the importance of being in-person for face-to-face conversation. He muses that conversation is a human moment. The human moment has two prerequisites: people's physical presence, and their emotional and intellectual attention...To make the human moment work, you have to...focus on the person you are with. Usually when you do that, the other person will feel the energy and respond in kind....The positive effects of a human moment can last long after the people involved have said goodbye and walked away. People begin to think in new and creative ways; mental activity is stimulated. (Hallowell 1999, 3-4) [ Page ] 105 Personal involvement will make conversation become fruitful. He argues the need of involving different personal dimensions, such as physical, emotional and intellectual presence, which will produce a positive outcome. Bennett (1998, 8, 102) argues that personal face-to-face conversation is a better way of communication between people with different cultures. People from Western culture, such as North Americans, live in a low context culture in which they use a direct, explicit style of using verbal symbols in communication that are more or less independent of the context. People from Eastern culture, such as Chinese and Japanese, live in a high context culture, resulting in communication that is highly contextualized. They rely more on context, using nonverbal symbols, such as gestures or facial expression, rather than just trusting words. Bennett argues that an in-person conversation between people of different cultures is effective because all participants can listen and observe directly, perceiving that they themselves are being perceived by others. They see themselves engaged in conversation and capable of giving and receiving feedback (Bennett 1998, 8-9, 13-18). Samovar, Porter and McDaniel share the view that a low context communication style is explicit and verbal, while a high context communication style is implicit and nonverbal. People with different communication cultures anticipate differently. People in high context cultures anticipate that their conversation partners will understand their "unspoken feelings, implicit gestures, and environmental clues" (Samovar, et al 2009, 269). Wilson emphasizes that in-person conversation effectively provides inquiry and directness when two people or groups turn toward each other. When [ Page ] 106 one is willing to care about another's reality, taking the initiative to open oneself and step into another's world, this in-person presence produces a friendly atmosphere that promotes understanding. Note that stepping into this person's world does not mean that you're agreeing with them or admitting that you have wronged them. What it does mean is that you are helping them feel understood rather than spending your energy justifying your words and actions. It is the St. Francis of Assisi principle of seeking first to understand, then to be understood. (Wilson, 2009, 72) This project adopts an in-person way of conversation, partly because over many long years MCPC’s Cantonese speaking and English speaking congregations have seldom gotten together for fellowship and ministry collaboration, except for Easter and Christmas joint services. Each congregation pursues their own goals, seldom conversing with the other. I designed the project’s in-person way of conversation so that participants from both parties could talk, listen and see each other directly during conversation sessions. Doing this provided opportunities for to them to learn taking the initiative to reach out to others. In-person conversation requires participants' total bodily participation. More than providing physical presence, in-person conversation involves other personal dimensions, such as intellectual and emotional presence. Details will be discussed in the next section. [ Page ] 107 Mutual Mutual conversation is interaction between two or more people in which "people... talk directly to one another" (Bohm 2004, 18). It is a reciprocal way of speaking and responding among people in conversation. Wilson argues mutuality in conversation occurs when people are willing to open and share themselves, as well as encouraging others to respond similarly in return. Through mutual interaction, conversation parties come to a deeper understanding of themselves and their conversation partners. This, according to Wilson, is saying "I pictured in my mind's eye what it was like to be him [sic] in this situation" (Wilson 2009, 193). It facilitates building relationship. More than verbal communication, mutuality in conversation is, according to Isaacs, to "think together in relationship. Thinking together implies that you no longer take your own position as final. You relax your grip on certainty and listen to the possibilities that result simply from being in a relationship with others" (Isaacs 1999, 19). He argues that this mutuality of togetherness in conversation will change the way people see one another. The intention of conversation is to enhance understanding through thinking together in an open manner, listening to others. It leads to building relationship, which will become a base for collaboration in future action. Wheatley defends a similar view of mutual togetherness of conversation. It "is a much older and more reliable way for humans to think together" (Wheatley 2009, 28). She argues that the mutual connection of thinking together allows people to learn from each other's [ Page ] 108 experience and interpretation, and eventually will lead to wiser decisions of what actions to take. Dixon, in "The Hallways of Learning," argues that mutual conversation is more effective than other ways because people can create shared experiences directly (Dixon 1997, 32). People gain immediate clarification through inquiries during mutual conversation. Bennett (1998, 17) argues that mutuality of conversation involves both verbal language and nonverbal behaviour. He claims speech (words symbolizing categories of phenomena) is digital while nonverbal behaviour (voice, gesture and eye contact) is analog. Mutuality represents phenomena by creating context, which is experienced directly. He argues that participants from different cultures should pay close attention to nonverbal cues (Bennett 1998, 17). My project involved participants of Chinese culture, a high-context culture which conveys meaning with a "large emphasis on nonverbal codes," as well as participants of Canadian culture, a low-context one that conveys meanings through "explicit codes and usually via verbal communication" (Samovar, et al 2009, 268). Understanding nonverbal cues is necessary to extract meaning from conversations among people of different cultures. Benefitting from the literature, I designed the first conversation session to explore both Chinese and Canadian cultures. This let participants understand their own culture in addition to another, enhancing their awareness of differences in order to make conversation more effective. In subsequent sessions, I presented different patterns of communication and conflict resolution from Chinese and [ Page ] 109 Canadian cultures. To develop mutuality, it is beneficial to encourage participants to listen, reflect and give their own feedback so each participant understands another's views, leading to the discovery of how much they actually hold in common. Based on insights gleaned from the literature, I took note that achieving genuine conversation in a mutual manner requires both a relaxed atmosphere and a comfortable environment, so a safe, relaxed and pleasant seating arrangement was designed. In summary, conversation that is structured, in-person and mutual can be effective. These conversations were structured, guided by me as facilitator. They were kept on topic by following some basic rules to maintain order. Participants took turns speaking; no could speak when someone else did. The conversation was in-person. Participants were required to involve themselves totally, including their physical, mental and emotional presence. Conversation was mutual, participants’ being responsible not only to listen but also to provide feedback. This reciprocity and relating to one another made it possible for the participants to share their commonalities, such as common ground and common interests. In Powerful Conversations, Harkins argues that conversation can build trust and strengthen relationship (Harkins 1999, 13). Nevertheless, there are concerns that need to be addressed in order to make the conversations more effective with regard to my project. [ Page ] 110 Primary Concerns in Applying Kenotic Conversation In Intercultural Communication in Context, Martin and Nakayama claim that those who converse have two basic levels of concern. Primary concerns are more permanent in nature, such as their age, gender and ethnicity; secondary concerns are more changeable, such as their educational background, marital status and socioeconomic status (Martin and Nakayama 2007, 108). My project involves participants of different genders, languages, cultures and generations. Obviously, differences are not limited to these but they are the primary concerns related to conversation in MCPC. Gender and generation are inborn and immutable in nature. Mother language relates to the culture in which they were raised. These primary concerns need to be addressed in order to make conversation become effective. While others concerns, such as education, occupation and social status, may have some effect on conversation, these secondary concerns have not been considered in the project because they are inherently more changeable. Participants could change these secondary elements in life from time to time. Gender It is necessary, since both men and women participated, to explore the power of gender to impact conversation. Smith-Lovin and Brody, in their study found that in cross-gender conversation, men were more likely to interrupt women than men in conversation. Their findings also revealed that men were more likely to succeed at interrupting women than other men (Smith-Lovin and Brody 1989, [ Page ] 111 432). The study apparently showed that male is the dominant gender in conversation. However, different results emerged in some recent studies, such as Wright's "Gender and Language: Challenging the Stereotypes" (2002, 17-18) and Xu's "Gender Differences in Mixed-Sex Conversation" (2009, 33). Their studies suggest there is no convincing evidence to show women were less likely than men to interrupt conversations. Other factors could affect outcomes, such as age, culture, language ability, status, conversation topic, context and the study’s methodology. Neither could draw concrete conclusions on differences in conversation between genders. The interruption of conversation entails more factors that relate to the individual participants (Wright 2002; Xu 2009). Martin and Nakayama also argue that communication styles between men and women are more similar than they are different. They claim that "these stereotypes of gender differences persist maybe partly because of the stereotypical depictions of men and women in magazines, on television, and in movies" (Martin and Nakayama 2007, 172). In my project, gender difference remains a concern because of the possibility of gender inequality occurring in conversations. There are two groups of participants. Each group has a female participant. One is an elder in the Session. The other is a Canadian born second generation, who was raised and educated in Canada. She upholds Canadian values like freedom of belief and equality. Despite the absence of conclusive evidence of gender-based differences in conversation, I created some basic conversation rules to foster equality and mutual respect to each other, so all participants were equal and encouraged to feel free to say what they wanted in conversation. [ Page ] 112 Language "Language is a medium of communication" (Gudykunst 2004, 7). It is a commonly known channel to express people’s thinking, perspectives and experiences (Rogers and Steinfatt 1999; Bennett 1998). However, different languages have their different styles of expression, which often reflect the culture and thinking patterns of a particular language. Gudykunst argues that Eastern cultured people, such as the Chinese, have synthetic thinking, focusing on matters in their totality. They tend to speak indirectly and heavily rely on the context. People from Western cultures, such as Canadians, have linear, logical and analytical thinking, focusing on things in parts. They tend to speak directly and specifically to the parts (Gudykunst 2004, 199-202). Ideally, it would be best for people to make conversation by using their own mother language because they can fully express themselves without any language barriers. But if two people with different languages converse, both insisting on speaking their own mother languages, conversation will be ineffective even though they are communicating face-to-face. Gudykunst argues that if one of them is willing to adopt the other’s language, it will likely lead to more effective conversation. From Giles' 1973 study, Gudykunst extracts the idea that when people change their ways of speaking in order to accommodate others it impacts affect their communication behaviour. When linguistic difference is emphasized, divergence in speech increases; when people speak with speech patterns similar to the listeners', convergence in speech increased. This adaptation to each other's communication behaviours enhanced communication efficiency because receivers were more [ Page ] 113 likely to become close to speakers when communication unfolded using their own behaviour pattern (Gudykunst 2004, 266-267). Rogers and Steinfatt accept the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis, that "language influences thought" (Rogers and Steinfatt 1999, 136). The hypothesis may be stated radically, staking the claim that language largely determines how people think and perceive the reality, or it may be stated moderately, arguing that languages, thought and perceptions are interrelated, impacting each other. In designing this project, I decided that regardless of which form of the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis one adopts, the language of conversation is a key concern, related to participants’ thought and perception. In order to have effective KC, the language issue had to be resolved, taking into account Gudykunst's insights. I had to decide on a common language for effective conversation because half of the participants were English speaking and the other half were Cantonese speaking. This was not an absolute obligation, as English speakers understand some Cantonese because their parents were Cantonese speaking. Similarly, the Cantonese speakers understand English because they have worked in Canada for decades. By using a common language in the project a sense of similarity was created among participants, so convergence of closeness occurred instead of increasing divergence. To solve the linguistic difference among participants, I chose to use English as the language of conversation in light of the common proficiency in English of Cantonese and English participants. Further, using English required Cantonese speakers, first generation Chinese cultured leaders, to abandon their mother language in favour of English. This is an expression of leaders’ willingness to adopt the self- [ Page ] 114 emptying required by KC. They had to leave the language they were most comfortable speaking and step into the world of the English speakers. Other details of language considerations were discussed in the project limitations in Chapter 1. Culture The popularity of business trips and leisure travel brings people of different cultures into more frequent interaction than before. Increasing migration challenges people from different parts of the world to live together, as in the city of Toronto. Differences in culture need to be addressed if people want to have effective conversation. Samovar, Porter and McDaniel argue that the greater the cultural differences and the more language differences, the greater the miscommunication and conflict (Samovar, et al 2009, 18). When people see things with their own cultural perspectives and assumptions, they will use themselves as the standard for judgement. Yankelovich argues that a cultural blind spot is a barrier blocking us from becoming informed and understanding reality. He claims that a blind spot "is a set of deeply rooted but erroneous assumptions built into our culture's dominant model of knowledge" (Yankelovich 2001, 174-175). Gudykunst asserts that this ethnocentrism is unavoidable in human nature. He quotes Sumner's definition of ethnocentrism as "the view of things in which one's own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it" (Gudykunst 2004, 130). People tend to view their own group's internal values and ways of doing things are always superior to [ Page ] 115 that of any other group. Ethnocentrism negatively evaluates others instead of trying to understand them. This cultural bias negatively affects conversation between people of different cultures, leading people to assume that problems are created by others and not themselves. Livermore, in Cultural Intelligence, speaks of a cultural iceberg. The visible part above water is about ten percent of the total, artefacts, such as foods, dress, music and daily habits. The remaining ninety percent of a culture below water is invisible, the culture’s beliefs, values and assumptions (Livermore 2009, 81-83). People have to be aware of both their own culture and that of others. Stewart and Bennett assert that when we interact with people of different cultures, we should temporarily suspend our assumptions and beliefs, expanding our boundaries in order to narrow the cultural gap (Stewart and Bennett 1991, 152). Bennett, in Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication, warns that we are in danger of losing ourselves if we do not know ourselves well before beginning a conversational exchange (Bennett 1998, 210-211). We need to be aware of our own self-identity, cultural values, assumptions and beliefs in order to converse with others effectively. With regard to the cultural dimension of my project, I intentionally designed the first conversation session to focus on patterns within Chinese culture and Canadian culture. This allowed participants understand their own culture and the culture of their fellow participants, thereby minimizing the cultural stereotyping of those who differ from them. [ Page ] 116 Generation Conversation between people of different ages and generations happens everywhere, as between parents and children in families. Wiebe, in Bridging the Generations, argues the popularity of age-stratified activities in our society, "our work, school systems, recreational activities, and media culture - all seem to keep the young and the elders in their own world. And the church is not immune" (Wiebe 2001, 33). It is true in MCPC that intergenerational connections are rare. Our Sunday classes, fellowships and cell groups are stratified by age. With respect to generational differences, Gudykunst quotes a 1987 study by Barbato and Feezel that indicates more than half of jokes in English ridicule old people. He argues that those who stereotype aged people have a negative attitude towards people who are older than they are (Gudykunst 2004, 151). On the other hand, I have heard older people also express negative perceptions about younger people, such as regarding the latter as impolite and immature. These mutually negative views of different generations threaten healthy interpersonal relationships. Nevertheless, Wiebe suggests that a deadlock in which "young and old aren't close, [is] not because they don't like each other but because they simply don't know one another" (Wiebe 2001, 34). She points out that the lack of communication between generations is the reason. Having a common ground, like agreeing that everyone is made in the image of God, can stop stereotyping as people learn to know one another. The following studies suggest that conversation is possible between generations. In his study of "Intergenerational Communication," Bettes (2010, 17) [ Page ] 117 finds that the younger generation tended to increase self-disclosure if they saw that the conversation was beneficial to them, particularly when they perceived that the older generation possessed desirable knowledge, wisdom and experience. On the other hand, the older generation tended to find common interests with the younger generation (Bettes 2010, 19). The finding shows that conversation can serve as a bridge on which the traffic of connection between generations can move. Another of the study’s findings was that the younger generation felt uncomfortable talking to the older generation because they feared being judged by the older generation (Bettes 2010, 18). This finding highlighted the need for conversation with a nonjudgemental attitude in order to encourage intergenerational conversation. A major challenge to intergenerational conversation, according to Rendle, is getting generations to look beyond their own generational lens. Having conversation in which one sees another's needs and uniqueness may promote mutual understanding, bringing greater appreciation of intergenerational differences (Rendle 2008, 182). It is necessary for us to leave our own conversational frame of reference and go into another’s to facilitate talk between generations. Zhang and Hummert’s "Harmonies and Tensions In Chinese Intergenerational Communication" finds that conversation could relieve conflict between both young and old generations by honoring each other's autonomy, accepting and respecting each other (Zhang and Hummert 2001,230). This finding suggests both generations need to be accepted and respected in conversation. Another study by Zhang, "Family Communication Patterns and [ Page ] 118 Conflict Styles in Chinese Parent-Child Relationships," finds that the parenting styles of Chinese parents shifted from a pattern of demanding their children's conformity to a pattern of valuing conversation with them. It reflects the gradual change of Chinese culture from a highly hierarchical society to one promoting equality and freedom. Zhang explained that the shift occurred because Chinese young people were exposed to western ideologies of equality and independence due to the growing globalization of the economy. They preferred to be treated as equal by their parents (Zhang 2007, 123-124). The gradual shift of Chinese culture with its modernization may make conversation among Chinese generations more accessible in the future. Findings from the above studies revealed that cross-generational conversation is possible. Wiebe argues the benefits of such conversation, noting: "Elders have no wisdom unless they are asked to share it. Unless someone draws it out of them, it remains as hidden as the gold in an undiscovered mine" (Wiebe 2001, 172). Conversation is widely considered to be a means to connect people (Yankelovich 2001; Born 2008; Wilson 2009). My KC project involves participants in Boomer, Buster and Mosaic generations. Learning from the above concerns, 1 designed conversational rules, such as respect, to encourage participants to be genuinely at ease during conversations. Personal Dimensions of Kenotic Conversation Conversation is a natural human activity, involving people interacting with each other (Wheatley 2009, 33). The project conversations focus on people [ Page ] 119 developing the ability to engage in KC, as well as assessing its impact on them. The following paragraphs will discuss physical, intellectual, emotional and social dimensions of people in conversation. Physical Conversation is a mutual interactive activity between people in a particular setting. Wood underscores that a conversational setting’s environmental elements, such as space, light, time, quietness and even odors, affect how we feel, think and act, as well as the conversation’s outcome. She reveals that we feel more relaxed in rooms with comfortable chairs than in rooms with stiff, formal furniture (Wood 2011, 105). A relaxed, pleasant physical setting is necessary if people want genuine conversation. Harkins points out that a relaxing and comfortable environment may facilitate lowering the barriers of fear and mistrust. Such an environment may enhance the expression of wants and needs by demonstrating positive conversation attributes, such as openness and mutual connection. These help form "deep empathy and understanding, a willingness to see other points of view, and a trustful rapport leading to clear commitment of effort and action" (Harkins 1999, 8). In the process of conversation, verbal content is augmented significantly by nonverbal expressions, such as body language and one’s manner of speaking, in conveying a message in mutual in-person conversation, according to Rogers and Steinfatt. They regard nonverbal expression as largely unintentional and unconscious. They refer to Edward Hall, who described nonverbal expression "as [ Page ] 120 a hidden dimension or silent language" (Rogers and Steinfatt 1999, 161). Wilson shares a similar view on the importance of nonverbal cues. They are "meaning- makers" (Wilson 2009, 87), helping to amplify and clarify people's messages in conversation. Martin and Nakayama state that nonverbal expression conveys relational messages between people. It tells how we really feel about other people (Martin and Nakayama 2007, 256). All these tell us that observable nonverbal expressions reflect the true feelings of people during conversation. It is one reason why mutual, in-person conversations are an effective way of communication. Based on the readings, I designed a relaxed and pleasant environment for conversation. An appropriate time was chosen. I arranged the physical setting to facilitate conversation, taking into consideration the meeting space’s attributes, including lighting and seating arrangements. I arranged the seats in a way that all participants can listen clearly to what others are saying and see each other easily. I took handwritten notes, as far as possible, of both the verbal and nonverbal content of conversations. Neither audio nor video was recorded because participants did not agree to that request. Intellectual Direct, face-to-face conversation is an interactive way of information exchange involving people’s intellectual dimension. When people receive a message, they intuit its meaning based on their perceptions, previous experiences, circumstances or knowledge. [ Page ] 121 Stanfield, in The Art of Focused Conversation, introduces a structured form of conversation (Stanfield 2000, 17-18), the main features of which are laid out in this paragraph. A facilitator guides conversation, focusing on a specific topic based on their mutual interests. The facilitator helps the participants get together in a group to reflect by asking them four levels of questions, ranging from superficial to deeper levels of the topic. These four levels of questions trace the human thinking process of perception, response, judgement and decision. The first level of questioning separates facts from the participants' perceptions. Questions are objective, covering external realities and observable data of the topic. This ensures that participants are dealing with the same body of data, in all its aspects. The second level seeks participants' personal response to their perception at the previous level. The questions in this level are reflective, addressing participants' internal feelings, emotions and personal experiences as they relate to the data in the previous level. The third level seeks participants’ judgement, building on objective data and their feelings or the associations from the previous level. The questions in this level are interpretive, focusing on the meaning of the topic. They draw out the data’s significance for the group’s participants. Questions relate to layers of meaning, purpose, significance and implications. The fourth level elicits participants' resolution to make decisions and plan action relevant for the future. The questions allow participants to take the data from the previous levels and use it to make choices (Stanfield 2000, 17-18). Doing this helps the participants stay focused on the topic of conservation. The conversation is structured and guided systematically by different levels of [ Page ] 122 questions. Participants can build an objective ground, based on the facts, which Stanfield labels "directly observable data." He argues that "without work at the objective level, the group cannot be sure they are really talking about the same thing" (Stanfield 2000, 25-26). This process allows participants to continue the conversation at ease because it foregrounds facts instead of pointing fingers at others. A Chinese axiom says: "A good start is half-success." When participants are on the same page in terms of looking at, thinking about and discussing facts, they become more likely to maintain the conversation’s momentum, going on with the guidance of the facilitator. Some literature claims that listening is vital in face-to-face conversation because we need to hear in order to provide our mind with material to interpret. Isaacs argues listening opens a door for us to participate in the living world beyond our own world. It allows us to connect with others and to develop understanding. Listening begins with being aware of our thoughts about what our conversation partners say, tying those thoughts to the range of feelings we remember or have experienced (Isaacs 1999, 92-97). As part of KC, I believe listening may be a form of intellectual way of self-emptying, as we temporarily lay aside our own values and assumptions and step into another’s world to know and learn their realities. Listening can help us engage in kenotic humility by self- emptying to others and stepping in, connecting what we think about others and the facts before we immediately jump to conclusions. Isaacs says, "Listening this way can help us resolve differences. We can become more attentive to the 'data' that [ Page ] 123 leads us to make our conclusions, and so open a much different quality of inquiry" (Isaacs 1999, 97). Regarding listening, Yankelovich encourages us to listen with empathy to others’ views, developing the ability to think others' thoughts and feel their feelings. Participants are encouraged to examine both their own and others’ assumptions openly and with respect, doing so "without challenging them or reacting to them judgementally" (Yankelovich 2001, 45). I argue that listening with suspended judgement is a kind of intellectual discipline where we do not make any judgement until sufficient data are gathered and understood. According to Isaacs, most people in conversation believe they are aware of what others think and why they think it. Such people cannot enter conversation. Instead, Isaac argues, we have to admit that we do not know all of another’s thoughts. He labels this as willingness to "access your ignorance" which "is to recognize and embrace things you do not already know" (Isaacs 1999, 137). People having this attitude are willing to be influenced by the conversation itself, resulting with a feeling of "exhilaration at the new perspective" (Isaacs 1999, 137). We must recognize that we do not have all the answers to every question. We should humble ourselves by listening to others in conversation and through self-examination. These are kenotic ways to allow ourselves self-emptying and stepping into the lives of others before we draw premature conclusions. [ Page ] 124 Emotional Conversation is a person-to-person activity. It evokes emotions. Wilson states: "Face-to-face conversation conveys the greatest amount of emotion, trust, and understanding" (Wilson 2009, 84). He argues that face-to-face conversation can activate the limbic system of our brain, that is, the emotional centre. Activity in this limbic system, or emotional centre, is contagious, spreading among people as they interact. He quotes from Primal Leadership (by Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee) to support his argument that Scientists describes [the limbic loop] as 'interpersonal limbic regulation,' whereby one person transmits signals that can alter hormone levels, cardiovascular function, sleep rhythms, and even immune function inside the body of another...The open-loop design of the limbic system means that other people can change our very physiology - and so our emotions. (Wilson 2009, 86) It says that people connect at the limbic level when they are in conversation, linked in their physiological and emotional dimensions. Wilson further explains this emotional effect of conversation: "One term scientists use for this neural attunement is limbic resonance, 'a symphony of mutual exchange and internal adaptation' whereby two people harmonize their emotional state" (Wilson 2009, 86; emphasis original). Emotion connects people in conversation. When people are involved in conversation, emotions are contagious. They can reciprocate and mutually regulate participants' emotions. Wilson describes an emotional benefit of face-to-face conversation, that "it reduces fear and worry" (Wilson 2009, 87). He supports his claims by explaining that this mutual, in-person conversation [ Page ] 125 stimulates the production of hormones that enhance pleasure and reduce fear and worry. More than one study conducted demonstrates that conversation can strengthen and secure parent-child relationships (Gentner and Lowenstein 2002; Thompson 2006). Harkin encourages people to be open and honest about their feelings, needs and weaknesses in conversation. He emphasizes the need for emotional connections. Demonstrating a true sense of caring with others facilitates others’ willingness and ability to express freely their own wants and needs (Harkins 1999, 8). Regarding emotional expression, Stewart and Bennett (1991, 150) argue while that some people may conceal verbal expression of their emotions they nevertheless express their emotions through nonverbal behaviours during conversation, such as vocal and facial expressions, gesture and eye contact, rather than revealing them by words (Stewart and Bennett 1991, 157). Emotional contagion among the participants in conversation is not only reciprocal but bivalent. Positively, it spreads within a group to stimulate conversation; negatively it can destroy conversation and spoil relationships. Therefore, as the facilitator in the project, I had to be aware and regulate the emotional atmosphere in the conversations. I consider the emotional dimension in conversation as an opportunity in KC to encourage participants to step in by strengthening emotional connection. They reach beyond themselves to relate to others, creating a shared sense of “you and me” instead of "you or me" (Yankelovich 1999, 15). To encourage this connection I prepared a session of [ Page ] 126 Bible study that stressed how all of us are in the Body of Christ with living connections to each other. Social Conversation is a social connection. It can include verbal or nonverbal expression. A relationship starts, for instance, when a baby is born and becomes connected with its mother in a family. Beattie claims that “conversation is without doubt the foundation stone of the social world - human beings learn to talk in it, find a mate with it, are socialized through it, rise in the social hierarchy as a result of it (Beattie 1983, 2; emphasis original). “The act of reaching beyond the self to relate to others in dialogue is a profound human yearning," according to Yankelovich (Yankelovich 2001, 15). Vengel asserts that "Conversations bridge the gap between people who have different values, different views, and different backgrounds" (Vengel 2010, 1). Wheatley also argues that conversation is social activity. It brings change. "I believe we can change the world if we start talking to one another again. Simple, honest, human conversation" (Wheatley 2009, 7). Wilson emphasizes mutuality and personal involvement as two conversation keys to connect people. They encourage conversation since they require taking the initiative to open ourselves to others, “two people or groups turning toward each other, using inquiry and directness to pull out each other's reality on the way to reaching common ground" (Wilson 2009, 4). Mutuality of questioning and response can lead to genuine conversation. It promotes qualities that are valuable to have sincere conversation, such as care about others’ feelings, [ Page ] 127 openness and genuineness to resolve differences. He suggests a “Law of Psychological Reciprocity” in conversation by saying that "when we feel respected by someone, it's easier for us to respect them. And when we feel trusted by someone, it's easier for us to trust them" (Wilson 2009, 14). Conversation is a mutual way for people to return their feelings to those who created them. This conversational approach supports the concept and practice of KC. It begins with taking the initiative to empty ourselves by temporarily laying aside our views and assumptions, turning toward another by stepping into their world with respect, where we show concern for others by seeing and feeling their reality. From their response and feedback, we reflect what we understand of others and ourselves. In a mutual manner, we respond to them to help them to see both themselves and ourselves. Eventually, people begin to understand and see both sides’ needs. Wilson (2009, 17-19) claims that this mutuality in conversation will result in bringing two worlds together by finding common ground. Mutuality will also reveal possible solutions through further cooperation as those ideas emerge that eventually will benefit both parties in the long run. Yankeloivch claims that equality among all participants in conversation fosters relationship building. Participants must be treated equally and not be subjected to coercive influences of any sort. They are encouraged to have an open conversation where they, particularly the leaders, see others as equals, instead of fearing a loss of status and power. This approach to conversation emphasizes "cooperating, conducting dialogue, crossing boundaries, seeking alignment on a shared vision, tolerating complexity, and developing networks of relationships" [ Page ] 128 (Yankelovich 2001, 172). Equality in this way allows different views and ideas in conversation and encourages participants to connect in relationship. Isaacs argues that another angle of the social aspect to conversation is that it requires participants to take responsibility to speak their own voice, expressing their own genuine selves. He argues that many people feel pressure to speak as the group does. This urge may arise from both within oneself and within the group or the context. Speaking our voice by revealing our thoughts is our social responsibility in conversation. By revealing our thoughts and feeling, we may contribute ideas to move the group forward (Isaacs 1999, 165). Gaining insight from the literature, I designed a rule of equality in conversation. Every participant had to be treated equally, regardless of differences in age, gender or leadership status in church. Participants had to listen and acknowledge what others were saying. Besides, as each conversation session started, I encouraged them to express their own selves without fear of rejection or dismissal. They were free to speak their own voice and to put forward their genuine thinking. These four dimensions, namely physical, intellectual, emotional and social, were taken into consideration in this project as described above. They contribute different areas in the development of KC. I argue that the essence of KC (self-emptying, stepping in and showing concern for others) has already been practised in different ways in various contexts but it has not been labeled “KC.” Wilson, in his book Juice: The Power of Conversation, describes how missionaries adopted an approach similar to KC. They self-emptied by leaving [ Page ] 129 their home country, to step in with people where they served and show concern for others by interacting with them conversationally in their frame of reference. The [missionaries] don't teach, they go to the places...to sit with the people there, loving them and listening to their hurts....People talk and listen to one another. It's as simple and as profound as that. Through this open space of true dialogue, miracles happened. People's hurts begin to be healed; they begin to see ways in which they can reconcile with others; and they begin to have a dream for their future. (Wilson 2009, 197-198) Benefits of Applying Kenotic Conversation KC can provide a method to resolve the challenges in MCPC, through conflict resolution and empowerment of the younger generation. Results of my project demonstrated two positive impacts upon the participants. First was their perceived change in improving their understanding, relationship and trust. A second impact was enhancement of their collaboration in church ministries in which the younger generation was empowered to take up some leading role. Detailed results will be discussed in Chapter 5: Research Findings and Interpretation. The following sections discuss the benefits of applying KC to facilitate conflict resolution and empowerment. Conflict Resolution "If we cannot talk together, we cannot work together" (Isaacs 999, 329). The departure of English speaking young adults and the English pastor brought to the surface the underlying tension or conflict in MCPC these last few years. These sparked my curiosity to study seeing how conversation works in resolving the problem. Conflict resolution was necessary in MCPC because we want our church [ Page ] 130 to be healthy. The existence of conflict or tension would weaken the church and hinder its growth. Howe holds that conversation (he spoke of “dialogue") can lower hostility and sustain relationship between humans: Every man[sic] is a potential adversary, even those whom we love. Only through dialogue are we saved from the enmity toward one another. Dialogue is to love what blood is to the body. When the flow of blood stops, the body dies. When dialogue stops, love dies and resentment and hate are born. (Howe 1963, 3) Cloud and Townsend consider that having conversations is the initial step to resolving clashes. People can see the problem and can take the initiative to resolve it. Conversation connects people: "the two are bringing their differences to the light of relationship and seeing what can be done" (Cloud and Townsend 2003, 23). In his article "From Surgery to Acupuncture," Choy mentioned a case study from an Asian American church on conflict management. It reported that through face-to-face conversations, conflicts were revealed and discussed. Participants explored lists of possible changes to resolve conflict and eventually people on both sides agreed to move forward together. The positive result of the study demonstrated that face-to-face conversation could provide a workable process to resolve conflict in an Asian American church context (Nakka- Cammauf, Viji and Tseng 2009, 147-148). Okafor and Osakindle uphold "effective communication remains the best option as there is an interconnection between communication and conflict...most conflicts are resolved through communication. Thus, communication plays a vital [ Page ] 131 role in both the generation and the resolution of conflicts" (Okafor and Osakindle 2014, 325-326). They introduce an appreciative attitude with two conversational techniques for resolving conflict. First is the foundational technique of seeking to cool off other's emotions by repeating as many times as necessary what we think others have said until our conversation partners concur that we have understood them. Only then may we state our own opinion. Okafor and Osakindle argue that doing this would greatly minimize emotion in heated conversations where words may ignite an emotional explosion. This technique contributes to our grasping another individual's idea, gives him or her our feedback, indicating that we have listened to them and invites continuing conversation. The second technique is diffusion. Okafor and Osakindle argue that we can diffuse a conversation partner’s anger by agreeing with some of his or her viewpoints. It is difficult for one partner to maintain his or her anger if the other partner finds some truth in his or her viewpoint (Okafor and Osakindle 2014, 330-331). Conflict resolution requires effort from both sides. Participants must look at the other side and understand his or her view. In "Communication Conflict, and Dispute Resolution," Putnam and Folger suggest a role reversal technique. This technique enables disputants to see the conflict from the other's perspective. It would better prepare them to engage in resolving conflict openly and constructively (Putnam and Folger 1988, 354-355). This role reversal technique requires putting oneself into another's place to perceive things. In addition, Bennett, in "Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity," suggests related a practical way to resolve conflict is for people to [ Page ] 132 seek out commonalities and downplay differences. He argues that if people are able to converge over a commonality, it opens up the possibility of knowing others, and, in turn, through feedback from others, people begin to know their own selves more (Bennett 1986, 28). These conversational techniques and attributes support the essence of KC. They point to how people must and can self-empty temporarily in order to step into and meet the other side's views, finding commonalities on both sides instead of differences. The techniques also suggest showing concern for others, such as taking care of their emotions and needs with the purpose of resolving conflict among people. Empowerment "Never trust anyone under thirty" Merritt quotes the motto from the Boomers (Merritt 2007, 94). This reverses an earlier generation’s battle-cry from the 1960s never to trust anyone over thirty. Personally, I have heard similar comments from some leaders in Canadian Chinese churches in the Greater Toronto Area when I talked with them during my fifteen years of pastoral experience. As more Chinese children are born in Canada, Chinese churches have a growing need to raise a new generation of leaders to serve the future church. Merritt points out that in church it is difficult for the younger generation to take leadership roles when current leaders, drawn from an older generation, are functioning as leaders. She encourages conversation among church people by getting them together to share their stories and struggles. This becomes a [ Page ] 133 powerful way to build up trust when people share honestly and are appreciated. According to Merritt, trust is necessary to share power with the younger generation. Power-sharing shows the younger generation that they are treasured to care and develop the church and are embraced as valued members in the Body of Christ. Merritt relates trust to empowerment: "As we begin to trust young people in our congregations...and allow them to have some power, then our churches will reflect that leadership" (Merritt 2007, 146). Wilson claims a positive outcome of conversation is that it "increases trust, bonding, attention, and pleasure" (Wilson 2009, 87). Conversation is a way to help build up trust, which in turn facilitates empowerment. In a research study, "Hemorrhaging Faith," Penner and his associates found that the younger adult generation had positive views of conversations with their parents when the latter shared the Christian faith with them. They benefitted from conversations with their parents, particularly "they enjoy opportunities to engage in faith-centered dialogue, the chance to ask questions, and being included in the practices of their parents" (Penner, et al 2011, 46). The finding indicates that the younger generation is not as reluctant to converse with the older generation, as is often supposed. Another finding was that the younger generation is willing to be empowered to learn to take leadership roles. However, the study also found that the younger generation considered their voices, their talents and their abilities ignored altogether and thought church leaders did not care about them (Penner, et al 2011, 56). These findings reveal that the younger generation are concerned about leadership roles in church. They lack opportunities from [ Page ] 134 current leaders to exercise their abilities. The study found that the younger generation believes they can benefit from interacting with the older generation, such as gleaning from their wisdom and encouragement, being blessed by their prayers and being challenged to be accountable. A young adult says "I really benefit from the life investment of the older generation. The genuine interest the older generation takes in me is crucial" (Penner, et al 2011, 58). Literature and studies support the benefit of applying the essence of Kenotic Conversation in resolving conflict and empowering the younger generation. An in-person, mutual method of conversation brings people together face-to-face, facilitating shared understanding. This method may also facilitate the relief of tension or conflict. Conversation also brings older and younger generations together so that trust could be developed, making possible the empowerment of the younger generation. Chapter Summary This chapter discussed in detail an understanding of what conversation entails. This led to a discussion of how specific features of a conversation, such as its being structured, mutual, in-person, might enhance communication. The specific method of conversation developed in this chapter takes into account several significant differences, such as language, gender, culture, status and generation. Different dimensions of an individual are involved in conversation, namely, the physical, intellectual, emotional, and social. Understanding how each of those dimensions impacts conversation increases our understanding of how to [ Page ] 135 resolve conflict and encourage empowerment. The next chapter will discuss how the project was conducted. [ Page ] 136 [ Page ] 137 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Based on MCPC's needs as enumerated in the first three chapters, I introduced and developed a conceptual framework for Kenotic Conversation (KC) to apply in my study. The purpose of introducing and field testing KC was to explore and understand how KC worked among the research participants, and to assess what impact KC would have on their life experience after they had gone through the study program. This chapter describes in detail of how the study was implemented: research methodology, aspects of study design, how the study was conducted, data collection, data analysis, and, ethical considerations. Methodology Research methodology is "a systematic process that helps one to explain, predict and control observed phenomenon" (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2012, 43). Therefore, I determined what was likely to be the most appropriate research method so that I could address effectively the research problems I had identified. I would do so through collection of relevant data, using well-designed research instruments to minimize misunderstanding. [ Page ] 138 A Project The current study is a project. According to Bramer, a project "is a temporary endeavour undertaken to produce a unique product, service, or result” (Bramer 2011, slide #24). The study is an original work and different from some activities, such as weekly Sunday service. It has a time period to start and end from February to August 2013. The project study adopted two main approaches to provide a framework for the study: an action research method and a qualitative phenomenological approach. I will describe these approaches, why I used them and how I used them in my project. Action Research Stringer claims that the purpose of action research (hereafter “AR”) "is to gain greater clarity and understanding of a question, problem or issue" (Stringer 2007, 19). Coghlan and Brannick state that the essence of AR is "research in action, rather than research about action; a collaborative democratic partnership; research concurrent with action; a sequence of events and an approach to problem solving" (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 4). In this study, I worked with the Session and the members of the church to address the challenges we had in MCPC as stated in Chapter 1 of how we could improve trust in the relationship between the Cantonese and English generations. Solutions were discerned through the application of the Kenotic Conversation (KC) program. AR was used because it is "an approach to research which aims at both taking action and creating knowledge [ Page ] 139 or theory about that action" (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, ix). The current study is a collaborative action taken between the leaders and members of MCPC, and myself as the researcher. The KC concept was introduced and field-tested as a means to create better understanding of MCPC’s challenges in terms of knowledge and practice. Cohglan and Brannick argue that AR entails an iterative cycle that "works through a cyclical process of consciously and deliberately (1) planning, (2) taking action and (3) evaluating the action, leading to further planning and so on" (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, ix). This study constitutes the first AR cycle. The outcomes provide initial knowledge and practical experience, which will lead to modified action during further AR cycles. My study followed the phases laid out by Coghlan and Brannick (2010). The planning phase involved discerning where the problem of the study lay, collecting appropriate information related to the study, such as MCPC yearbooks, developing a relevant theological rationale and conducting a literature review. The phase also involved development of conversation forms and rules, study methodology, data collection methods, scheduling of the events, such as interviews and conversation sessions, arrangements for the conversation site, as well as promotion of the plan. In the planning phase, both Cantonese and English congregations were informed about the study. Church leaders (the Session) were informed about the study’s purpose, problem, plan and potential outcome. The study was hoped to be beneficial to the church by enhancing communication between the Cantonese speaking and English speaking generations. The Session [ Page ] 140 elders were informed in their meeting, with their consent. While designing the study, I consulted with my pastoral friends, who served in Chinese churches in the Greater Toronto Area, regarding their pastoral experience of the relationship between Cantonese and English congregations. Their sharing helped me to design the interview questions. In the action phase, the project idea was shared with the church and the project’s activities were conducted. They granted me study leave during the project execution. The Session supported me with increasing my annual study allowance from $600 to $1,000 a year during the study period. I invited the study participants, carried out sampling and selection of the study participants, filled out the consent forms and collected them. These were done with the help of an elder who played a role in inviting the participants and collecting consent forms. The action phase also involved asking the church administrator in advance to book the Board Room that was used as the conversation venue and informing the Session about progress. These tasks were shared among the members of the leadership board, each with varying degrees of involvement. Conducting the study from February to August 2013 was one of my responsibilities for the action phase. In the evaluation phase, the data were tagged, analyzed, interpreted, assessed and evaluated. To ascertain the validity of the raw data, I did fact- checking with the help of the participants. First, I sent the raw data I had recorded about each individual back to them and asked them to verify whether I had collected them accurately. Second, I sent the analyzed data to each of the participants and asked them whether my interpretation of their data were accurate, [ Page ] 141 that I had not twisted their original meaning. They agreed with thanks. The findings were also made known through a public presentation among a group of pastoral professionals and members of the congregation and Session. This phase also involved writing of the thesis to describe the project process, present the results, draw conclusions and assess the entire project. Through this first AR cycle, the study demonstrated that KC could relieve the challenges participants were experiencing in MCPC, both on a practical level and in terms of generating knowledge on an academic level, by assessing the impact of applied KC. The outcomes of this first AR study are expected to become the initial knowledge and practical experience, which lead to modified action, for further AR cycles. Qualitative Phenomenological Approach The second main approach the study employed was qualitative phenomenological. Qualitative research was chosen with an eye to answering questions regarding phenomena being researched, with individual experience exploration and minimizing generalizations. Merriam argues that a qualitative method is appropriate for a phenomenological study because the researcher explores a deeper understanding of the details (Merriam, 2009, 23). Phenomenological study "is an approach that focuses on how life is experienced" (Denscombe 2010, 94). It deals with participants' perceptions, attitudes, feelings and emotion. Different from narrative research, a qualitative phenomenological approach focuses on individual life experiences. It "describes the meaning for [ Page ] 142 several individuals of the lived experiences surrounding a concept or phenomenon....[It] explores the structure of consciousness in human experiences" (Miller and Salkind 2002, 151). In the study, specific questions were asked in the interviews to obtain participants' individual experience related to the identified challenges at MCPC that were under study. Their views and experiences were recorded and analyzed to understand the phenomenon of the issue being investigated. The phenomena were MCPC’s three challenges: communication; conflict resolution; empowerment of the next generation. Furthermore, after each conversation session in the study program, participants were requested to return their own written feedback in order for me to understand as much as possible their inward consciousness of real life experience and views on the issue. Data analysis focused on descriptions and words provided by the participants. Doing this in a systematic way enabled me to obtain in-depth information from the study’s participants that would lead to decisive conclusions about the research findings (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2009, 482). This phenomenological study method provided an empirical approach that helped to understand the challenges affecting the Cantonese and English congregations in MCPC and to explore how KC worked among the participants. According to Williamson, a phenomenological approach in qualitative study research is particularly appropriate for “areas where there is little understanding of how and why processes or phenomena occur, where the experiences of individuals and the contexts of actions are critical, or where theory and research are at their early formative stages” (Williamson 2002, 5). [ Page ] 143 Study Design This section presents the scope of the study, selection of participants, as well as the features and process of conducting KC. Scope of Study The study focused on introducing the concept of KC and putting it into field practice, exploring how it works among the research participants. The KC undertaken in this study program was conducted within a structured, mutual and in-person framework. Other kinds of conversation, such as telephone conversation were out of the scope in this study. The study also applied KC to address the needs of communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation in MCPC and assessed its impact on the participants. All study participants were from MCPC. Selection of Participants This section describes the procedure and rationale of participants sampling. It consists of sampling method, sampling criteria and sampling size. Sampling Method The study was qualitative, focusing on words and descriptions obtained from the participants. Merriam argues that when qualitative analysis is concerned with answering questions regarding how a process works or unfolds, the use of non-probability sampling instead of probability sampling is appropriate (Merriam 2009, 77). So non-probability sampling was chosen to fit with the qualitative [ Page ] 144 approach as opposed to a probability sampling that would have given every congregant in MCPC an equal chance to take part in the study. The study adopted a purposive sampling approach in line with the study objective - conversation among participants from the Cantonese and English generations. Creswell suggests that the researcher "selects individuals and sites for study because they can purposefully inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study" (Creswell 2007, 125). Using a purposive sampling approach, I was able to sample research participants from the Cantonese speaking generation, who were first immigrant generation, and the English speaking generation, who were either Canadian Born Chinese or Canadian Raised Chinese, in MCPC. They received the information required for the study. The rationale of this purposive sampling was to determine if this conversation study could bring positive outcomes among participants drawn from groups that differed both in age and in mother tongue. It is reasonable to speculate, however, that such conversations might also bring positive outcomes in other settings. If participants of different generations who speak different languages may resolve tensions, it is likely that participants in a less complex scenario, that of a single generation who speak different languages, will benefit from applying KC. Similarly, participants who share the same mother language but belong to different generations, another less complicated situation, are likely to benefit from applying KC. [ Page ] 145 Sampling Criteria The sampling criteria restricted selection to a particular pool of participants. The participants had to meet the following three criteria: have experienced the issue being studied, English proficiency, and, availability. The rationale of the first criterion was Creswell’s suggestion that qualitative researchers "collect data in the field at the site where participants experience the issue or problem under study" (Creswell 2007, 37). The rationale of the second criterion, adopting English as the study program’s conversation language, was that this KC strategy required the Cantonese speaking generation to step into and show concern for the English speaking generation’s world. Another reason for using English was for the sake of better communication, since Cantonese participants' English proficiency was better than English participants' Cantonese proficiency. The rationale of the third criterion was that participants were available to participate the KC program including interviews, conversation sessions and written feedback. Sampling Size I adopted two sampling methods to determine who would participate the study, as well as the number of participants. The criterion that "participants have experience of the phenomenon being studied... works well when all individuals studied represent people who have experienced the phenomenon" (Creswell 2007, 128; emphasis added). In this study, those sampled from the Cantonese speaking generation were Session elders, since they had attended MCPC consistently for [ Page ] 146 many years, leading and serving in different ministries. They knew and had experienced MCPC’s challenges; they were first generation immigrants to Canada, arriving as adults. Their mother language was Cantonese and they had sufficient English proficiency to minimize conversational barriers. The criteria for sampling from the English speaking generation included: participants were from the English congregation, their mother language was English, they were professing members of MCPC, either having been baptized in MCPC or having transferred their membership to MCPC, were either the Canadian Born Chinese or Canadian Raised Chinese, and, they were either Busters or Mosaics and had attended the informal conversation meeting in April 2009. Convenience sampling was used to determine the sample size. According to Creswell, the convenience sampling method means dealing with individuals whom “the researcher can access and [from whom] easily collect data" (Creswell 2007, 126). The sample of Cantonese speakers was drawn from the pool of the fourteen Session elders, fewer than half of whom had mastered English sufficiently to participate. I invited each personally but some declined because of unavailability. Therefore, only three elders were available to do the study. On the other hand, the English speaking generation selection pool was the entire congregation. The entire congregation’s ages were quite evenly distributed, from fourteen to retirement. Using these criteria, 1 invited them personally, as I had to the Session elders. I did not make a recruitment announcement in the English service in order to avoid attracting those who did not meet the criteria and would [ Page ] 147 thereby have to be refused. Three English members fit all the criteria and were available to do the study. LeBaron, in Bridging Cultural Conflicts, recommends that there be equal numbers of conversation participants from the two communities involved. It is better if they are also matched for status, gender and generation (LeBaron 2003, 258-259). Therefore, I recruited an equal number of participants from both groups. Eventually, the KC study consisted of six participants - three from each group. Gender was also considered in that four participants were male (two from each group) and two participants were female (one from each group). Although the study sample size was small, Creswell argues that this small size is acceptable because "the intent in qualitative research is not to generalize information but to elucidate the particular" (Creswell 2007, 126). Features and Process of Kenotic Conversation This section describes the study process, including the schedule, format, and details from the conversation sessions. Period, Place and Schedule of Conversations The study period was from February to August 2013. The research instruments used were interviews, conversation sessions and written feedback. Details will be described later. Interviews were done either in MCPC, participants' homes or my home. The working schedule was based on finding the most convenient time for participants, as well as a comfortable environment. As a result, individual interviews were done either in the church or their homes. The [ Page ] 148 first five conversation sessions happened on a weekly basis in April 2013, and the sixth conversation session occurred in early July 2013. The delay was due to some participants’ personal scheduling issues. All six conversation sessions were done at MCPC, surroundings familiar to all participants. Each participant was requested to send his or her written feedback to me after each session via electronic mail. Table 6: Project work plan [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Tale 6 details ] [ Page ] 149 [ Table 6 continues, please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Tale 6 details ] Settings of Conversations Conversation settings will become favourable, Harkins argues, when they provide intimate or family-oriented circumstances in which "the barriers of fear and mistrust are low enough for the expression of true wants and needs" (Harkins 1999, 8). If such connections are made, from the conversation will emerge "a [ Page ] 150 deep empathy and understanding, a willingness to see other points of view, and a trustful rapport leading to clear commitment of effort and action" (Harkins 1999, 8). I took Harkin's advice, designing the conversation settings to provide a relaxed, comfortable environment facilitating sessions by putting participants at ease. All six conversation sessions took place in a church boardroom with which all the participants were familiar. The room had comfortable chairs and a table. It provided enough room so participants were free to choose their seats. The environment provided sufficient space that everyone was able to see each other, speak face-to-face and listen to one another. Lighting was sufficient and room temperature was set at about 25 degree Celsius. I provided each participant with a pen and a notebook for their own note-taking if they wished. I presented the session material by using a computer and attached projector. The environment for conversation was comfortable, relaxed and without annoyances. I scheduled the conversations on Tuesday evenings when there were no other congregational activities in the church building. Format of Conversations The conversation sessions had a structured, in-person and mutual format. They were designed so each structured conversation session explored a single, specific topic. I was the facilitator to ensure that the conversation was focused and directly on topic, as well as to guide the participants to follow the prescribed rules and procedures, such as giving others an opportunity to speak and listening to them for the purpose of sharing their common concerns (Samovar, et al 2009; [ Page ] 151 Wood 2011; Department for Children 2009). Conversation in a structured framework gave participants opportunities to express themselves fully before anyone could interrupt by giving immediate responses. Structured conversations let the participants exercise self-emptying in KC by temporarily laying aside themselves, suspending their judgement before sufficient input is received from others. The project’s conversations were structured by my facilitation. I guided the participants to stay focused on the topic by providing guided questions, using “what” and “how,” to elicit their experiences of the reality of MCPC’s congregational life. The in session questions are detailed in in Appendices E to J. As the facilitator, 1 made sure the participants followed the rules of the conversations. The participants were free to express themselves. The conversation was structured with some rules the participants were required to follow. At the beginning of the first conversation session I read out the rules and explained the rationale for having these particular rules. I made sure all the participants understood and agreed to follow. The rules kept the conversations lively, friendly, and orderly since all participants had opportunities to express themselves and listen to others. The project had four basic rules. First, participants had to keep the conversation on the topic. Stanfield argues: "Without focus, the group will talk in generalities" (Stanfield 2000, 39). Second, equality was required among the participants (Wheatley 2009, 33). Regardless of his or her age, gender, language ability and church position, each participant had equal right to speak or to keep silent without feeling pressure or being rejected. No one was allowed either to dominate or interrupt the conversation. If it happened, I [ Page ] 152 reminded them to listen to others by inviting other participants to speak. Participants were encouraged to exercise mutual responsibility so that they could give feedback and responses to others, as well as asking for clarification. Third, participants had to respect each other (Wilson 2009, 20). Participants were free to take turns speaking. When one spoke, the rest had to listen. They could not interrupt the speaker before he or she had finished talking. Participants were not allowed to use offensive language to attack others and had to ensure conversations were honest and genuine. Fourth, participants were required to practice and adhere to confidentiality (Phelps 1999, 93), particularly in terms of some personal issues. The conversations required participation of the whole person. Participants were encouraged to be physically, mentally, emotionally and socially engaged in the conversations. During conversation sessions, I reiterated these rules, as needed, to make sure the participants followed them. Written feedback was also requested at the end of each session in order to determine and capture what they had said in conversation, as well as their reflections about the topic. Second, the conversation was in-person. Participants were encouraged to involve their whole person, engaging physically, intellectually, emotionally and socially during conversations. This displayed respect for other participants and was a means to practice KC’s principle of stepping into the frame of reference of another. Third, conversation was mutual. It began with listening to others and understanding them so that participants could exercise KC’s goal to "start there" from where they were. Peace, in his article Holy Conversation (quoting [ Page ] 153 Broughton's study), declared that "genuine conversation is characterized by four factors: mutuality, reciprocity, openness and respect" (Broughton in Peace 2002, 259-260). It means the participants not only express themselves in conversation but also they have the responsibility to listen to others and give responses and feedback. This reciprocal way of conversation connects one person to another, making it possible for the participants to share their views and receive others' views. Besides rules for conversation, the layout of each session consisted of a welcome, opening prayer, Bible study, presentation of material about the topic, conversation and a wrap up with an ending prayer. Each session started at 8 p.m. and it lasted for about 1 hour and 45 minutes. The sessions' format was as follows: 1. Opening Prayer & the Bible Study (15’) 2. Material Presentation (30’) 3. Participants Conversation (50’) 4. Wrap up and Ending Prayer (10’) I designed the layout of each session to reflect the existing MCPC meeting pattern. People were used to having an opening prayer, followed by Bible study, before discussion of the business agenda. At the start, I welcomed the participants, hoping to uplift them and create a constructive atmosphere. An opening prayer reminded them that we were in the Body of Christ in the same local church. Doing this aimed to shift their thoughts from their daily life activities to the present conversation. Then I conducted a Bible study that drew attention to biblical teachings about the session’s topic. After that, I presented background material related to the topic, giving them some information to warm up their minds and kept their interests on the topic. Presentation of this material [ Page ] 154 took about 30 minutes, about the length of a sermon that the participants were used to. The conversation was limited to about 50 minutes. I restrained it because I was aware that participants, many of whom arise early, needed to go home in time to get enough sleep for the next day. I kept the conversation focused on the topic by asking questions related to their real life concerns. I acted as a facilitator to make sure their conversation followed the rules all had agreed upon. I did not disturb the conversation, acting merely as an observer unless the conversation became distracted from the topic or participants needed help by means of clarifications or receiving more information about the topic. The wrap up summarized and captured what had been discussed and offered appreciation their participation. A closing prayer is common practice at MCPC. As facilitator, I controlled the conversation’s pace and timing. Topics of Conversation I chose the session topics based on the issues under study - MCPC's challenges in terms of communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation. The research participants consisted of people of both Chinese culture and Canadian culture. Enhanced cultural understanding was needed among participants so they could more easily know and understand each other. One session focused on implementation taking because this study was an action research. We explored what possible ways of action might improve the current situation in MCPC. The last wrap up session gave participants opportunity to converse about the overall process. Topics of these six sessions were: Chinese [ Page ] 155 culture and Canadian culture; Chinese and Canadian communication patterns; conflict resolution patterns; empowerment; implementation strategy; project wrap up. Data Collection Data were collected in order to achieve the purpose of the study, namely, to field test the concept of KC in MCPC and assess its consequences for the research participants, gauging the impact of the study program upon their life experience. Bell advises the necessity of seeing "the same thing from different perspectives and thus to be able to confirm or challenge the findings of one method with those of another" (Bell 2010, 118). Data were collected through interviews and participants' written feedback. In addition, I conducted field observation to provide additional information to support the main data. Field observation is regarded as supplementary because Bell warns that solo observers should be aware of the danger of bias. However, she believes it is difficult to be totally objective (Bell 2010, 194). All data sets have some kind of bias; that was why I collected data from multiple sources complimentary to each other in order to minimize any bias. Interviews Each participant had to take an intake interview before the launch of the program and an exit interview after the program concluded. Interview dates can be found earlier in this chapter in Table 6: Project Work Plan. The purpose of the interview was to collect data about the participants’ perspectives on the areas of [ Page ] 156 communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation. Interviews were conducted in a one-on-one, face-to-face format. Interviewing was determined to be an appropriate method to obtain first-hand information from participants regarding their experience of the real life situation at MCPC. Interviewing allowed them to interact in an open, deep and lively manner. Stringer highlights that interviews can: provide opportunities for participants to describe the situation in their own terms. It is a reflective process that enables the interviewee to explore his or her experience in detail and to reveal the many features of that experience that have an effect on the issue investigated. (Stringer 2007, 69) Bell accentuates the advantage for a researcher of conducting interviews. Interviewing allows follow up of the ideas discussed, the probing and investigation of the interviewees’ motives and feelings. In addition, any ambiguities can be clarified immediately during the interview (Bell 2010). I adopted interviewing because it gave participants flexibility to express their views on issues of concern. I could also record and observe responses in situ, noting their verbal and nonverbal expressions. Interviewing was an appropriate method to address real life experience because it focused on participants’ own descriptions and the wording they chose for their narrations (Marshall and Rossman 2006, 2-3; Holliday 2002, 6). The interviews were semi-structured with open-ended questions (Thomas 2009, 162-164). I guided the interview with a sequence of pre-determined, open- ended questions about a specific topic. The interview did not dictate the participants’ range of responses to each question. Using open-ended questions [ Page ] 157 gave participants flexibility to develop ideas and provide their perspectives and personal experience, thus enhancing understanding of their opinions, attitudes and experiences about the topic. The interview questions were designed to help participants reflect on their own culture, to elicit their views on the project’s objectives, such as communication and conflict resolution with people of different cultures and generations, as well as to express their views on the empowerment of the next generation. Each participant agreed beforehand to allow the researcher to record data by hand. There was neither video nor audio-recording because the presence of recording equipment may be disruptive and affect participants’ responses (Bell 2010, 167). There were also privacy concerns. Participants' input was sought and they preferred not to allow recording. I respected them and recorded responses directly by hand, noting both their verbal and nonverbal behaviour as much as possible. As needed, 1 asked for clarification to ensure that information was recorded without twisting their meaning. The length of each interview was kept to about thirty-five to fifty minutes. Interviews were done either in my church office, my home or a participant's home, depending upon their decision and consent beforehand. This approach aimed to find "a quiet location free from distractions" (Creswell 2007, 133). Both intake and exit interviews asked the identical questions except the intake interview also asked participants for their personal information and the exit interview added questions about the effectiveness of the project (see Appendices [ Page ] 158 C and D). The purpose of doing both intake and exit interviews was to assess what impact, if any, the project had had. Session Feedback The study consisted of six conversation sessions. Participants were requested to return their written feedback after each session, specific to the topic discussed in the session. Instructions provided to participants for feedback consisted of two sections. First was "How to enhance” discussion of a topic, such as communication, conflict resolution or empowerment. Second was "What possible actions can be taken” in respect to that topic? The length, style and writing format were up to their preference, as long as they could convey their opinions clearly. Feedback fulfilled several purposes. It helped maintain their momentum in reflecting on the topic, capturing not only what they had said in the session, but also anything they wanted to express but did not during the conversation sessions. It also allowed them to offer other reflections related to the topic. Creating written feedback helped increase their retention of the session’s content. Wood claims we tend to notice and recall stimuli with repeated exposure to it, thereby increasing our retention of what we had said and what we had listened to in the conversations (Woods 2011, 127). Concerning the language chosen for these conversations, English was used for various reasons; these criteria were stated in the previous section of project limitations and selection of participants. An additional reason for using English in the conversation sessions was that English is a low-context language since ideas [ Page ] 159 can be expressed without relying on embedded cultural symbols or concepts. Stewart and Bennett point out that people from Western cultures, such as Canadians, usually speak straight to the point, directly and explicitly, by using precise and concrete words in conversation. They rely less on the context because they believe their language expression is clear enough to convey their exact meaning and intention (Stewart and Bennett 1991,157). Besides verbal content, I also recorded their nonverbal behaviours, such as body movement and facial expression. These carry messages about the emotions of the speaker because emotion is less controllable than words. Below is a table summarizing lists of data sets collected in the project: Table 7: Lists of data sets [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 7 details ] Below is a table that summarizes details of each participant’s participation in the project. All took part in the intake and exit interviews, as well as sessions 1, 3 and 4. One person did not attend Session 2; half of the participants missed [ Page ] 160 Session 5; two people did not attend Session 6. Two missed two sessions; two missed one session; two attended all. Table 8: Details of Each Participants’ Participation in the Project [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 8 details ] The main reasons participants missed a session were out of town business trips, conflict between the timing of a session and a participant’s work-related meeting, as well as personal engagements and/or difficulties As noted in Table 5,1 did an Exit Interview after Session 5 for immediate feedback, to defend against participants’ potential loss or corruption of memory. The time gap between Sessions 5 and 6 was about two months because the majority of participants were not available. Studies demonstrate that “recall performance” degrades notably when people encounter distractions, whether by the actual elapse of time or the introduction of distractor tasks in an experiment (Barrouillet and Camos 2015, 89-90). Distractions interfere with the consolidation of memory and also decay the quality and accuracy of memories. Participants welcomed Session 6 because the project had not included that kind of conversation so far. I did a Supplementary Exit Interview after Session 6 to collect potential auxiliary data from the participants. Twice I have reminded some participants to take the Supplementary Exit Interview but they have not [ Page ] 161 replied. A distinct possibility is that they felt they had expressed themselves already in their written feedback and thus provided no further information. Possibly other reasons interfered, such as their busyness or belief that conversation is ineffective. The latter supposition, however, may not be likely in light of the examination of responses concerning the project’s effectiveness that is provided in Chapter 5: Research Findings and Interpretation, where they responded positively. As stated in the consent form, it was their decision to decline the interview without giving any reason. I am also aware of my dual identity as researcher and pastor. It was prudent not to be coercive in my role as their pastor. Data Analysis I analysed the qualitative data through coding. According to Bell, codes are tags or labels for assigning units of meaning to the descriptive or inferential information compiled during a study....So coding allows you to 'cluster' key issues in your data and allows you to take steps towards 'drawing conclusions'. (Bell 2010, 221-222) I coded from the raw data collected from the project participants. Saldana explains that In Vivo coding developed from the raw data (Saldana 2013, 84). So I started with In Vivo coding and after that I applied the In Vivo codes to other sections of the raw data that shared the same theme. The raw data I collected were from interviews and written feedback from the participants (Table 7). The questions I asked in the interviews covered the following three areas: communication, conflict resolution and empowerment (Appendices C and D). The session written feedback were also covered these three areas. From the raw data [ Page ] 162 of each of these three areas, I put quotes with similar meaning into a code. Words, phrases and sentences from the participants would be quoted directly to support the code. In coding the raw data, I used abbreviations to locate where the data came from, whether in an interview or a conversation session feedback. I assigned a numerical label to each line in the raw data document to identify it (Denscombe 2010, 276). There were three kinds of abbreviations, separated by colons (:) in between. The first number after "P" represents a participant. The second character, a capital letter or second number, denotes the data collection occasion. The number or numbers in the third position represent the numbered line from which the quote came. For example, P4:E:5-7 meant the quote was taken from the document recording the raw data of participant number four’s exit interview, lines 5 through 7. Another example, P5:3:7-l 1 refers to the raw data document of participant number five’s third session feedback, lines 7 through 11. Table 9: Meaning of Abbreviations [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 9 details ] [ Page ] 163 By means of these abbreviations, 1 put similar attributes of the quotes into a code. For example, one code was "awareness of self and others' differences." It was based on participants’ given data, such as from this participant: I am now more aware about different cultures. Now I feel like to take consideration. E.g. to my parents. I am much aware of about our differences. These differences make me more....know how to respond, let's say example....my parent told me, my first impression: that's so wrong. Now, know different culture and generation. I can't say that it's not right, it's wrong. Not judge anymore. Not judge his way is wrong. Therefore less tension. I won't get mad and angry. That says dad's culture, generation are different from me. Therefore he does things differently. So it is not point or no reason to angry, or force them just like me. (P1:S:6-12) Another participant of a different generation and culture said: From the project, I know more, sensitive to different subcultures. With regard to them personally, to their ways of handling things, and to their ways of thinking, I understand more of their response and behavior. It causes me to accept people with different cultures. (P2:S:23-25) These quotes reflected that participants showed their awareness to people different from them. After this conversation project, they claimed that they have enhanced their awareness and became more accepting of people of another culture and generation. These quotes may reveal other meanings, for example, that the participants enhanced their understanding through the conversations. By using the abbreviations, I coded the raw data. There were sixteen codes developed from the raw data. From these sixteen codes, I integrated them into three themes. The integration was according to the three questions asked in the interviews with the areas of: (1) communication, (2) conflict resolution, and (3) empowerment. For example, I grouped the following six codes in the area of communication: [ Page ] 164 involvement in conversations, open-mindedness to different views, awareness of self and others' differences, respect other participants, listening attentively and empathy to other participants. These six codes in the area of communication I grouped them around a theme, openness. The theme, openness, was with regard to properties of participants' consciousness of self and/or others. The second theme, common ground, was with regard to properties by which participants related to others, and the third theme, support, was with regard to properties of participants’ treatment of others. Openness was in the area of communication, common ground was in the area of conflict resolution, and support was in the area of empowerment. The following table lists them: Table 10: List of the Sixteen Codes in Three Themes [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 10 details ] [ Page ] 165 Ethical Considerations The project followed the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS 2010). Before participating in the project, every participant was informed about its purpose, procedure, potential risks and benefits. He or she understood and acknowledged it by signing an informed consent form (Appendix B). The participants understood they were voluntarily taking part in the study and not being forced to participate. They were free to withdraw at any time during the course of the project without affecting their relationship with MCPC. The purpose of the consent form was to get their permission to use data provided by them. I assured them that any data provided by them regarding the project would be stored confidentiality, locked in a filing cabinet in my office and accessed solely by me. Data collected was used strictly for the present study without reporting their names in connection with their responses and feedback, unless they agreed to be identified. Physical copies of raw data were destroyed after completion of the project. [ Page ] 166 Chapter Summary In this chapter, I have explained in the methodology section that the study was a project, using action research and a qualitative phenomenological approach to explore the phenomenon the participants experienced in MCPC - conflict and a strained relationship between the older Cantonese generation and the members of the younger English generation at MCPC. I described the study design in detail, along with the scope of study, selection of participants, and features of the study. Multiple data sources were collected through interviews and feedback from the sessions. I coded the raw data, developing the code by grouping data with similar meanings. Sixteen codes were developed. Those codes that shared the same concept were integrated into a single concept. There were three concepts. Data interpretation details will be discussed in the next chapter. [ Page ] 167 [ Page ] 168 CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION This chapter presents findings and their significance to the challenges affecting Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC). Data collection and data analysis were executed according to the study purpose, to explore and understand how Kenotic Conversation’s (KC) concepts would work among the participants from Cantonese and English generations and to assess its impact. The research findings showed improvement of communication and conflict resolution among the participants and empowerment of the younger generation to take up leadership positions. I present the findings in seven sections: 1) demographic findings, 2) description of conversation sessions, 3) overall project evaluation, 4) acknowledgement of the project, 5) conversation elements found in KC: openness, common ground, and support, 6) Impacts of KC: on perspectives change (understanding, relationship and trust); on action (fellowship, stewardship, and mission), and, 7) application of KC to improving communication and resolving conflict in MCPC. This section presents the findings of the study grounded in the results obtained from the raw data. Descriptive statistics were gathered on the [ Page ] 169 demographic variables while thematic analysis was used to isolate different themes that came up from the conversations. Demographic Analysis Demographic analysis matters immensely for three reasons. First, it is important to confirm that participants were in two different generations. As Table 11 indicates, all three participants from the English generation were in the younger age range (between 18 and 34 years), while the three from the Cantonese generation were in the older age range (between 50 and 64 years). This demographic age range conforms to my intentional design, laid out in Chapter 1, to explore how KC works between generations. Table 11 : Demographic of Participants - Age Range [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 11 details ] Second, it is valuable to determine participants' cultural tendency, as signalled by their age when they arrived in Canada. As mentioned in Definition of Key Terms in Chapter 1, those born locally or who emigrated to Canada in their early childhood (under age 4) are regarded as second generation immigrants, raised with Canadian culture (Kwon 1993). All English participants in the study arrived between birth and five years, while the Cantonese participants were in a significantly older age range. The distribution was not perfect; the data showed a participant who migrated to Canada between the age of 6 and 15. [ Page ] 170 Table 12: Demographic of Participants - Age to Canada [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 12 details ] Table 12 reveals that the majority of participants moved to Canada at the age of 0-5 years (50%), all from the English generation, followed by those aged between 16-30 years (33.3%) and 6-15 years (16.7%), from the Cantonese generation. Table 13, below, complements Tables 11 and 12 by displaying the number of years participants have lived in Canada. This enabled me to deduce that some English participants were born in Canada and to underline the more advanced ages of the Cantonese participants, affirming that the study investigated two distinct groups, distinguished by generation. Table 13: Demographic of Participants - Years in Canada [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 13 details ] Most of the participants (50%) have lived in Canada for 16-30 years, followed by those living 41 or more years in Canada (33.3%) and between 31-40 years (16.7%), as shown by Table 13. Third, it is necessary to affirm participants have life experience of the phenomenon being studied. All participants have been in MCPC more than ten years, therefore they could provide the related information in the study. [ Page ] 171 Table 14: Demographic of Participants - Years in MCPC [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 14 details ] Table 14 shows the number of years of membership in MCPC. The majority (66.7%) have been MCPC members for between 21 and 30 years and 33.3% belonged 11 to 20 years. Table 15 below summarizes the participants’ demographic details. It highlights the age range between participants of the Cantonese and English speaking generations. The smallest age difference between the Cantonese and English generations is roughly twenty years. The importance of this difference in age between the groups is supported by the literature that indicates the age of arrival in Canada determines one’s cultural generation (Kwon 1993, 53; Zhou 1997, 64; Rumbaut 2004, 1167; Waters 2014, 21). It is evident that the Cantonese speakers are essentially “first generation” and the English speakers lie nearer to “second generation.” All participants were MCPC members for more than eleven years, the most recent joining in 2002. [ Page ] 172 Table 15: Displays participants' age range, age to Canada, years in Canada and years in MCPC [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 15 details ] Description of the Six Conversation Sessions This subsection describes the details of the six conversation sessions. The purpose is to examine what the participants shared, how they responded to others, and their verbal and nonverbal behaviour in conversation, in order to assess the effectiveness of the program. Similar to the interviews, neither video nor audio recording was welcomed by participants. Quotations transcribed reflect my best effort to record them in my own handwriting during the conversation sessions. I present what was said in the conversation sessions and I interpret the data collected in the conversation sessions, together with my field observations. Session 1 : Chinese Culture and Canadian Culture Participants had known each other already since they have been in MCPC for many years. However, at the beginning of the first session, participants appeared a bit tense, with the Cantonese generation choosing to sit on one side of the table and, similarly, the English generation sit on the other side. They faced each other in a negotiation-like setting. After I began by welcoming and thanking them for participating, I introduced each participant, let them greet each other and reaffirmed their consent to participate in the study. Then I briefed them on the purpose of the study, the [ Page ] 173 conversation session format, the topics and my request that they provide written session feedback. I stated the basic rules for conducting the conversations, as mentioned in earlier chapters. The purpose of this session was to help participants understand more fully their own culture, as well as gaining insight into the culture of their fellow participants. I shared the biblical doctrine of unity and diversity in the Body of Christ to illustrate the reality of differences in His church. Then I made a presentation on both Chinese culture and Canadian culture. Session 1 details are in Appendix E. As the facilitator, I guided the conversation by asking: "How do you see Chinese culture?" It stimulated conversation, participants showing their interest by becoming actively involved in sharing their own views and feelings. The following conversation was an honest exchange of perspectives. Participants' nonverbal behaviour showed that they listened with respect while others spoke. A Cantonese participant claimed that Chinese culture’s long history had condensed much wisdom that had proved reliable: "Chinese were not extreme...respect people, love harmony...just like Confucius' teaching about median." I observed other participants listening attentively, their faces looking at the one who spoke. An English participant shared another view: "I see Chinese culture as being formal and hierarchical...feeling distant from one another and a lack of warmth or sincerity...take the mean to me is passive and lukewarm.” [All quotations are directly recorded verbatim from my notes, including any grammatical problems.] This evoked from another English participant: "Why Chinese people do not speak [ Page ] 174 directly?" A Cantonese participant stated this showed a desire not to embarrass people. In the conversation, Cantonese participants affirmed their view of the goodness of Chinese culture and English participants honestly shared their views, asking questions to gain more understanding about Chinese culture. Both groups rendered their own views and listened to others, thus enriching all participants' understanding. Similar discussion was sparked by my asking: "How do you see Canadian culture?" English participants valued it, noting: "I am proud to be Canadian." Another shared being thankful that the participant’s parents emigrated from China to Canada before the participant was born. A Cantonese participant noted concern that "Freedom of expression sometimes harms the harmony of the 'whole'....because of freedom of expression and encouragement of new ideas, the country [Canada] would lose the benefit of learning from the past and its mistakes." After discussion of the first two questions, I observed that participants were less protective of their own cultures. They did not become defensive when their own cultural values were challenged. Then I asked this forward-looking question, "Is it possible to blend Chinese and Canadian cultures well?" They responded more optimistically and positively, taking into account more similarities than differences between their cultures. They agreed mutually that it was possible for both cultures to give up their own weaknesses and take up the other’s strengths. Achieving this goal requires continuous learning, which would lead to changes in thinking, beliefjudgement and action. Some participants asserted that both cultures should follow biblical values instead of cultural norms. [ Page ] 175 The first conversation session explored fruitfully the participants’ cultures, both Chinese and Canadian. In a good conversational atmosphere, participants demonstrated active involvement, listening attentively with respect, without interrupting others and being open-mindedness to listen to challenges without refuting them. I observed the participants talked politely. They expressed that it was interesting to see their own culture and learn of another culture by direct listening and asking questions, exploring why each group acted differently. The session went on in a mutual, interactive way. As the session was conducted in English, the Cantonese participants spoke a bit more slowly but I observed the English participants were patient to listen. I sensed the latter showed empathy for the Cantonese participants by choosing to speak slowly and clearly. Occasionally, some participants wrote their own notes during the conversation. Session 2: Communication Patterns This session was designed to respond to the request made during the informal meeting in April 2009 (detailed in Chapter 1) that there be more direct communication between Cantonese speaking leaders and English speaking members. The purpose of this session was to help participants to perceive both their own communication patterns and those of the other group. After Bible study and introducing communication patterns in both Chinese and Canadian cultures, I encouraged participants try to exercise a feature of KC, to empty themselves of their own communication pattern and learn to see with another’s perspective. Session 2 details are in Appendix F. [ Page ] 176 In keeping with the previous Tuesday's conversation, participants demonstrated similar attitudes and behaviours as the previous week. Furthermore, I observed that they talked more at ease, listening to others and expressing their personal views in a non-threatening manner. Before I asked them a guiding question, I sensed that they were ready to discuss because they were looking at me in expectation. I asked them a guiding question: "How to enhance communication between first generation Chinese cultured people and second generation Canadian cultured people in MCPC?" Participants claimed that equality and respect were valuable for open conversation. Self-emptying without prejudgement was a key because "Everyone is entitled to its own opinion." Then they were enthusiastic to give some suggestions to enhance communication, such as paired Bible study, paired prayer groups, paired ministries, such as co-teaching Sunday classes, mutual visits between the English Ministerial Meeting (EMT) and the Session meeting. Participants welcomed further conversation of the sort introduced in this study, believing it would be beneficial to MCPC’s relationships and ministries. "We need to give more interaction time and avenue for all these different groups to 'dream' and 'talk' about issues and plans before we can talk about how to proceed." Further in the conversation, participants began to share their own lived experience. I interpreted it as an improvement that participants did not feel threatened to share because relationship had been built. This demonstrated some trust of conversation partners as the session went on. A Cantonese participant began by claiming: "Actual involvement gives better understanding." A [ Page ] 177 participant shared the experience of serving on the English Pastoral Search Committee, working with English young people for the past three years. This changed the participant’s perspective. This person formed a better opinion of the English young people as the participant became more aware and knowledgeable of the English young people. Actually, one of "the English young people" was another study participant who was listening to the speaker. Another English participant shared his lived experience. He claimed that ministry invited people to work together. He shared about a serving experience, working with an elder and a Cantonese auntie. It was not as difficult as expected. He did not feel uneasy. The next guiding question was: "What possible actions can be taken?" Various suggestions from participants included: offering mentorship or discipleship programs to strengthen the bond between Cantonese and English speaking generations; translating all church announcements and publications into English and Chinese for better communication; providing a suggestion box or prayer items drop box to enhance caring. A participant suggested having a joint fellowship night so that people could interact with one another. I observed the participants becoming relaxed during the session. Some of them took the initiative to go deep, sharing honestly their personal lived experience without being felt threatened. This demonstrated some trust in relationship among the participants. [ Page ] 178 Session 3: Conflict Resolution Patterns The purpose of this session was to let participants perceive their own conflict resolution patterns, as well as that of others. The session covered the need to resolve conflict in MCPC’s real life situations. Having studied a biblical example of how the Apostolic church handled conflict, and presented Eastern and Western ways to handle conflict, I encouraged participants to exercise another feature of KC, stepping in to stretch into new ways of seeing things from another’s view. Session 3 details are in Appendix G. I facilitated the conversation by posing a question to address MCPC's real life situation: "How to resolve conflicts between first generation Chinese cultured people and second generation Canadian cultured people in MCPC?" Besides the idea of improving communication, participants showed their passion to suggest different approaches to resolve conflict. One approach was to find a common ground in resolving conflict. A participant claimed that both conflicting parties must have "some overlapping common interest." They could do "interest based negotiation" through mutual effort in conversation with a strategy of give and take; each side traded out something and got back something. Further on this track, someone suggested we should resolve conflict by addressing the facts rather than pointing fingers to blame others. Another idea added in was that a mediator was needed when conflict could not be resolved. Some ideas presumed the need to seek God's will and help. Participants were enthusiastic to take positive views of handling conflict. [ Page ] 179 Nevertheless, a participant spoke honestly from a Chinese perspective that speaking out explicitly in conversations to resolve conflict conversation would hurt the relationship. It was necessary to care about other people's feeling. Further on this, a Cantonese participant confessed: "It is more easy for young generation to change than old generation because [the old generation] have already built a long-long time habit." I interpreted that it was healthy to have different voices and opinions in conversation. Participants appear to have concurred, daring to speak out honestly without worrying about spoiling the new relationship. This reflected that some understanding and trust had developed among them so that even those offering different views would neither be punished nor marginalized. It was healthy in the study group to embrace different views to broaden their perspectives on the issue. Actually, I observed that no offensive verbal or nonverbal behaviour appeared. Instead, an English participant suggested: "I would like to maintain this conversation group as mediator." This group, consisting of both generations and cultures, has provided a strong foundation of interaction and understanding that could connect different groups in MCPC. Session 4: Empowerment The purpose of this session was to explore how to empower the next generation so that they can take up leadership positions since the current leadership is aging. I regarded this session topic as embodying KC’s concern for others because it addressed the needs of both generations. The older generation needed to pass the leadership baton and the younger generation needed to take it [ Page ] 180 up. This session encouraged the participants to express their own views of how empowerment should be and listen to others’ views. After Bible study and presentation of relevant material, I posed them guiding questions for their conversation. Session 4 details are in Appendix H. Participants held two different concepts regarding empowerment. First, was the thought that empowerment arises through self-study and adding value. One could get empowerment from study, learning something to empower oneself. Second was the idea that empowerment meant delegation of authority and responsibility by current leaders. As a facilitator, I clarified that the term empowerment in this study meant for the current leadership to give someone the power and responsibility to do something significant. The conversation revealed that participants from the Cantonese generation, who were church leaders, did not refuse to empower young people as leaders. One asserted that we should empower at "right time with right power to right person to do the right things." It was necessary to encourage the next generation to take up more leadership roles. Another leader participant expressed that we should actively create the atmosphere to make things happen instead of passively waiting for the situation to change. Empowerment required taking action: "Empower them to small ministry, develop their faith, to do difficult or complicated task. It is a process." For their part, the younger participants did not refuse to take up the leadership baton. They voiced their opinion that empowering new leaders required allowing mistakes to be made as leaders embraced new ways of doing [ Page ] 181 things. An English participant argued from the younger generation’s perspective: "It is important to enhance tolerance of allowing mistakes." A second English participant continued the idea: "Getting involvement in first generation term? or second generation term?...Need more free hand involvement." The idea was if new leaders were truly trusted, the older leaders needed to let them decide to do things their own way. A third English participant affirmed that there was no right or wrong with different opinions or directions. They were "not mutually exclusive, not either/or thinking, but both/and thinking." I interpreted that the young participants were willing to take up leadership roles. They need encouragement from current leaders because they worry that having different ways of doing things and making mistakes may evoke dispute. Session 5: Implementation Strategy Having gone through previous conversations, this brainstorming session aimed to explore implementation strategies for enhancing communication, resolving conflict and empowering the next generation in MCPC. I guided their conversation by asking "how" questions. Session 5 details are in Appendix I. Participants were excited to give suggestions. They were open and enthusiastic to exchange their ideas back and forth. Their suggestions were quite mixed. Concerning communication, the key was to "mobilize the whole church." Arranging events for the whole church could enhance interaction among MCPC people. A suggestion to increase face-to-face interaction was planning "no generation color events," such as inviting outside speakers to conduct workshops [ Page ] 182 for the whole church. Mentoring programs to pair up people of different generations was considered worthwhile. Other suggestions to address the congregation's needs included updating the church website frequently, in light of the younger generation’s habit of checking the web 24/7. Concerning conflict resolution, participants emphasized finding commonality to bond people together was feasible in MCPC. For example, our existing mission ministry could draw people from different congregations to work together. Concerning empowerment, participants focused on taking action by promoting cooperative joint activities and joint ministries. Current leaders supported new leaders by embracing possible mistakes and accepting their different ways and styles of leadership. The church should update its organizational chart, letting people know the leadership roles and responsibilities, as well as encouraging people to become leaders. A questionnaire survey was consulted to identify the younger generation’s talents and discern which serving positions might best suit their talents and interests. From their perspective and status in MCPC, the participants gave some worthwhile suggestions to consider for future implementation. This session acted as a survey to seek their views on implementation strategies for enhancing relationships in MCPC. The church could invite them to help in implementing some of the ministries they suggested. Session 6: Wrap Up The purpose of this session was to encourage participants to share in as much detail and as specifically as they could their own personal stories, [ Page ] 183 reflections, experiences and any changes resulting from the previous conversations. Session 6 details are in Appendix J. Participants focused on the issue of empowering the next generation, questioning why it could be achieved in the workplace but not in the church. They explored possible reasons why it did not happen in MCPC by honestly sharing their real life experience in family and in church, including their internal fear. Participants also asserted that mutual understanding was necessary in empowering the next generation. Participants from both the Cantonese and English generations admitted they held different value systems and ways of doing things. In concluding the study, participants appreciated the conversation sessions and confirmed the value of conversation in a structured, in-person and mutual form. The following paragraphs were extracted from their conversation. "Why we need next generation leaders?" a participant asked other participants with an inviting tone. Their responses were: the church needed continuity; fresh ideas to move forward; the earlier the better to develop the next generation of leaders. The participant shared his workplace experience. Now the age of a Chief Executive Officer is younger than ever before. The younger generation has become more aggressive and confident to sell themselves. They were smarter and went faster. However, this did not happen in church. Then I asked: "What factors limit empowering our next generations in MCPC?" An English participant suggested that we were not "not willing” but merely over cautious. We were more cautious about end results than satisfying others’ needs. Empowerment requires tolerance of mistakes but the older [ Page ] 184 generation were not risk takers. "The old needs to pass the baton, and the young needs to hold the baton. Just cooperate or collaborate." A Cantonese participant honestly shared that first generation leaders feared they would feel "I'm no use" if they let go of leadership. Leadership gave them a sense of still being useful. An English participant responded that empowerment was cooperation between generations: "Next generation relies on first generation experience. First generation needs second generation fresh idea." This participant claimed that when the first generation led, the next generation grew in that environment. A participant shared from his experience of serving experience that it was necessary for both generations to know the plan for empowerment. The time frame for achieving empowerment depended on how well the new leaders take up responsibility. Another noted: "if time is too long, people lost loyalty. It drops." Others asserted that understanding between current leaders and new leaders was important in empowerment. Both need to work out the plan and agree on goals and objectives. A participant emphasized: "Mutual understanding is very important. Second generation has to understand why first generation acts that way. It takes time. It takes mutual understanding." Another participant added that empowerment "starts from the heart...Has a heart to empower a person. Mutual understanding, care about the person." An English participant underlined a significant real life problem: "We can never reach a consensus because difference in value systems. Both want best, but not meet at the point. 'My honey could be your poison'." A Cantonese participant agreed, saying that when empowerment was realized, "I no longer impose my [ Page ] 185 value to church, now you [next generation] have to on your own. You run your way. Let go." Participants increasingly suggested it was time for the younger generation to take over. Current leaders must be open-minded to accept the next generation taking leadership roles, welcoming them and letting them step into those roles. Participants admitted, however, that the reality was much different. Embrace was valuable in empowerment. A little conversation between an English participant and a Cantonese participant in the session proved the depth of difference. An English participant expressed appreciation for this study: "I feel being valued...we have good communication...let other people know our appreciation." A Cantonese participant replied: "No need to say out." "How you expect second generation appreciate first generation?" "Appreciation through action. Saying is empty, doing is the truth. Action speaks louder than words'." Nevertheless, the Cantonese participant agreed that both generations need to accept and learn the other generation’s ways of communication. Having gone through six conversation sessions, participants claimed face- to-face conversation was better than other means of communication, such as texting. Reasons for asserting this included that interaction was fast, that seeing others’ facial and body language made it easier to know other participants’ feeling, that they gained experience, and that they could have a sense of working "together to achieve something." In an exit interview, one participant stated: “Face-to-face is the best option. Close interaction” (P1:E:9). Another participant, also when talking in an exit interview about face-to-face conversation, highlighted: “In conversation, built up trust, enhance communication and [ Page ] 186 therefore, can learn from each other” (P2:E:27-28). Participants treasured the sense of togetherness in the conversation sessions. Finally, I ended the session with prayer and expressed appreciation to the participants. Acknowledgement of the Project Participants considered mutual, in-person conversation as a good means of communication because it was more direct and clear. It also resulted in good outcomes, such as mutual benefit and increasing trust between participants. Participants confirmed that communication, conflict resolution and empowerment for the next generation were key issues to build up the relationship among Cantonese and English speaking generations in MCPC. A participant stated that: “The three key issues: communication, conflict resolution and empowerment. I totally agree that these three key issues are fundamental building blocks if you want birds of different feathers to come together” (P2:6:80-82). Overall Project Evaluation Participants responded to three evaluation questions in the exit interview (Appendix D) with their degree of agreement or disagreement on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strong disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neutral; 4 = agree; 5 = strong agree). For each question, I summed up all the numbers and divided by six to find the average (mean) of their overall responses. Average responses from participants to each question are summarized below. No response to any of three questions scored 3 or under. The table below shows findings from the participants' responses, all of which fell into either "agree" or "strongly agree. " [ Page ] 187 The findings show the participants agreed the conversation program was effective. Table 16: Overall Rating of Effectiveness of Conversation [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 16 details ] Scores are based on six participants - each generation has three participants. Kenotic Conversation Findings Two themes emerged from the conversation study. The first highlighted elements found to encourage productive conversation. These emerged from analyzing all of their feedback throughout the study period, as well as from data collected from participants' exit interviews. The second theme was the impact of conversation on the participants. This arose from comparison of data from intake and exit interviews, supplemented by some participants' reflections in feedback from sessions. There were two impacts. Participants changed their perception of others in the conversation group and actions taken by some participants. The following sections present findings on these themes: elements and impact. Elements in Kenotic Conversation (KC) Participants demonstrated positive attitudes towards conversation, which has been described earlier, by addressing the area being studied. Also they gave [ Page ] 188 their input on how to have meaningful conversations, both in response to questions asked in interviews and in their session feedback. In response to areas of communication, conflict resolution and empowering the next generation, participants asserted respectively: openness, having common ground and providing support were key elements. I isolated these three key elements by extracting the common features of conversation summarized in Table 10, p.165. Openness The theme of openness is particularly significant element in terms of communication. For example, the raw data collected in the area of communication were coded to gather together all references to the theme of openness. These six codes (involvement in conversations, open-mindedness to different views, awareness of self and others' differences, respect other participants, listening attentively and empathy to other participants) covered different aspects of openness in communication. In the conceptual framework of KC, the theme of openness expanded on the concept of self-emptying. It described the participants’ willingness to leave their comfort zones such as their own culture and generation, opening themselves to new ideas. It also involved their showing a respectful attitude to listen to people different from themselves. The theme of openness, as indicated by the codes, demonstrated in the participants during their conversation sessions and their input in the interviews and written feedback. In brief, the theme openness regarded to properties of participants' consciousness of self and/or [ Page ] 189 others. The theme openness linked with self-emptying feature in the KC and described the participants' views on the area (or issue) of communication. Involvement All six participants responded that the meaning of involvement in conversation was more than just being physically present. It also required being mentally, emotionally and socially present. Participants should engage in conversation with all their senses, including their ears, eyes and mouth. Furthermore, involvement in conversation meant people have to make an effort to arrange a conversation and get involved in it, whether informally or formally. This was evident from one participants’ observation concerning the discussion (P3:I:12-14): “Be open communication about good things, bring appreciation, say thank you. Be responsive, courtesy is important, respect, kind, gracious, & attentive. Be sensitive to body language, eye contact, interested and concern to people.” Another participant stated that personal involvement encouraged communication: “I'll be happy if old G approaches me and consult my ideas. I'll be very glad. This can be applied and used in church. Sit down and let the next G [me] talk, old G don't speak, just listen” (P2:E:23-25). The above findings go hand in hand with my field observations, where I watched participants become actively involved in the conversation as described earlier. They focused on the conversation without being disrupted, such as checking their cell phones. I observed some participants took their own notes as they listened. [ Page ] 190 Open-mindedness All participants affirmed that open-mindedness was important in conversation. It meant people encouraged different ideas, tried to be objective by suspending their own presumptions and their judgement of others. According to the participants, open-mindedness can be divided into thinking in terms of one’s own self and of others. Open-mindedness in one’s own self, one declared, means that we “Don't come with some presumption” (P4:E:24). Another noted: “Take time to think what they say, not to criticize too quick. I'm not the only one is correct. Not all my opinion are right” (Pl:E:19-20). Open-mindedness to others, according to another participant meant being open and subjective: “After the program, I become more open, open to one another, for example, with young people, I'm approachable. I can see more of their motivation. I may not be totally agree with, but I would not say they are wrong, and also I would not hinder them. There is no black and white. Grey area is broad” (P2:S:29-32). Open-mindedness was evident from my observation of the conversation sessions, in which participants exchanged views without using offensive language or tone. This open-mindedness to others was demonstrated through less defensive and judgemental attitudes when perceiving personal differences. As mentioned in Chapter 3, Wheatley argues that people with open-mindedness are usually curious about each other when engaging in conversation (Wheatley 2009, 33). It encourages mutual interest in conversation. [ Page ] 191 Awareness Awareness is an aspect of openness to others' responses. With regard to cultural and generational differences, the Cantonese and English participants recognized their own culture, generation, methods of thinking and handling things, as well as the other participants’ approaches. They claimed that there were two kinds of awareness, awareness of one’s own self and awareness of others. They suggested that self-awareness helped them to increase awareness of others: “I am now more aware about different cultures. Now I feel like to take consideration” (Pl:S:13). Another added: “Now learn to adapt and appreciate. Make more smarter decision. Appreciate first generation. Help me understand how I think myself and others. Appreciate first generation and their thinking. Help me to see my first generation friends and how they think” (P4:S:13-15). A third linked awareness with being sensitive to others: “From the project, I know more, sensitive to different subcultures. With regard to them personally, to their ways of handling things, and to their ways of thinking, I understand more of their response and behavior. It causes me to accept people with different cultures” (P2:S:23-25). These two kinds of awareness indicate that when participants examined their own thoughts it helped them to understand better others' thoughts from different cultures and generations. This led participants to accept, appreciate and make smarter decisions. LeBaron claims that "there will be not cultural conflict if we move beyond our ethnocentric views and blind spots (LeBaron 2003, xi-xiii; emphasis added). Awareness is a positive attribute, helping people gain trust and [ Page ] 192 understanding, leading to commitment and action (Harkins 1999, 8) as laid out in Chapter 3. Respect All participants asserted that respect was necessary. They agreed that honest and genuine expression of oneself must be balanced by granting others an equal right to speak. Participants in this study consisted of two generations, cultures and church status (leaders and members). They affirmed that respect protected all participants’ right to speak. This respect did not intend to disrespect or undermine any generation or position. Such factors, they agreed, should not be barriers to guarding the right to express one's views and opinions. People practising this respect facilitated on-going conversation. The views on respect expressed by the two groups of participants were like two sides of the same coin. English participants stated their need to be respected, even though they were young: “Be sure not to feel my opinion and expectation above the other. I won't undermine their own. Respect and consider them” (Pl :I:22-23). In a later session, one opined: “Be equal, remove position of parent, just a friend with my kids, allow people share openly and honestly. Allow them trust me” (P4:E:7-9). Evidence of the granting of such respect by Cantonese speakers emerged in an English speaker’s feedback from the third session: “I'm respected even I'm younger, have equal say as old generation. May be my age is younger, not mature, but don't want to be felt stupid, not want to have a feeling of inadequate, unintelligence, otherwise, disengage in the conversation” (P3:I:47-50). [ Page ] 193 The Cantonese generation participants realized the younger people’s need to keep face. They affirmed the importance of keeping the younger people's voice in the flow of conversation: “Also second generation's face is important, give them respect” (P6:E:7). Another allowed that: “Everyone is entitled to its own opinion” (P2:2:46). The same person offered an unalloyed expression of respect in feedback from the Supplementary Interview: “I don't like classes. I prefer equality” (P2:S:52). Participants did not put their views and opinions over others but valued those expressed by others. Respect was valuable in keeping conversation open and honest. This was also captured during my observation. Participants appeared to speak at ease in the conversation sessions. Each had a turn to speak without being interrupted. Listening Listening was an expression of appreciation in conversation. Participants grasped that the prerequisites of a good listener include being open-minded without prejudgement and listening attentively: “Listening - good listening, open- minded, non-judgmental listening, not to guess any motive behind” (P2:E:9-10). Specific recognition of the significance of nonverbal communication included this comment: “Be sensitive to body language, eye contact, interested and concern to people” (P3:E:14). These findings were supported by my in session observations. Participants listened attentively, turning their faces to people who spoke, making eye contact. [ Page ] 194 They kept silent when listening. Law states that listening respectfully may inspire understanding (Law 2009, handwritten lecture notes) Empathy Empathy in conversation among the participants helped them to be emotionally sensitive and accept others’ differences. They tried to perceive from others’ perspectives, being sensitive to individual needs and feelings, such as keeping face. Furthermore, this empathy appeared to change behaviour. One English speaker stated: “Try to give more respect, more sensitive to their feeling with interaction with first generation. Sensitive to the needs of their face, facts and feelings” (P6:E:17-18). Another enthused about empathy: “Know how Chinese culture people thinking. Accommodate the way they communicate. When they are happy, talk something important casually, they are more open” (P3:E:9- 10). From a Cantonese speaker came this observation: “Not everyone is opened to change and not everyone want to experience new things. I think that’s OK too” (P2:6:174-175). This participant’s feedback on Session 6 included: “I can appreciate some of the issues between different generations and different cultures (P2:6:72-73). Summary of Openness and Its Significance Participants asserted that openness was a key element for productive conversation. Data collected about openness consisted of six categories. Involvement refers to personal engagement in conversation. It was a starting point, conversation becoming possible only as people made the effort. Open- [ Page ] 195 mindedness refers to suspension of one’s own presumptions and judgement of others. It encouraged expression of different ideas, facilitating the search for mutual interests. Awareness refers to being open to others' responses. It helped to gain a deep understanding of each other. Respect refers to valuing people of different backgrounds. It was valuable in keeping conversation open and honest. Listening was an expression of appreciation in conversation, encouraging on- going conversation. Empathy refers to emotional sensitivity to difference by trying to see from another’s perspective. This led to taking care of others’ needs, rather than one’s own, during conversation. Common Ground The theme of common ground is valuable in terms of conflict resolution. Seven codes were developed in the area of conflict resolution. These codes shared the same theme: common ground. From them emerged two aspects of common ground: a confessional aspect and an interpersonal aspect. The common ground element was based on what the participants agreed with such as same Christian beliefs. In the conceptual framework of KC, common ground described the stepping in feature. It described that the participants were crossing the boundary from their own perceived self-value and stepping into others’ (of differences such as culture and generation) and trying to come up with some common ground leading to resolve conflict. The element common ground was expressed by the participants' input in the project. In brief, the common ground regarded properties by which participants related to others. It linked with the stepping in feature in the [ Page ] 196 KC and described the participants' views on the area (or issue) of conflict resolution. Confessional Aspects All the research participants were professing members of MCPC. As their pastor for almost ten years, I knew them because I have delivered sermons, taught Sunday classes, conducted various fellowships and groups, and done personal counselling with some. Yet I could not simply assume that all participants shared the same detailed understanding of how to honour God in Christian practice. Participants have different levels of spiritual maturity and confessing commitment. I could not assume that they all would take their Christian faith and belief seriously in all of their experiences, explicitly seeking to honour and depend upon God when handling life situations, such as resolving conflict. Body of Christ Despite differences in language, culture and generation, participants agreed that they were in the Body of Christ. One affirmed: “Remind all of us that we are all servants of Christ. Jesus Christ is our boss and head of MCPC” (P6:3:48-49). Another, reflected: “Physically, we may speak different languages, but our commonality is founded on God's Word and God's truth. That is our common language” (P4:3:19-20). The awareness of the concept of the Body of Christ indicated that even if participants were in conflict, they were still connected, in relationship under the godhead of Christ. This awareness paralleled the Apostle Paul’s teachings that the church is the Body of Christ (Eph. 1:23). We [ Page ] 197 are one body in Christ (1 Cor. 12:27; Rom. 12:5); the body is one yet has many limbs. The Body of Christ was an important common ground the participants stood on when conflict arose. God's Will Participants agreed that we should look for God’s will and stated that we need to believe and submit to Him: “Prayers and Bible study together. Look for God's will” (P5:3:14). During conservation, it was also clear that through God, reconciliation was possible among conflicting parties and we should always put God first and above everything. Stemming from the awareness, reverence and love for God, one affirmed: “Have Bible study and prayer, God will guide and allows us. We have to learn to believe and submit to Him. Bible study and prayer together is the best, let all understand God, not dad/mom's will. We together to seek God's will” (P5:E:75-77). Seeking God's will added significantly to resolving conflict. No one person’s will dominated the decision. When the conflicting parties accorded God's will the ultimate authority, reconciliation was possible among them. Participants asserted that we should always put God first and above everything, stemming from an awareness, reverence and love for God. God's Way Participants conpnected conflict resolution with following God's way, agreeing to apply His way to others to solve problems: “To have an environment be understandable, respectful, listening, demonstrate Christ-like, speak not in anger, and create a positive environment in conversation” (P3:I:16-18). This [ Page ] 198 person added: “Sit down face-to-face talk with conflict party. Be a Christian, sit down and prayer, ask God's presence in resolving conflict...At the end, pray with each other. Apologize if need, seek for forgiveness if wrong. Healing needs grace and recover from conflict, able to redeem” (P3:I:32-33 & 42-44). Another said: “Through prayer together, read Bible together, to know God and follow God” (P5:I:63). By arranging a favourable environment with a Christ-like manner to resolve conflict, participants discerned a substantial way to follow God's way. The Bible urges following God's way to find success; Christ proclaimed He is the Way (John 16:6). Biblical Authority God's will and God's way are found in the Bible. Participants asserted that the Bible is a basic need, as it is the ultimate authority to bridge any gap (P6:2:5- 6), to rebuke and correct (Pl:S:25), as well as to go beyond their cultural and generational differences. One declared: “Need to bridge the gap. We need to use Bible as standard to look at issues concerned” (P6:2:5-6). Another affirmed: “We need rebuke, correct if biblically wrong. But no need to correct if not biblically wrong” (Pl:S:25). A third called for unity: “Let every member receive the same message from God: Bible, regardless any culture, for example, Chinese, Confucius, Maple leaf. Back to basic: Bible” (P5:E:34-35). Hope appeared in this reflection: “Indeed, I wish that whatever we do in our Church. We put our eyes towards Jesus. Our events are all centered on Jesus. We do it for Jesus. We do this together to succeed by the grace of our Lord Jesus. The knowledge we gathered, [ Page ] 199 the technique we accumulated, the programs that we planned are only means that we will go a better job, an improvement for God. Amen (P6:6:61-64).” Summary of the Confessional Aspects and Their Significance Honouring God is a core value in MCPC. Whatever the church’s activities, it seeks to glorify God despite the differences in generation and culture. People in MCPC acted like a spiritual family in the Body of Christ. All people accorded the Bible its authority as the standard. That authority transcends human cultures, generations and languages. All people directed their attention from "me" to "we" in God's family. Because they honored God, people were more willing to lay aside of their own views and consider others. They sought to work together for God’s glory through conflict resolution. Elmer argues that honouring God is the vital commonality that both conflicting parties must share in conversation to resolve conflict in Christian community (Elmer 1993, 171). He claims the importance of the concept of the Body of Christ in dealing conflict. "In the midst of conflict, it is good to assure one another that our relationship with God is foremost in our minds" (Elmer 1993, 171). This mirrors a Chinese axiom from Confucius: "If our beliefs are different, we cannot get together to discuss" (Chen, et al 1990, 316). It is to say that if our fundamental belief is different, we have no ground to plan and cooperate in taking action. Honouring God is the fundamental belief that MCPC stands on, the spiritual foundation on which other things could build up. [ Page ] 200 Common Ground: Interpersonal Aspects Just as the kenotic Christ had to leave the glory of Heaven to take on human flesh, so also do these confessional foundations need to take on flesh and blood reality. This leads to the interpersonal aspects of common ground. Passion to Resolve Conflict Passion to resolve conflict refers to the gathering together of concerned parties to deal with the issue. Participants wanted to deal with conflict as directly and efficiently as possible. Appropriate times and settings provided a relaxed atmosphere. People conversed in an equal, respectful, open and interactive manner. One stated: “Make sure the matter has to deal with, as soon as possible. It requires communication, interaction. Don't let it drag on, don't hold it. Don't hold it” (P1:E:27-28). To this another added: “Find most appropriate time, both not stress out, in relax atmosphere, then talk equally together, and ask feedback” (P6:E:29-30). A Cantonese speaker courageously self-emptied: “Put down the first generation hierarchy. 'I know better than you.' I should learn 'I don't know everything.' Therefore I need to listen what others say” (P2:E:35-36). This person added: “Continue communication, even though cannot enter an acceptable agreement from both sides, but still have communication, keep communication channel open” (P2:I:41 -43). Okafor and Osakindle highlight that both sides should have a passion to make an effort to commit to resolving conflict (Okafor and Osakindle 2014; cf. Chapter 3). Participants need to look into the other side’s view and understand it. Doing so would better prepare them to engage in [ Page ] 201 resolving conflict openly and constructively (Putnam and Folger 1988). The Chinese characters (危機) "crisis" carry two meanings: (危) danger and (機) opportunity. People may see conflict as crisis but it can also be an opportunity to build relationship through conflict resolution. To quote a Chinese idiom, "不打不相識" (P2:I:35): "After fighting to each other, now we know each other better and become friends." Being Factual In handling conflict, participants tried to address facts instead of blaming others by finger pointing. This became evident during the discussion: “Conflict resolution is to both sides want to try. The principle: to the facts, not to personal” (P2:I:40-41). A second added: “Look at the matter, don't look at the person. Issue- oriented rather than person-oriented. Encourage to see the fact” (P6:E:43-44). Seeking facts became important: “Ask the fact straight. I don't suppose thing, until I understand the fact, and understand how they feel” (P4:I:13-14). According to Elmer (1993, 174), being factual and dealing with the facts helps to create genuine understanding of the situation. Otherwise, finger pointing at others will miss the point and bring greater conflict. Okafor and Osakindle (2014, 328-330) underscore that parties resolving conflict must be factual, address the issue by avoiding use of offensive language, and encourage exploration of the others’ minds by asking gentle, probing questions. On this line, someone stated: “Ask questions to find the fact, because questions are non-threatening, let people think about the facts” (P4:I:19-20). Being factual gives space to both sides to digest [ Page ] 202 messages instead of a constant, rapid-fire exchange of opinions that decreases opportunities to resolve conflict. Being factual facilitated conflict resolution. Commonality Commonality helped resolve MCPC’s problem. Stressing commonalities, such as a mutually acceptable procedure, rules for conflict resolution rules and a facilitator proved valuable to conflict resolution. A Cantonese speaker asked: “find a common ground. Sometimes go to third party to settle, for example, court, arbitrator, find the party which both agree to have arbitrate. Both sides should accept the final result from this third party. Both sides decide the process, and the process decides the outcome” (P2:I:43-46). Another stated that agreement even on small things could help in resolving conflict: “Find some common ground both agree on, even small thing” (P3:I:40). Bennett argues that people are able to converge over a commonality. It opens up the possibility of knowing others, and in turn, through feedback from others, people begin to know their own selves more (Bennett 1986). A participant shared that adopting an objective way of handling could offer opportunity for conflicting parties to work together. That, in turn, may enhance collaboration and lower hostility. “Use an objective method do it for, say, six months, and after that, evaluation, try your method. Therefore, both have ground rules. Upon big frame, both find some solution, this is partnership, not hostility” (P2:I:38-40). Finding commonality can express some of KC’s features as parties in conflict become willing to self-empty what they had otherwise insisted upon, stepping in to find a possible commonality for the benefit [ Page ] 203 of both, and showing concern for others in caring of their needs with the purpose of resolving conflict. Summary of the Interpersonal Aspects and Their Significance Participants asserted that common ground was a key element for conflict resolution. Two aspects of common ground appeared in the data: the confessional and the interpersonal. The confessional aspect referred to the participants’ commitment to take their Christian faith and belief seriously in handling conflict. It consisted of four elements: Body of Christ, God's will, God's way, and, biblical authority. Participants' belief in the Body of Christ was a fundamental common ground on which the conflicting parties stood. In terms of seeking God's will, participants were willing to put it into practice by following God's way. Biblical authority served as a processing guide in resolving conflict. The interpersonal aspect pointed to the components participants asserted were valuable in resolving conflict. It consisted of three elements: passion to resolve conflict; being factual; commonality. Passion to resolve conflict refers to the conflicting parties’ willingness to start by gathering together to deal with the issue. Being factual refers to conflicting parties’ focus on facts instead of people, seeking solutions logically instead of emotionally. Commonality refers to the formulation of mutually acceptable ways to handle problems. The process could offer opportunities for conflicting parties work together, possibly enhancing collaboration and lowering hostility. [ Page ] 204 Support With regard to empowering the next generation, an English participant pointed out that the first generation’s fear was a barrier. I understand now why first generation hesitate to empower second generation: is FEAR [participant wrote in capital letters]. What they fear about. They forget about how church grow in the past. Self-conflicting, fear of mistakes, fear of failure, fear of workload, fear of doing work... A lot of fears destroy empowerment. Fear of consequence, fear of losing respect, fear of losing status, fear of change. A lot of first generation against, they forget how things 20 years ago from now MCPC built up. Allow new leaders at that time. (P4:S:62-64 & 69-71) Participants asserted that empowerment required support. There were three kinds of support: encouraging the next generation to learn to take up leadership roles; accepting change by willing to risk failure; taking action in ministry. The theme of support is particularly significant in terms of empowerment. Three codes cover material in the area of empowerment. These codes represent particular expressions of the theme of support, such as encouragement. In the conceptual framework of KC, the theme of support relates to demonstrating concern for others. It described the participants’ concern for others’ needs and their search to benefit others through empowerment. Participants opined that a number of different forms of support were necessary for empowerment. In brief, the theme of support regarded to properties by which participants treated others. Participants noted the importance of support in terms of achieving empowerment. Encouraging All agreed that encouraging young people and sharing leadership experience were valuable to ensure that the new leaders have the ability to lead [ Page ] 205 and take up leadership posts. English speakers stated that it was important for young people to be encouraged and supported to become leaders. An English speaker, talking as if he were a first generation leader, declared: Encourage younger generation to step up, I step down a bit, stop taking over. Let them step up what needs to be done. Use my experience. Approaching, open to help them. Give opportunity to step up to experience as a leader. Young generation may feel unconfident and nervous. Let them know it's ok. Encourage them. Prayer together. Let them know I always to help them if need. (Pl:I:37-41) Another English speaker agreed: “Old generation - Don't be negative. This is the biggest thing. A lot can be accomplished if old generation is more supportive” (P4:E:54-55). The first speaker added: “If I got encouragement from older generation, it will motivate me more” (P1:I:16). On the other side, Cantonese speakers agreed that encouragement was valuable to empower the next generation’s leaders by providing tangible and intangible support by way of advice and resources. As one said: “Give [the younger generation] encouragement, resources & materials, complement, let them feel good and support” (P6:E:52-53). Penner argues that interacting with the older generation is beneficial since we gain wisdom, encouragement and blessing (Penner 2011, 58). Encouragement is fuel to motivate the next generation to learn to take up leadership role. Accept Change Accepting change is part and parcel of the process of empowering young people to take leadership roles. This can be done through allowing young people to take leadership positions and accepting when things are done differently. [ Page ] 206 Accepting change meant three things: the first generation’s letting go; accepting different ways of doing things; accepting the risk of possible failure in the leadership learning process. A Cantonese speaker allowed: “In order to empower the younger generation, we must first learn how to let go” (P5:6:52). Another admitted the need to “[f]ollow [the younger generation’s] instruction. Let them try their ways of doing things” (P6:I:59-60). Some mused: “Allow and accept different ways of doing things, how they would prefer to do. Give the chance to do even they may not do it right. Give them the authority to do. They actually take it on. Give it to them full responsibility, let them fails, learn from mistakes” (P4:E:43-46). Positive responses from English speakers included eagerness and readiness to implement the empowering process in MCPC. One averred: “I felt that it's time for young generation to take up” (Pl:E:43-44). Someone else enthused: I'm very happy to be involved in conversations about empowering the next generation at MCPC! I feel that it is very important and a good time to develop a strategy to do so. There are many examples of other Chinese churches losing their second generation, because the younger generation grows increasingly disconnected from the older generation and presumably, due to a lack of empowerment and involvement in church management and leadership. (P3:4:7-11) The findings parallel Feldman and Khademian's three empowerment considerations: first, to run the risk of accepting new leaders; second, to expect there may be new ways of accomplishing the work; and, third, to embrace that new leaders are going to make mistakes (Feldman and Khademian 2003, 24). The findings showed the first generation were willing to let go and accept change. Barna argues that to pass the leadership baton to a new generation, current leaders [ Page ] 207 must let go of the reins graciously and joyfully, ready to embrace change (Barna 2004, 3-4). Merritt claims that empowerment was an expression of trust: "As we begin to trust young people in our congregations....and allow them to have some power, then our churches will reflect that leadership" (Merritt 2007, 146). Taking Action The next generation cannot be empowered without taking action. All agreed to come up with a plan to empower young leaders. Actions suggested were enhancing communication and conducting joint projects through interaction. One called for creation of a plan, program, structure and system to empower the next generation, specifically a partnership for teaching Sunday School together (P2:I:68-69). Another suggested: It would be helpful to have more opportunities to work together to improve our communication and learn to serve with each other effectively. This would be very encouraging to see and participate in and would make a significant difference to the future of MCPC. (P4:4:15-18) Members of both generations agreed it would be powerful if current leaders shared their life experiences. As leadership development continues, I will observe from time to time and remind leaders of this suggestion. “Before that, I'll demonstrate to them, like 'I do, you watch; I do, you help...etc.' I set an example first” (P2:E:53-54). A younger person added: “Want to see how they [first generation] do things. Learn from them, watch/leam from them. Observe and learn, and get excited to, interesting, enjoyable so that develop a passion for it. Explain and teach me the value of that work” (P4:E:51-53). [ Page ] 208 This finding shows the intentions of leaders to take action and empower the next generation. This reflected the belief of the Chinese cultured people, in this study Cantonese speakers, that as Wu and Chao's study good intentions were better expressed through actions than words (Wu and Chao 2005, 517). Verbal appreciation offered by an English speaker at the end of the last session underlined this belief: "Saying is empty, doing is the truth. 'Action speaks louder than words'." Summary of Support and Its Significance Participants asserted that support was a key element to empower the next generation of leaders. Findings show that support consists of three categories. Encouragement meant instead of being negative, current leaders would provide tangible and intangible support to the younger generation. Motivating new leaders to learn and take up leadership roles is powerful. Accepting change requires the current leaders let go, accepting new ways of doing things and taking the risk of possible failure when new leaders were learning. It was crucial to release the younger generation, giving them space to grow and learn to become mature. Taking action referred to the search for collaboration between current leaders and new leaders. This connected both generations in real life, so life and working experiences could be exchanged, helping young people become excited to learn to become leaders. [ Page ] 209 Impact of Kenotic Conversation Conversation is not merely about shared thinking. It can turn competition into collaboration, as people begin to work together (Isaacs 1999, 23; Yankelovich 2001, 173; Wilson 2009, 25). When comparing data collected from participants' intake interviews with exit interviews and their sessions’ feedback, I found that KC had two central impacts on the participants: their perspective toward each other changed and study led to concrete action. Impact on Change of Perspective Participants demonstrated three changes in perspective after the conversations: enhanced mutual understanding; improved relationships; greater trust among them. Understanding Before the conversations, participants from both generations expressed the need to have their feelings and perspective understood by the other generation, yet they did not believe that the other side understood them. Indeed, participants critiqued others' culture negatively, adopting their own values as the standard by which to measure others. Many expressed concerns during their intake interviews, as well as a few during session feedback. One worried: “I hope old generation considers what I feel” (P 1:I:28). Another echoed: “Hope the older generation understand my perspective. I think older generation doesn't understand younger generation” (P3:I:46-47). A Cantonese speaker feared: “My second generation does not understand my feeling” (P5:I:11-12). Another feared lack of respect in [ Page ] 210 return: “I respect your choice, but I need you to understand why I feel this way” (P5:I:45-46). Distrust arose from lack of understanding: “I find it strange that they expect strong family units without expression or feeling, but rather based on obligation” (P3:1:10-11). An English speaker added: I see Chinese culture as being formal and hierarchical. This can result in people feeling distant from one another and a lack of warmth or sincerity. Some of the philosophies seem confusing or conflicting to me and do not resonate with my personal values. In particular, those around being passive or lukewarm (taking the mean). (P3:1:3-6) KC enhanced participants’ awareness of understanding in two aspects. First, they improved their self-understanding, becoming more aware of each other’s thinking pattern and culture. One noted: “I enhance the awareness of understanding - both myself, and others, about the cultures and generations” (Pl:S:23-24). Another shared: “Enhance my understanding others thinking patterns, being respectful of how people thinking and respond in different situation” (P4:S:6-7). Regarding self-understanding, data findings demonstrated that after the KC program, participants enhanced their awareness by self-critique, admitting their own blind spots, and becoming deliberate in their self-evaluation and reflection. “I need to admit that I myself have blind spot, evaluate my own self. Admit my mistakes if have” (P6:E:33-34). Someone confessed: “1 admit, in my generation group, we often behave with double standard. We set expectations for our children but yet we, ourselves do not live by the same” (P5:6:32-33). An elder candidly admitted: “We translate the word ‘respect’ into ‘obedient.’ We share our experience with the next generation in a negative manner. We always turn them off by preaching and nagging them to death!” (P5:6:37-39; emphasis [ Page ] 211 original) A young person stepped into the elders’ worldview: “Appreciate first generation. [The program] help me understand how I think myself and others. Appreciate first generation and their thinking. Help me to see my first generation friends and how they think....Now I understand” (P4:S: 13-17). A second aspect of enhanced understanding after the KC program was a much fuller understanding of others. Participants became more understanding of others’ generation and culture. They stated in exit interviews that they changed their perspective before and after the program, becoming more understanding to others. One enthused: “The session helped me to see many past experiences in a new light and acknowledge that the actions of [the older generation] may not have been purposeful acts to hurt me, but rather their customary way of dealing with conflict or communicating during conflict (P3:3:16-19). Another gained this insight: “Before the project, I regard their perspective is wrong, their opinion is wrong. After the project, I know more about their background and culture. 'If I were them, I will do the same as them.' The project enhance my understanding” (P2:S:26-28). An elder remarked: “Now I understand more second generation their thinking, communication skill work around Canadian culture and second generation culture” (P5:E:11-12). The enhancement of understanding both self and others helped participants to become aware of and accept differences, to be more considerate, to respect and be less judgemental of people who differed from them. “Accept the facts that we are different. Before, I'm more judgemental. Now more understanding” (Pl:S:20-21). Further along this line, one remarked: “Help me [ Page ] 212 work well to one another. More balance between respect and make a change for better. Understand when is necessary, how to respect. Learn to practice more. Need to understand, it's worth considering” (P4:S: 18-20). A third added: “From the project, I know more, sensitive to different subcultures. With regard to them personally, to their ways of handling things, and to their ways of thinking, I understand more of their response and behavior. It causes me to accept people with different cultures” (P2:S:23-25). The first speaker thus applied the new insight: “I enhance the awareness of understanding - both myself, and others, about the cultures and generations. Now I would not take action quickly, but think more” (Pl:S:23-24). The enhancement in understanding of both self and others changed participants' willingness to adjust their behaviour when responding to others, the better to connect with people and, as a result, work better together. An English speaker affirmed: “Know how Chinese culture people thinking. Accommodate the way they communicate. In before, confrontation. Now not so deliberate, more casual, it'll be more effective. Cooking dinner, casual, do some significant in a casual way, not so much confrontation” (P3:E:6-8). Another shared a real life experience of how enhancement of understanding lessened tension with parents: “I am now more aware about different cultures. Now I feel like to take consideration of my parents. I am much aware of about our differences. These differences make me more....know how to respond.... I can't say that it's not right, it's wrong. Not judge anymore. Therefore lest tension” (P1:S:13-19). [ Page ] 213 When comparing intake interviews with exit interviews, I found that participants enhanced their mutual understanding in terms of their self- understanding and understanding of others. It demonstrated that understanding resulted from conversation among people in MCPC of different cultures and generations. Conversation was a part of a mutual journey to enhance understanding. "A key outcome of conversation is the ability of a diverse group of people to come to a common understanding" (Born 2008, 5). Isaacs also states conversation can widen our views and create a new kind of association when we listen to others’ views. Conversation changes the ways people see one another and work together (Isaacs 1999, 23). Relationship Comparing the intake and exit interviews, data shows participants improved their relationships. Before the conversation program, participants preferred not to have face-to-face communication. They argued that they were not related to each other and their ways of doing things were so different they had no common point for negotiation: “We do not face to face communicate, and no facial communication. We text a lot” (P5:I:6-7). Opinions from the English speakers included, “Old generation is reluctant to say in front of next generation. Prefer not upfront talk to them” (P5:I:8-9), and “If old generation insists” their ways “are working,” I will quietly do what I want anyway, leading to the “extreme...you do your own, I do my own” (P2:I:21-22). Yet another added: “Want autonomy. Avoid conversation with old generation. I just want to do my [ Page ] 214 own thing” (P3:I:23). More submissively, one declared: “If [the older generation] strongly against, I'll consider not to do. Or I do it and don't tell them” (P6:I:44- 45). Finally, someone lamented: “I feel a significant distance between the two generations” (P3:4:23-24). After KC, participants improved their relationship in two aspects. First, participants improved personal relationships among the group, as a result of being brought together for interaction through conversation. One participant highlighted that: “If I never met and talk with [another participant], I wouldn't go to tell him my personal story. Now we see each other a few weeks. Now I wouldn't mind to tell him my personal story” (Pl:S:32-34). Second, participants developed their working relationships among themselves. After KC, talk in general became easier. They were less afraid to discuss issues affecting them and the church: “Now it's easier to discuss this topic. For example [another church] is proactive to get new leaders, young leaders. But it was not in MCPC. But now it's easier to discuss the topic. Go back and more together. Easier to talk about” (P4:S:40-45). Another corroborated: “After project, I am less afraid to bring things up. People keep it hidden from being talk about. After project, people more open, church members come together to discuss the topic. We understand each other, how culture thinks. It'll be easier to talk and less afraid to talk about it” (Pl:S:42-45). A participant suggested maintaining this study’s conversation group because this group consisted of people with different generations and cultures who had already come to understand each other through these sessions. The [ Page ] 215 conversation group could serve as a mediator to connect and to enhance conversation among different groups in MCPC: I like the idea of maintaining this conversation group as mediator between groups...but I also encourage inviting new members to the group to enhance first generation and second generation conversations. Maintaining the group which consists of both generations can create a strong foundation of interactions and understanding, where first and second generations work towards similar goals. (Pl:3:16-20) As the conversation sessions went on, I observed that they grew more at ease, rearranging seats to mix together instead of sitting opposite each other by generation. Before the later sessions began, they had lively chats about daily life, like their work or their families. Before one session, they shared video clips of how badly local roads had flooded because of heavy rain and how it snarled traffic. They grew excited to share without hesitation their views and suggestions of how to enhance conversation. One underlined not only that relationship arises from communication but that some flaws in communication were overcome by a good relationship: “Communication is a relationship, mutual understanding, get to know each other. If having good relationship: even some unintentional speaking is okay. But if in bad relationship, any speaking is no good” (P2:E:14-16). This finding showed that conversation could promote relationship, in keeping with what is asserted in the literature (Harkins 1999; Cloud and Townsend 2003; Isaacs 1999). Yankelovich argues that conversation helps to build relationships when an individual’s perception changes from "you or me" to "you and me" (Yankelovich 2001, 13-15). The present study found that KC could promote both personal and working relationships. [ Page ] 216 Trust Comparison of data from the intake and exit interviews found that participants built up trust within the group. Before the program, participants demonstrated little trust of others. They preferred not to open up to or consult with others, not letting go but holding onto their perceived power to make decisions on their own. Despite that, they wanted others to trust them, allowing them to do things their own way: “Don't just let them do their own things in their own” (P1:I:7). An elder declared: “I share with second generation, ask for their feedback. Decision still belong to me” (P6:I:12). A younger person countered: “First generation has the right to make all the final decisions. Because they feel it is not based on knowledge and experience but based on age and social status” (P2:2:35-36). More pointedly another added: “Respect my way of handling things. Don't treat me [like a] little [child]. I'm grown up, adult already” (P5:I:53- 54). KC facilitated the building of trust in at least two ways. First, personal trust was built among them, as a result of the interaction created by the conversation program. One highlighted how conversation facilitated greater trust with another: “Enhance trust after program. A lot easier for me to trust. That releases tension. If I never met and talk with [another participant], I wouldn't go to tell him my personal story. Now we see each other a few weeks. Now I wouldn't mind to tell him my personal story. This is trust” (Pl:S:31-34). Another confirmed the conversation program’s role in developing trust among participants. Trust could not be accomplished single-sided but only [ Page ] 217 mutually. Conversation encouraged a different kind of trust than shared with people not in the KC program: “Trust comes mutually, can't be one sided. I trust people those who are involved in the program, that is the research program. If people outside the program, probably not” (P4:S:36-37). The second aspect of trust was rooted in collaboration, with KC’s leading not only to a change of perspective on trust but also a change in action. A Cantonese speaker describes this change in the collaborative working experience: “After the program...more interaction, E [an English participant] came to my home to pray. I am let go at ease that E goes, give E trust. We all trust God, rather than mutual trust. God will provide, people support, emails. E felt really not by mouth, but by really deeds” (P6:S:15-18). Data revealed different understandings of trust. Cantonese speakers considered “trust” as passing the leadership baton to the next generation. One admitted: “In order to empower the younger generation, we must first learn how to let go” (P5:6:52). Another added: “Willing to let young G try...and not treat them as a baby. Let them do, even they cannot do it at the first instance. It is a learning process” (P2:E:50-52). On the other side, English speakers saw trust as taking the leadership baton from the first generation. A representative of this party offered: “I'm willing to take over, but I need support...1'11 open to responsibility, won't afraid to take the challenge, but don't leave me alone, because I'm no experience, need support” (Pl:E:55,59-60). Trust meant passing the leadership baton between generations. This required collaboration from both sides, with willingness to give and take respectively. It would not succeed if either of any [ Page ] 218 side was not willing, as one participant stated: “It is a mutual "take over," it would not work if one side is too stubborn to let go or if the other side is too lazy or selfish to carry on the responsibility” (P5:6:52-53). The different ways the two generations expressed trust paradoxically complemented each other, affirming the need for a transfer of leadership from one generation to the next. Trust, developed through KC, helped participants to get close and benefit from collaboration in ministry. Harkins claims that face-to-face conversation emotionally connects people. It will enhance trust when people are committed to take action and increase their performance (Harkins 1999, xii). Wilson argues that a positive outcome of conversation is that it “increases trust, bonding, attention, and pleasure” (Wilson 2009, 87). Yankelovich claims that conversation has its magic of binding people together, enhancing mutual understanding, strengthening relationship and building trust in one another (Yankelovich 2001, 215). LeBaron argues conversation brings more than just enhanced mutual understanding and strengthened relationship; some conversations actually produce tangible joint action (LeBaron 2003, 257-258). The findings of this study showed that besides changing participants’ perspective in terms their understanding, relationship and trust, participants also started some joint action during the conversation study period. [ Page ] 219 Summary of Impact on Change of Perspective Comparison of intake and exit interviews demonstrated three changes of perspective among the participants. First, participants enhanced their understanding of themselves and others regarding cultural and generational differences. They became more understanding and accepting of the differences. Second, participants improved relationships among the group. They strengthened their personal and working relationships, becoming open to share their own selves with other participants in the study group. On a working level, participants became more at ease to talk through some difficult issues affecting the church. Third, participants built up trust among themselves. They established trust at a personal level, as well as starting to work in collaboration. Participants grew open to share their personal stories with other participants in the study group, but not to those outside the group. Participants stated that passing the leadership baton required collaboration in trust between the older and younger generations. Impact on Action Harkins claims that “Conversations are the medium through which we build relationships, make connections, develop understanding, and work and live together” (Harkins 1999, 6). Findings displayed the impact of KC on participants' actions. In the study period, the participants demonstrated collaborative action in different ministries in MCPC. Apart from joint worship services on Good Friday and Christmas Eve, these collaborative works between English and Cantonese [ Page ] 220 congregants rarely happened in the roughly ten years I have been at MCPC. Their joint action during the study period included fellowship, stewardship and mission. Fellowship During the project period in late April 2013, at a Session elders retreat, an elder who was a project participant took the initiative to propose a joint project of all fellowships in MCPC, a fellowship night with the theme "Togetherness," to be held on June 29, 2013. The Session approved it. This elder presented the dual purposes of his proposal. First was an intention to enhance congregational relationships in the whole MCPC via this collaborative project. Second was giving an opportunity to empower the next generation by entrusting them with some leading roles and responsibilities for planning and executing the joint fellowship night. He shared his experience: “To start out, I gather all heads of each fellowships and advisors to share the vision. For me personally, I used to hold several face to face meetings to finalize the details of the events.... I opted out broke down the details of the events and assign to each group leader to plan and execute.... In my plan, I admit to [different generations and cultures] that it is a new attempt. We all need to have a desire for new things (a desire for change for Christ). (P6:6:24- 37) He went further and stated that: I also attempted to tell them, it is a risk that some people may not like the style, the time, the way or the format of this event. But, I tried to challenge to try for our Lord (take risk for Christ)...In hosting that event, I tried to stay in the background. We let each group...both the Cantonese youths as well as the English youths, to do their own job. Each complement each other. We did have a good time. I thank God that we had tried to have an environment of togetherness despite much diversity. (P6:6:39-56) [ Page ] 221 The project engaged all congregations in MCPC and mobilized young potential leaders in the youth fellowships. This elder called fellowship chairs together to plan and make decisions, assigning and empowering different tasks according to people’s willingness and talents. Each fellowship was entrusted with some responsibilities and empowered with some leading roles. Both English and Cantonese youth fellowships collaborated in leading the praise and worship. It was a night of togetherness for the whole church in which we enjoyed one large fellowship. For the first time in MCPC’s history fellowships mobilized different groups of people, particularly the younger generation, to participate in the whole process from planning and decision making to executing. This happened in just two months. All of the congregations were happy about and satisfied with the joint fellowship. They expressed the desire to hold such worship frequently. It was a valuable experience to strengthen relationships in MCPC and let young people learn how to lead a ministry. Stewardship Another joint action during the project period was updating the audio- visual system in the sanctuary. In May 2013, the Session appointed both Cantonese and English speakers familiar with the appropriate technology for audio-visual systems to work together. Three Cantonese elders who participated in this study took part in approving improvements. An English speaking project participant was appointed as a technical team member to represent the English congregation in this AV joint project. In his supplementary exit interview, he [ Page ] 222 related his working experience with another English youth and a Cantonese youth on this collaborative team: Do it more in practical level. A month a ago, work between [Cantonese and English people as a team] make sound system better in the sanctuary...Both parties understand and works well. We work together. Practical project to make both better understand each other. Enhance the sound system now, it's good to both. Now [the Cantonese side] more understand [why need to do like this]. It is because the sound ball amplifier in ceiling is not good easy for congregation to listen clearly. Now [the Cantonese side] understands. It's an harmonious project. Work good for both congregations. (P4:S:24-33) Mission Project A third action related to the study was international mission ministry in MCPC. An English participant took the initiative to go to a Cantonese participant's house to discuss the mission project and seek the latter’s support, as the latter headed the mission department. The outcome was a mission project approved by the church. This English participant has undertaken international mission for two years, occasionally coming back to MCPC to give updates on the mission work, to lead events, such as Sunday worship and Saturday night concert, as well as to challenge our church members to undertake their own missions. Summary of Impact on Action All these impacts of KC on action share four commonalities. First, all these actions happened during the study period. None of these actions had previously happened on a regular basis in MCPC. Some of them, the joint fellowship and audio-visual improvement, happened for the first time in MCPC. Second, all these actions involved study participants. They participated in various [ Page ] 223 scopes, from initiating of the idea, putting forward a proposal, to approving, planning, organizing and executing the work. Third, all these actions were collaborative, involving different generations. Each of these works included English and Cantonese congregants, particularly the younger generation. Fourth, the outcomes of these actions drew positive comments from church people, especially some senior people who have hearing problems, who were satisfied with the sanctuary’s improved sound system. Application of Kenotic Conversation to Further Research Findings from the present study of the Kenotic Conversation program in MCPC’s context suggests that KC may have potential application in contexts similar to MCPC, such as local Chinese churches in Canada with both Cantonese first generation and English second generation people. The issue of applicability in other settings requires further research before a definitive statement can be made. The experience and results from the study may provide an initial step to further application to different ethnic groups’ local churches in Canada which have similar tensions in relationships between first generation immigrants to Canada and second generation, Canadian born members, as found in MCPC. As this present study is a pilot project, there are possibilities for improvement. For example, KC might be scaled to involve intensive study and conversation within a large group involving several participants. [ Page ] 224 Chapter Summary This chapter has presented the study findings and interpreted them in light of issues raised in Chapter 3: Literature Review. From the demographic findings, it was evident that the two groups of participants were church leaders who were first generation immigrants with Chinese culture, and the church members who were second generation, raised in Canadian culture. They acknowledged the study and supported it. The Kenotic Conversation (KC) program not only improved communication but helped solve challenges arose at MCPC, specifically concerning conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation of leadership. KC was specifically designed to address these challenges in MCPC's environment. The three elements found in KC, openness, common ground and support, echoed the argument in Chapter 2: Theological Rationale regarding Jesus' conversation, such as with the woman at the well, in which water functioned as their common ground. KC’s elements encompass not just "common ground" but also in openness and support, as when Jesus empowered His disciples via face-to- face verbal means. The use of KC created a restoration of relationship between two different parties, which, in my study, are the Cantonese and English generations with their cultural differences. The younger generation can be empowered through encouragement, while the older generation learned to accept change and take action to facilitate the development of leaders from the younger generation. KC impacted participants in at least two ways. First was by changing their perspectives. They increased understanding of themselves and others, [ Page ] 225 thereby enhancing personal and working relationships, as well as building deeper trust. Second was an impact on their action. Participants practised collaborative projects during the study period, such as fellowship, stewardship and mission ministry. [ Page ] 226 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The purpose of the project was to explore and understand how Kenotic Conversation (KC) could improve the trust relationship between the leaders from the older Cantonese generation and the members of the younger English generation at the Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church (MCPC), as well as to assess the impact that such conversation had when participants completed the study program. This study helped to address three challenges faced by MCPC. First, the loss of young and middle-aged adults from the English speaking congregation was alarming. The church needed communication. Second was the departure of the English speaking pastor. The church needed to resolve conflict. Third was a lack of development of younger leadership in MCPC. The church needed to empower leaders drawn from the younger generation. The research question of the study was: "What are the impacts of Kenotic Conversation conducted in structured, in-person and mutual manner to MCPC in Toronto, Canada?" A conceptual framework for an approach to conversation, called Kenotic Conversation (KC), was designed based on the theological rationale and literature review. The project included one-on-one interviews of participants before the project and a series of six conversation sessions among the participants. The [ Page ] 227 conversation sessions were in a structured, in-person and mutual form. Each conversation session had a specific topic. As facilitator I guided conversations. Participants agreed to follow some conversation rules. Each participant was required to return his or her written feedback after each conversation session. One-on-one interviews of participants were done after the conversation series. The outcome of the project was that I found some elements that were valuable for KC, as well as discovering two ways participants were impacted. This chapter presents the achievement of the project: key conclusions; contributions; recommendations; my personal reflection. Achievement of the Project The project was successfully undertaken, achieved its purpose, and answered the research question. It was able to develop KC among the Cantonese and English generations in MCPC so as to help with the challenges affecting the two generations and thus the entire church. The project was also able to create change among the project participants. It enhanced their mutual understanding, relationship and trust. It also had the ability to bring changes to the participants’ actions. Three Key Conclusions This section presents three key conclusions of the project. First, the elements found in the Kenotic Conversation in MCPC are discussed. Second was impact of KC on changing perspectives among the project participants from Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. Third, KC aided in impacting [ Page ] 228 actions by the project participants from both the Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. First Key Conclusion: Elements Found Valuable for KC in MCPC Since the project was action research, the conversations were designed to address MCPC's real life and challenging needs, namely, communication, conflict resolution and empowerment. The study found that the elements valuable for KC were openness, common ground and providing support. A purpose of the project was to explore and understand how KC works among the participants. These three factors were found valuable in KC to address the challenges that affected MCPC. Table 17: Elements Found Valuable for KC and their Significance [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 17 details ] Openness was an element of KC among Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. Participants demonstrated self-emptying by involving [ Page ] 229 themselves in listening without making immediate judgement, not trying to "correct" what they heard from other participants. They concentrated on the conversation topics to speak and listen without any distractions, such as checking text messages or receiving phone calls. Participants also became aware of differences between their own culture and generation, and that of others. This awareness enables people in the conversation to consider the views and opinions of others (LeBaron 2003; Law 2009, handwritten lecture notes). Participants listened to others and laid aside their own views and granted respect to each other. Such respect for each other permitted participants to speak freely, regardless of differences in age, gender, culture, language ability and church status. They seldom interrupted another speaker's speech. The study found openness was an element with self-emptying in KC. Common ground was another element valuable for KC among the Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. In resolving conflict, participants practiced an attitude of kenotic stepping into others' frames of reference in order to find common ground. Commonality among conflicting parties could serve as a foundation on which both might build. Participants, for example, become aware of themselves as being in the Body of Christ, highlighting that realization by drawing attention to and emphasizing similarities rather than differences. This helped them move from conflict to agreement. They stated that becoming passionate for unity was necessary in order to resolve conflicts before they grew worse. During conversation sessions, participants shared their own experiences of stepping into others’ frames of reference, such as finding an appropriate time and [ Page ] 230 relaxed setting to discuss contentious issues. In handling conflicts, participants preferred to look at facts, rather than assumptions, as well as isolating and examining the issue, rather than resorting to finger pointing at those who disagreed. Providing support for the younger English generation was another valuable element in KC among Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. In empowering the next generation, participants emphasized an attitude of kenotic concern for others. This included the Cantonese generation’s concern for the needs of the English generation by providing support as they develop as leaders. English participants spoke honestly of the concern of the current leadership, pointing out that fear was a barrier of empowerment and asking the current leadership not to have negative thoughts about them. Findings revealed that encouragement from current leadership manifested itself in two ways. First was via tangible support, such as resources and materials. Second was intangible support, such as sharing leadership experience and words of encouragement. Participants admitted accepting change was necessary for empowerment of a new generation of leaders and that current leadership should learn to let go of their positions, encouraging young leaders to take up leadership roles, as well as accepting the latter's different ways of doing things. Accepting change also included being willing to embrace the younger generation’s possible mistakes and failures in the leadership learning process. Participants described empowerment as the process of letting the younger generation take action in real life situations. They spoke of a gradual apprenticeship approach that would let the younger [ Page ] 231 generation gain leadership experience as they drew wisdom from the current leaders’ experience. Collaborative ministries involving both parties could also enhance empowerment. Second Key Conclusion: Impact of KC on Changing Perspectives among Cantonese and English generations in MCPC KC led to changes in perception, in terms of understanding, relationship and trust. Table 18: Summary of Three Perception Changes and their Significance [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 18 details ] Regarding understanding, KC helped enhance understanding among the participants. Having gone through six conversation sessions, participants from both Cantonese and English generations believed themselves to have increased their self-understanding with regard to their own cultures and generations, as well as those of others. Through KC, they learned others’ culture, changing their perception of how others thought and others’ reasons for doings things differently. Participants not only became sensitive to people’s differences but grew to accept those differences. [ Page ] 232 Relationship was also enhanced as a result of KC since it was evident that participants improved their relationship with others. Their relationships became strengthened and tension was lessened among them during and after the sessions. This was demonstrated as participants mixed their seating so they could share and discuss freely with each other. They also shared an interesting video and talked in a friendly manner. The participants related that they enjoyed getting together, treasuring their new-found relationships. They claimed relationship is an important element in resolving conflict. A further finding further shows that KC helped produce more trust among participants. Participants pointed out the connection between conversation and trust. Conversation was the starting point to build up trust. Results showed that conversations increased trust among them. Trust was mutually interactive. It required effort from both sides. Trust could be demonstrated through sharing personal stories with those whom they had come to trust. Having trust, participants found it easier to discuss some hard topics. In field observations, I saw participants becoming more open to discuss difficult topics, more at ease to express their own views and ideas, as well as more eager to make suggestions. Third Key Conclusion: KC aids in bringing Impact on Action among Cantonese and English Generations in MCPC KC altered action, impacting collaborative work between MCPC’s Cantonese and English generations. All three collaborative efforts happened during the study period. These works were ministries in fellowship, mission and [ Page ] 233 stewardship that the above two parties collaborated in, with the endorsement of the church leadership, that is, the Session. Table 19 Summary of the Project’s Three Impacts on Action [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 19 details ] Regarding fellowship, at the Session retreat a Cantonese project participant initiated a proposal to have a church-wide fellowship night, "Togetherness." Upon the Session’s approval, this participant coordinated and empowered people among the different congregations and generations in MCPC to achieve this joint fellowship night. People met to work and discuss, all along the way, the creation of a new joint fellowship ministry that had never happened before in MCPC. A second impact on action involved mission work. An English project participant took the initiative to approach another Cantonese project participant, who was an elder and chair of the mission department, to advance the ministry. A third action impacted the church through stewardship. With the Session's approval to appoint and empower action, a joint venture project between Cantonese and English speaking technical people improved the audio-visual [ Page ] 234 system in the sanctuary. This benefited both Cantonese and English worship services on Sundays. All the above three joint venture actions involved project participants. A Cantonese participant initiated joint fellowship. An English participant took initiative to approach another Cantonese participant to advance mission. While the third collaborative work was approval by the Session, in which three of the Cantonese participants were members, the Session teamed up with others to endorse the motion to approve the jointly-undertaken audio-visual improvements. Contributions of the Study The study contributed in two respects. In the ministerial aspect, results indicated that conversation is possible among the Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. Kenotic Conversation involving the above two parties had never happened in MCPC before. Tension or conflict was not so severe that it was impossible to bring people together for KC. Results showed that leaders, the Cantonese generation participants, were willing to pass their leadership baton to the next generation. The English generation members were willing to take up the leadership baton, provided that they had support and encouragement from the current leaders. The project findings showed that KC helped the participants to change perceptions among themselves. The project participants increased the level of collaborative action between Cantonese and English speaking people. The conversation project created hope in the MCPC of bringing the Cantonese speaking and English speaking generations together. In the academic aspect, the [ Page ] 235 study’s findings based on the application of KC shed light on the knowledge of conversation in a context similar to MCPC. This program proved effect with regard to increased communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the next generation of leaders. This study helps to create knowledge by offering a conversational approach for enhancing communication and resolving conflict. The present project was conducted on an experimental scale. However, it shed some light on how Canadian Chinese churches may start a conversation among their Cantonese and English generations. Furthermore, I hope the experience of this project provides benefits to other ethnic churches in Canada with situations similar to MCPC’s. Recommendations The study has developed a program of KC with the aspects of self- emptying, stepping in and showing concern for others, expressed through the following elements of conversation: openness; common ground; providing support. It also produced some positive impacts upon the participants. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the study of KC is complete. There still room to make improvements to KC. This section offers some recommendations for further studies to improve KC. Three recommendations are to study the importance of language, the scope of the study, as well as ways to apply KC more broadly. I am curious how the details of language use may affect KC, particularly when participants have different mother languages. I am interested in how KC works with different people, such as [ Page ] 236 including MCPC’s Mandarin congregation. I am looking forward to seeing the impact of applying KC to other challenging issues in MCPC or in other Chinese churches in Canada. The present study adopted English as the conversation language. The mother language of half of the participants was English and the other half was Cantonese. It is worthwhile to study language use in conversation because language is a significant medium to convey messages. It carries different meanings to different people in light of their social class, context, gender, culture, and generation. I recommend improving KC by further studies to analyse the role of language in the expression and reception of KC. The study was an initial study done among Cantonese and English generations in MCPC. More related studies will improve KC. Future studies can apply the same approach in other congregations, such as with MCPC’s Mandarin congregation, to see whether similar results will be achieved or any other new knowledge emerge to improve KC. As the scope of recommended studies is still within MCPC, it is possible and feasible to do further study if church leadership endorses it. When other local Chinese churches try a similar KC project, it will benefit churches in terms of ministerial aspects as well as academic aspects. The current KC was adopted to deal with the challenges affecting the MCPC congregation, namely communication, conflict resolution and empowerment of the future generation of leaders. The effectiveness of applying KC to other challenges, such as differences in spending patterns, worship styles, and music, is yet to be assessed. The KC program developed in the current study [ Page ] 237 was an initial stepping-stone that hope to be adopted and used by different congregations potentially bringing changes in perception and action to Chinese churches in Canada. The newly developed KC can be used as training material in MCPC. In future I will conduct a series of workshops in MCPC to present KC’s details, in order to educate and encourage MCPC’s people to get together and engage in KC. I will adjust the workshop format according to the attendants’ needs, through the use of pictures, tables, charts and videos. The method of presentation conveyance also was a way to realize KC, as I had to self-empty from my conceptions in order to be open to that of the attendees, as I stepped into their place in order to make their learning easy, and as I showed concern for them with regard to their needs and issues. Personal Reflections As the researcher and a pastor, I would like to seek out other challenging issues in MCPC that might be resolved by using KC for the purpose to grow a healthy church in the community to witness Jesus Christ. The outcome of the study demonstrated that KC could improve the trust level in relationships among the project participants, whether from the older Cantonese generation or the younger English generation in MCPC. I reflected that as Canada's population becomes increasingly ethnically diverse, as well as generationally mixed since people are living longer than before, anxiety within churches will increase. Specifically, as we move into the [ Page ] 238 future there will be growing concern about how to narrow differences and enhance harmony among Christian communities. Connecting through KC is valuable not only in churches but also potentially in society at large, since it helps communities to understand themselves, as well as to take into consideration the views and opinions of others in society. The current study was a pilot step to challenge both church leaders and members to be flexible, creative and adaptive, conversing with people who differ from us. The promising results in the study encouraged us not to be scared to connect with others. From connection may emerge change, allowing us to adapt positively to the future. The study stimulated conversation among people in MCPC. I hope they continue to self-empty from their own concerns or values, to step into others’ frames of reference to welcome those different from them, as well as to show concern for others, embracing all helpful and constructive input that incubates possibilities for change. I am thankful that church people are engaging in conversation for the purpose of writing a new page in MCPC for the future. Last but not least, the project itself not only changed the participants' perspectives and their actions, but it changed me too. In the beginning, I doubted whether people would agree to join the project. For first time, MCPC’s Cantonese and English generations were together for a series of conversations in a small group setting. I could not guarantee how it would go if sensitive topics were discussed, items like empowering the next generation. I thank God that the conflict and differences among the English and Cantonese generations were not as severe as I assumed before the study. As the conversations went on, I observed [ Page ] 239 participants easily understood others' ideas and meanings. The study outcome encouraged me that KC can be workable in MCPC to deal with other challenges. After the study, I had a new single conviction for MCPC, which was to strengthen communication among the English and Cantonese generations via KC in order to improve and enhance understanding and conflict resolution mechanisms, as well as empowering second generation leaders. KC is a practical way for leaders and members to express Jesus’ love others. Having completed the project study, I look forward to calling back the project participants to elaborate my conviction and plan. Upon receiving their consent, I will invite them to form an ongoing conversation group for enhancing mutual relationship between MCPC’s different congregations. 1 hope that by practising KC in MCPC we will be in a position to raise our next generation’s leaders to continue to witness Jesus Christ in our community. I thank God for and was blessed by doing this project to confirm my conviction for the rest of my pastoral life. [ Page ] 240 APPENDICES Appendix A: MCPC Average Sunday Attendance 2002-2010 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Appendix A details ] Extracted from the MCPC year books [ Page ] 241 Appendix B: Informed Consent Research Program Title "Development of Incamational Conversation and Assessing Its Impacts Among Cantonese and English Generations in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Canada" Researcher Lawrence Koon Kau Leung, Senior Pastor Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church. Address: 2250 Denison Street, Markham Ontario, Canada L3S 1E9. Research Advisors Rev. Dr. David Russell, Tyndale University College and Seminary Dr. Mark Chapman, Tyndale University College and Seminary Rev. Dr. Kevin Livingston, Tyndale University College and Seminary Purpose The purpose of the program is to enhance understanding and trust between church leaders from a first generation Chinese cultural background and members of MCPC from a second generation Chinese-Canadian cultural background. The desired effects of this research project are to improve the retention of MCPC’s attendees and provide an opportunity to prepare second- generation church members for leadership roles in the future. Invitation You are being invited to participate in the above research program, which investigates the impact of a conversation program on the relationship between the first generation Chinese leaders and the second generation Chinese members of MCPC. Procedures The program will focus on facilitating an informative and diplomatic cultural exchange between first and second generation Chinese where each group will get a chance to share with the other about the values, habits, social norms, and communication styles, etc. of its respective culture. Additional goals that we hope to achieve through the program include: Developing culturally-appropriate strategy for conflict resolution, and Discussing the vision of empowering the next generation for service in the God’s kingdom with both generations present. [ Page ] 242 As a participant, you will be asked to participate in an intake interview and six weekly group sessions to explore the cultural and generational issues in MCPC. After each session, you will be asked to provide a brief, written reflection about your experience that week. At the end of the program, you will also be asked to participate in an exit interview to give your honest feedback of your overall experience. Voluntary nature of the program Your participation in this study is totally voluntary. You are free to withdraw at any time during the course of this study without affecting your relationship with MCPC. Confidentiality All the data you provide will be strictly confidential. All data collected from the program will be stored in a locker and assessed solely by the researcher. This data will be used strictly for the research program listed above. At no time will your name be reported along with your responses unless you agree to be identified. Risks and benefits There are no particular risks in the program. Participants may perhaps feel uncomfortable when they converse about the issue of conflict resolution because of the cultural differences between members. However, one of the program’s main goals is to develop conflict resolution strategy that will help minimize the discomfort felt by members of both cultural backgrounds during any type of exchange. Overall, there are many benefits to participating in this program. The program seeks to help its participants enhance their relationship with other participants, particularly those from a different cultural background. The hope is that your participation will have a positive impact on your current relationships and allow you to take part in empowering the next generation of MCPC members in the future. This program will not require you to waive any legal rights. Compensation Other than the time spent participating in and reflecting on weekly sessions, participants will incur no costs as a result of this program. Information update If there are any changes made to this program as it is described above, the researcher will inform you accordingly. [ Page ] 243 Questions If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Martin Mui. If, at any point during this program study, you wish to converse with me personally about the program, I would be glad to meet with you. Contacts Lawrence Koon Kau Leung Martin Mui Statement of consent I have read the above information. I sign in the line below to acknowledge that I have been informed of, and understand the nature and purpose of this study program, and I consent freely to participate. Please return the signed consent form to Mr. Martin Mui. Thank you. Name of participant: __________________________________________________________ Signature of participant:_________________________________ Date:_____________________ [ Page ] 244 Appendix C: Intake Interview Questions (1) In the area of Communication Imagine that you are living in a house with 3 generations of family members all under one roof. And imagine that you are the oldest generation in the household. In your ideal home, how would you like communication to take place? Describe it as fully as you can. If you are in the younger generation: (2) In the area of Conflict Resolution Continuing from the previous scenario, imagine that when there is a disagreement between you (the oldest generation) and the generation or two below you. In your opinion, how should this disagreement or conflict be resolved in your ideal world? If you are in the younger generation: (3) In the area of Empowering the Next Generation Continuing from the original scenario, what steps would you take to make sure that the next generation after you would be equally committed to taking care of the household? Personal information: 1. Which county were you born? 2. How long were you been in your country of origin since birth? 3. How long have you been living in Canada? 4. How long have you been in MCPC? [ Page ] 245 Appendix D: Exit Interview Questions (1) In the area of Communication Imagine that you are living in a house with 3 generations of family members all under one roof. And imagine that you are the oldest generation in the household. In your ideal home, how would you like communication to take place? Describe it as fully as you can. If you are in the younger generation: (2) In the area of Conflict Resolution Continuing from the previous scenario, imagine that when there is a disagreement between you (the oldest generation) and the generation or two below you. In your opinion, how should this disagreement or conflict be resolved in your ideal world? If you are in the younger generation: (3) In the area of Empowering the Next Generation Continuing from the original scenario, what steps would you take to make sure that the next generation after you would be equally committed to taking care of the household? Exit Evaluation Questions El. The entire process of this research program helps me understand more about my own culture. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly disagree agree E2. The entire process of this research program helps me understand more about others’ culture. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly disagree agree E3. I will try to use the implementation strategy generated from this research program to empower my next generation in MCPC. 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly disagree agree [ Page ] 246 Appendix E: Session 1: Cultural Patterns Welcome the participants Project Title Introducing Kenotic Conversation and Assessing Its Impact Among Cantonese and English Generations in Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Canada Researcher Lawrence K. K. Leung Purpose: 1. What factors needed in conversation between Chinese generation and English generation 2. Assess impacts of the conversation Procedure: 1. Consent 2. Intake Interview 3. Six Meeting Sessions 4. Sessions Feedback 5. Exit Interview Six Meeting Sessions: 1. Cultural Patterns 2. Communication Patterns 3. Conflict Resolution Patterns 4. Empowerment Patterns 5. Implementation Strategy 6. Wrap Up Sessions Format: 1. Opening Prayer & the Bible Study (15’) 2. Material Presentation (30’) 3. Participants Conversation (50’) 4. Wrap up and Ending Prayer (10’) Session 1: Cultural Patterns Purpose: Let participants know their own culture and the other's culture through structured in-person mutual manner to express themselves and listen to others Bible Study - Unity and Diversity in the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-27) [ Page ] 247 1. We are to be in Christ’s body (12-13) 2. We are to be different (14-19) 3. We are to be interdependent (20-27) Unity and Diversity in the Body of Christ Unity in Diversity (Agree to disagree) Ling defines culture “[as] the sum of all behaviour patterns of a people” (Ling 1999, 138) Hofstede defines culture “[as] the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one groups or category from another” (Hofstede 1997, 5) Chinese culture Three thinking systems: (1) Confucianism • A system of social ethics • Backbone: zhong yong (doctrine of mean) • Core values: Chung, Xiao, Ren, Yi • Chung - to higher social status • Xiao - to higher family status • Ren - to lower status • Yi - to be fair, righteous & justice (2) Daoism • Tien dao - Follow path of the universe • Wu wei (3) Buddhism • Lun wei - lives are without beginning and end • Six courses - divine, human, angel, animal, devil and hell Chinese culture Summary: • Concept of Harmony • Concept of Face • Concept of Relational Thinking Canadian culture Twelve commonplaces of Canadian culture and identity: (Diakiw 2011) 1. A wilderness nation, a land of awesome size and grandeur, with savage beauty and incredible obstacles 2. A northern nation the ‘true north strong and free’ 3. Home of our First Nations. Our Native roots are deeply entwined in our Canadian way [ Page ] 248 4. A nation state founded on European traditions by the English and the French 5. A nation of Immigrants 6. A land of remarkable freedoms with a goal of equity for all, regardless of sex, race, age, color, creed or disability 7. A nation with a strong sense of social welfare, committed to providing a social safety net for all 8. A country of diverse and distinctive regions with powerful regional identities - Quebec, the Maritimes, the Prairies, for example 9. A land of adventurers, innovators and entrepreneurs 10. A land of rich cultural traditions 11. Peace-keepers for the world and a partner with all nations 12. Canadian: Not American! Canadian culture Summary: • Equity • Rights - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom • Freedom • Care - Social policy • Embrace - Multiculturalism policy • Humanity - Immigration policy • Peace - International policy Comparison between Chinese and Canadian cultures (John W. Connor 1977, John Ng 1986) Chinese Values Canadian Values Hierarchy Equality Submission to authority Dislike rules & control Emphasis on position in relationships Plays down superiority/inferiority Accepts rules & propriety Questions authority Position validates assertions "Truth” validates assertions Collectivity Individualism Parent/Family Centered Autonomy Group Identity Individual Identity Achievement of goals set by authority Achievement of individual goals Family Identity Trained to be individuals Priority: social recognition Priority: self-actualization Duty & Obligation Rights & Privilege Responsible for the family Responsible to self Priority: duty to others Priority: personal rights [ Page ] 249 Motivation based on obligation Motivation based on feelings Deference & Restraint Self-Assertion & Self- Expression Emphasis on self-effacement Emphasis on self- assertion Conflict-avoiding Aggressive, confrontational Passivity & yieldedness Open & accessible to others Adherence to social politeness Informal, casual relationship Emotionally non-expressive Emotionally expressive Self-control & discipline Spontaneity Similarities between Chinese and Canadian cultures • Humanity • Embrace • Peace • Concession Similarities between Chinese & Canadian cultures and the Bible • Humanity - “Help the poor means lend to Jehovah” (Lev 19:9- 10) • Embrace - Jesus salvation (Matt 28:19) • Peace - Jesus ministry (Eph2:14- 16) Discussion How do you see Chinese culture? How do you see Canadian culture? Is it possible to blend them well? If yes, How? [ Page ] 250 Appendix F: Session 2: Communication Patterns [An image used in the original session under “fair use” was deleted in order to avoid breaking copyright law in a published document.]: Toronto Star. April 9, 2013, p.A14 Purpose: Let participants perceive their own communication patterns and that of the others through structured in-person mutual manner to express themselves and listen to others Bible Study - Reconciliation in Jesus Christ (Eph 2:11-22) 1. Separation (11-12) 2. Reconciliation (13-18) 3. Unification (19-22) Communication Patterns: Chinese Canadians Style of Thinking Collectivism “We” Individualism “I” Process orientation Outcome orientation Right brain oriented Left brain oriented Relational thinking Inductive thinking Indirect thinking Direct thinking Views on Facts Calculate human factors Look for facts & evidence Slow decision making How-to operation Language Indirect, avoid using extreme wordings Direct, explicit, precise language Differentiated linguistic codes Less differentiated linguistic code Face saving Fact Non-verbal emphasis Verbal emphasis High context Low context Receiver centered Sender centered Barriers 1st G. Chinese culture 2nd G. Canadian culture 1. Pride superior in knowledge wisdom, energy, technology, creativity life experience 2. Stereotype [ Page ] 251 3. Ethnocentrism 4. Mutual negative evaluation Ethnocentrism “When one’s own culture is considered central to all reality, the values, assumptions, and behavioral norms of that culture may be elevated to the position of absolute truth.” There are several implications of this definition. “First, ethnocentric beliefs about one’s own culture shape a social sense of identity which is narrow and defensive. Second, ethnocentrism normally involves the perception of members of other cultures in terms of stereotypes. Third, the dynamic of ethnocentrism is such that comparative judgments are made between one’s own culture and other cultures under the assumption that one’s own is normal and natural. As a consequence, ethnocentric judgments usually involve invidious comparisons that ennoble one’s own culture while degrading those of others.” (Stewart and Bennett 1991, 161) Mutual negative evaluation • Deteriorate mutual respect • Damage communication Both need to: • Put down - own values, thinking, assumptions, norms • Put on - understanding, respect, acceptance, empathy, objective view • Interaction of two cultures emerge a third culture Respectful Communication guidelines: • R: take Responsibility for what you say and feel without blaming others • E: use Empathetic listening • S: be Sensitive to differences in communication style • P: Ponder what you hear and feel before you speak • E: Examine your own assumptions and perceptions • C: keep Confidentiality • T: Trust ambiguity because we are not here to debate who is right or wrong (Law 1996) Enhance Communication • Pair up Bible reading program E-100 (Scripture Union Canada) • Ask English Ministry Team input before making Session agenda • Make brief report after Session meeting • Mutual support in real life situation Discussion [ Page ] 252 How to enhance communication between first generation Chinese cultured people and second generation Canadian cultured people in MCPC? What possible actions can be taken? [ Page ] 253 Appendix G: Session 3: Conflict Resolution Patterns Purpose: Let participants perceive their own conflict resolution pattern and that of the others through structured in-person mutual manner to express themselves and listen to others Bible Study - Handling Conflict (Acts 6:1-7) 1. Examine our ministry (1 -2) 2. Exercise our faith (3-5) 3. Express our love (6-7) Conflict Assumptions Chinese: “Face maintenance” model • Damaging • Dysfunctional • Emotional immaturity • Friendship testing • Inter-twin substantive conflict and relational face issues • A win-win face negotiation game Canadian: “Problem-solving” model • Expression of differences • Both dysfunctional and functional • Dysfunctional if not directly confront • Functional if have solution opportunity • Handle substantive conflict and relational issues separately • A win-win problem solving game Conflict Resolution Patterns: Chinese: • Ambiguous, indirect verbal messages • No clear agenda • Interaction between people • Bring historical past to shed light to present conflict situation Canadians: • Direct requests, direct verbal messages • A clear agenda • Linear thinking • Decision-making activities • Future-oriented goal setting Both need efforts: To Chinese: [ Page ] 254 • Be mindful of problem-solving assumption • Focus on resolving the substantive issues • Engage in an assertive style of conflict behaviour • Own individual responsibility for the conflict decision-making process • Ask more “why” questions • Use direct, integrative verbal messages • Commit to working out the conflict situation with the conflict party To Canadians: • Be mindful of face-maintenance assumption • Be proactive in dealing with low-grade conflicts • “Give face” and try not to push their opponent’s back against the corner • Be sensitive to the importance of quiet, mindful observation • Practice attentive listening skills • Discard the Western-based model of effective communication skills • Let go of a conflict situation if the conflict party does not want to deal with it directly Conflict Resolution Patterns • Chinese: ethnocentric biases • Canadians: egocentric superiority Both: continuously learn new and novel ideas [A copyrighted image deleted. It ] • Either/or thinking (Exclusion) • Both/and thinking (Embrace) Both need to learn: Realistic optimism - “accepting the reality of the current situation and finding a satisfying meaning therein.” (Schwartz 2010, 150) New way of seeing things through 1. Reflective Lens • Facts • Stories 2. Reverse Lens • Others perspective • Others feelings [ Page ] 255 3. Long Lens • Look future • Learn & grow (Schwartz 2010, 155-158) Conflict Resolution Patterns “Conflict is not destructive in a relationship if it is handled and counterbalanced by positive emotions, particularly trust, affection, humor, positive problem solving, empathy, and active, non-defensive listening.” (Ceja 2011, 16) Suggested Implementation strategy: • Ongoing conversation quarterly in this group • Role of this group: mediators between Session and ministry teams Discussion How to resolve conflicts between first generation Chinese cultured people and second generation Canadian cultured people in MCPC? What possible actions can be taken? [ Page ] 256 Appendix H: Session 4: Empowerment Patterns Purpose: Let participants explore what is empowerment and how empowerment should be through structured in-person mutual manner to express themselves and listen to others Bible Study - Biblical Empowerment (Num 27:18-23) • Public Endorsement (18-19) • Forerunner Endorsement (20) • Divine Endorsement (21) • Implementation (22-23) Definition of Empowerment: • “to give official authority or legal power to someone.” (Merriam Webster Dictionary) • “to give (someone) the authority or power to do something.” (Oxford Dictionary) Ownership: Factors that undermine transmission of psychological ownership: • Negative exposure • Lack of information • Negative perception Factors that enhance transmission of psychological ownership: • Shared experiences • Governance structures • Having information & knowledge • Owning company shares Empowerment: • Enhance sense of ownership - participation • Self-involvement - both first generation and second generation • Experience some control - voice, decision-making authority Empowerment Patterns: Chinese barriers: • Obey (xiao) the older generation leaders - reluctant change • Take less risk - agricultural culture, stable & safe go first • Concept of harmony - breakthrough barrier, group pressure • Concept of face - too much personal issue, limitation, trade-off transaction • Concept of Relational thinking — too much calculation, slow decision • Collectivism - less individual assertion & creativity [ Page ] 257 • Family oriented - fame pressure, unnecessary accountability • Son-killing culture - less autonomy, follow the same old rules Canadians barriers: • “Problem-solving” model - insensitive to others feelings & cultures • Individualism - blind spots • Lack of relational thinking - less consider context & overall picture • Lack of historical lessons - not emphasis on the past, inexperience Divine-empowered leadership praxis: • Clear communication • Empathy • Eternity focused • Expecting God’s power • Life as a bondservant • Concern for all people • Equipping for leadership (Quist 2008, 19) Implementation strategy: • Develop a feedback channel • Develop an ongoing process of learning • Develop 2nd G in BOM & in Session • Change language to English in BOM & Session Discussion How to empower MCPC’s next generation? What possible actions can be taken? [ Page ] 258 Appendix I: Session 5: Implementation Strategy Purpose: Let participants express themselves and listen to others possible ways of action to improve communication, to resolve conflict and to empower the next generation in MCPC Bible Study - Psalm 133 • Be members of one another • Be devoted to one another • Accept one another • Instruct one another • Greet one another • Carry one another’s burden • Encourage one another Jesus trained the Twelve in community. [An image used in the original session under “fair use” was deleted in order to avoid breaking copyright law in a published document.] (Forman, et al 2004, 63) Head: Leaders with godly wisdom Heart: Leaders with godly character Hands: Servant-leader who equip others Strategic Goal "Head" "Heart" "Hands" Strategic Components Courses Community Mentoring A Whole-Life Approach Courses: Cultivate biblical wisdom Community: Facilitate relational learning Mentoring: Encourage spiritual friendships “Community happens when there’s a sense of relationship, regardless of the activity. It happens when each gathering takes on the atmosphere of a family reunion, where hugs are abundant and bursts of laughter come easily. It happens when people enjoy just being with one another and where the atmosphere is more than just friendly.” (Forman, et al 2004, 87) “Biblically, the church is God’s called-out people-in-community." (Forman, et al 2004, 89) [ Page ] 259 Mentoring: • Identification • Imitation: Mentor as example • Instruction: Mentor as teacher • Involvement: Mentor as coach • Release: Mentor as team player Progression: • I do, you watch, we talk • I do, you help, we talk • You do, I help, we talk • You do, I watch, we talk • We each begin to train someone else (Forman, et al 2004, 110) A mentor says, ”I’m here for you, not to control you, but to facilitate your growth as a leaders. I’m mentoring with an open hand.” (Forman, et al 2004, 111) Empowering leader process: 3 I’s • Identify • Invite • Invest “Leadership [Ideas, Visions] without the discipline of execution is incomplete and ineffective. Without the ability to execute, all other attributes of leadership [ideas, visions] become hollow.” (Covey 2004, 273) Discussion How to enhance communication, resolve conflict and empower our next generation in MCPC? [ Page ] 260 Appendix J: Session 6: Wrap Up Purpose: Let participants share their own personal stories, experience and changes resulting from the conversations Bible Study - Change in God's Way “Dear friends, God is good. So I beg you to offer your bodies to him as a living sacrifice, pure and pleasing. That’s the most sensible way to serve God. Don’t be like the people of this world, but let God change the way you think. Then you will know how to do everything that is good and pleasing to him.” (Romans 2:1-2, CEV) Reflection • Be members of one another • Be devoted to one another • Accept one another • Instruct one another • Greet one another • Carry one another’s burden • Encourage one another Based what you have learned in the previous sessions about cultures, communication patterns, conflict resolution patterns, empowerment, please share, as detailed and specific as you can, your personal.... • stories • reflection (e.g. your self-awareness, others awareness, views and perspectives etc.) Appreciation and Wrap Up Prayer [ Page ] 261 REFERENCE LIST Barclay, William. 1976. The Acts of The Apostles (The Daily Study Bible Series). Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press. Barna, George. 2004. "Gracefully Passing The Baton." Perspectives. April 26, 2004. URL: http:// www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Perspective&PerspectiveID=29 (accessed August 22, 2008) -----. 2011. Futurecast. Austin, TX: Fedd and Company, Inc. Barnhart, Robert K. 1988. The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology. Hackensack, NJ: H.W. Wilson Co. Barrouillet, Pierre and Valerie Camos. 2015. Working Memory: Loss and Reconstruction London, England and New York, NY: Psychology Press. Bauer, Walter, William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich. 1979. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Beattie, Geoffrey. 1983. Talk: An Analysis of Speech and Non-Verbal Behaviour in Conversation. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Education Enterprises Limited. Bell, Judith. 2010. Doing Your Research Project. Maidenhead, England: McGraw-Hill House. Bennett, Milton J. 1986. "Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity." Cross-Cultural Orientation Ed. R. Michael Paige. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, pp.27-69. Bennett, Milton J. Ed. 1998. Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, Inc. Best, W. E. 1985. Christ Emptied Himself. Houston, TX: South Belt Grace Church. [ Page ] 262 Bettes, William. 2010. "Intergenerational Communication: An Evaluation." JCCC Honors Journal. Vol.l, Issue 1, Article 5, Spring 2010. URL: http://Scholarspace.Jccc.Edu/Honors_Journal/Voll/Issl/5 (accessed May 2, 2014) Bohm, David. 1996. On Dialogue. New York, NY: Routledge Classics. Born, Paul. 2008. Community Conversations. Toronto, ON: BPS Books. Bosch, J. David. 2005. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Bramer, Paul. 2011. Bramer Project Thesis. Toronto, ON: Tyndale University College & Seminary. Buttrick, George Arthur (Ed.). 1954. "The Acts of the Apostles." The Interpreter's Bible, Volume IX. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. Calvin, John. 2009. Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Grand Rapids, Ml: Baker Book House. Carlson, Kenneth P. 2008. Reaching the Next Generations in North American Chinese Churches. Unpublished Doctor of Ministry thesis. Portland, OR: Western Seminary. Ceja, Lucia and Josep Tapies. 2011. "A Model of Psychological Ownership in Next-Generation Member of Family-Owned Firms: A Qualitative Study." IESE Business School Working Paper. Issue 929. URL: http://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/di-0929-e.pdf (accessed February 12, 2013) Chan, Kai Wing. 1989. The Ups and Downs in Chinese History. Hong Kong: Hok Chun Book House. Chen, Kwong-Lui, K.K. Woo and H.J. Li. 1990. Famous Axioms from China (Chung Guo Ming Gui Chi Din). 3rd ed. Shanghai, China: Wan Le Book Publisher. Cheung, Alex and Simon Wong. 2002. Rediscovering the Bible: Book of Acts. Hong Kong: Logos Publishers Ltd. Cheung, Vincent. 1999. "Acts (I)." Tien Dao Bible Commentary. (Ed. John H.Y. Pao). Hong Kong: Tien Dao Publishing House, Ltd. Chia, Y.M. 1967. Exposition of the Gospel ofJohn. Kowloon, Hong Kong: The Alliance Press. [ Page ] 263 Chow, Henry P.H. 2015. "Religion, Immigration, and Ethnicity: A Survey of Chinese Evangelical Churches in Canada." International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education. Vol.2, Issue 6, pp.99-107. Cloud, Henry and John Townsend (Ed.). 2003. Boundaries Face to Face: How to Have That Difficult Conversation You've Been Avoiding. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Coghlan, David and Teresa Brannick. 2010. Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Cole, R. Alan. 1999. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Mark. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Connor, John W. 1977. Tradition and Change in Three Generations of Japanese Americans Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall. Covey, Stephen R. 2004. The Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, Inc. Creps, Earl. 2008. Reverse Mentoring. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Creswell, John W. 2003. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. -----. 2007. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Denscombe, Martyn. 2010. The Good Research Guide for Small-Scale Social Research Projects. 4th ed. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press. Department for Children, Schools and Families. 2009. "Achievement for All the Structured Conversation."The National Strategies. Ref.: 01056-2009KT- EN. 1209 Washington, DC: White House Press. Diakiw, Jerry Y. 2011. Canadian Culture and National Identity: The School's Role in Debating and Discussing the Roots of our National Identity. Munich, Germany: GRIN Publishing. Document Nr. VI83045. Dixon, Nancy M. 1997. "The Hallways of Learning." Organizational Dynamics. 25, pp.23-34. Dowley, Tim (Organizing Editor). 1987. Eerdmans' Handbook to The History of Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [ Page ] 264 Dzubinski, Paul. 1988. A Comparison Of First And Second Generation Taiwanese-Americans With A View To Bridging The Gap Between The Two. Unpublished Master of Theology thesis. Dallas Theological Seminary. Elmer, Duane, H. 1993. Cross-Cultural Conflict: Building Relationships for Effective Ministry. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Eng, W.L., J.C. Wong, Wayland Wong, D.K. Woo and P. Yuen. 2009. Completing the Face of the Chinese Church in America. Oakland, CA: Fellowship of American Chinese Evangelicals. Fee, Gordon D. 1999. Philippians. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Feldman, Martha and Anne Khademian. 2003. "Strategic Empowerment." Presentation at the National Public Management Research Conference, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. October 9-11, 2003. URL: http://www2.ku.edU/~pmranet/conferences/georgetownpapers/Feldman2.p df (accessed February 10, 2015) Femado, Ajith. 1998. "Acts." The NIVApplication Commentary. (Ed. Terry Muck). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Forman, Rowland, Jeff Jones and Bruce Miller. 2004. Leadership Baton: An Intentional Strategy for Developing Leaders in Your Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. Gonzalez, Justo L. 1985. The Story of Christianity: Volume 2 The Reformation to the Present Day. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers. Gudykunst, William B. 2004. Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Guthrie, Donald. 1999. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Hebrews. (Ed. Leon Morris). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Hallowell, Edward M. 1999. "The Human Moment at Work." Harvard Business Review. January-February 1999, pp.1-8. Harkins, Phil. 1999. Powerful Conversations: How High Impact Leaders Communicate. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Hendriksen, William. 1953. Exposition of the Gospel According to John - Volume 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. [ Page ] 265 Hendriksen, William. 1953. Exposition of the Gospel According to John - Volume 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Hofstede, Geert H. 1997. Cultures and Organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Holliday, Adrian. 2002. Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Horton, Michael S. 2002. “Hellenistic or Hebrew? Open Theism and Reformed Theological Method." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. Vol.45 Issue 2, pp.317-341. Howe, Reuel Lauphier. 1963. The Miracle of Dialogue. Minneapolis, MN: Seabury Press. Hsu, Princeton S. 1962. Christianity And Chinese Culture. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Baptist Press. Isaacs, William. 1999. Dialogue And The Art of Thinking Together. New York, NY : Doubleday. Kendagor, Solomon K. 2007. Every Tongue and Nation. Denver: Outskirts Press, Inc. Kent, Homer. A. Jr. 1978. The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Philippians. (Ed. Frank E. Gaebelein). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Kincaid, Lawrence D. 1985. "Recent Development in the Methods for Communication Research." Journal of East and West Studies, Vol.14, Issue 1, pp.89-98. Kistemaker, Simon J. 2007. Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles. 6th Printing. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Kraft, Charles H. 1991. Communication Theory for Christian Witness. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books. Kwon, Ho Youn and Shim Kim (Ed.) 1993. The Emerging Generation ofKorean- Americans. South Korea: Kyung Hee University Press. Lane, Patty. 2002. A Beginner's Guide to Crossing Cultures: Making Friends in a Multi-Cultural World. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Lasswell, Harold. 1948. "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society" The Communication of Ideas. (Ed. Lyman Bryson). New York, NY: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, pp.37-51. [ Page ] 266 Law, Eric H.F. 2009. Crossing Culture Together: Leadership in a Diverse and Changing World Workshop. May 25-26, 2009. Toronto, ON: Knox College. -----. 1996. The Bush Was Blazing but Not Consumed: Developing a Multicultural Community Through Dialogue and Liturgy. St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press. -----. 2002. Sacred Acts, Holy Change: Faithful Diversity and Practical Transformation. St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press. Law, Heung Lam. 1961. The History of China. Taiwan: Ching Chung Publisher. LeBaron, Michelle. 2003. Bridging Cultural Conflicts: A New Approach for a Changing World. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Lee, Helen. 1996. "Silent exodus.” Christianity Today, Vol.40, No. 12 (August 12) Leung, Ka Lun. 1998. A Short History of Christian Church: Ten Decisive Moment. Hong Kong: Renewal Resources (H.K.) Pte. Ltd. Ling, Samuel. 1999. Chinese Way of Doing Things: Perspectives on American- Born Chinese and the Chinese Church in North America. San Gabriel: China Horizon. Livermore, David A. 2009. Cultural Intelligence: Improving Your CQ to Engage Our Multicultural Word. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Longenecker, Richard N. 1981. “Acts of the Apostles” in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Volume 9. (Ed. Frank E. Gaebelein). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church Congregation Profile. 2010. Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church Marshall, Catherine and Gretchen B. Rossman. 2006. Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Marshall, I. Howard. 1987. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Acts. (1st ed. Reprinted). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Martin, Judith N. and Thomas K. Nakayama. 2007. Intercultural Communication in Contexts. 4th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Martin, Ralph. 1999. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Philippians. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [ Page ] 267 McGee, J. Vernon. 1983. "1 Corinthians - Revelation." Thru the Bible, Volume 5. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. McIntosh, Gary. 2002. One Church, Four Generations: Understanding And Reaching All Ages In Your Church. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. Merriam, Sharan B. 2009. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Merriam-Webster Dictionaries. "Conversation." URL: http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/conversation (accessed July 20, 2015) Merritt, Carol Howard. 2007. Tribal Church: Ministering to the Missing Generation. Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute. Miller, Delbert C. and Neil J. Salkind. 2002. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Nakka-Cammauf, Viji and Timothy Tseng (Ed.) 2009. Asian American Christianity: A Reader. Castro Valley, CA: The Institute for the Study of Asian American Christianity. Ng, John Lai. 1986. Cultural Pluralism and Ministry Models in the Chinese Community. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International. Ng, Kwai Hang. 2002. "Seeking the Christian Tutelage: Agency and Culture in Chinese Immigrants' Conversion to Christianity." Sociology of Religion. Vol.63, Issue 2, pp.195-214. Okafor, V.C. and E.O. Osakindle. 2014. "Conflict Resolution through Effective Communications." Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business. Volume 5, No. 9. January 2014, pp.321-334. Peace, Richard V. 2002. "Holy Conversation: The Lost Art of Witness." Word & World. Vol.22, Number 3, pp.255-263. Penner, James, Rachael Harder, Erika Anderson, Bruno Desorcy and Rick Hiemstra. 2011. Hemorrhaging Faith: Why and When Canadian Young Adults are Leaving, Staying and Returning to Church. The EFC Youth and Young Adult Ministry Roundtable. Phelps, Joseph 1999. More Light, Less Heat: How Dialogue Can Transform Christian Conflicts Into Growth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. [ Page ] 268 Putnam, Linda L. and Joseph P. Folger 1988. "Communication, Conflict, and Dispute Resolution: The Study of Interaction and the Development of Conflict Theory. "Communication Research 1988 15:349. URL: http://crx/sagepub.com/content/15/4/349 (accessed: November 8, 2014) Quist, Allen. 2008. The Divine Empowerment of Leaders: A Study ofLuke. Spirit Driven Leadership. URL: http://spiritdrivenleadership.org/pdfs/The_Divine_Empowerment_of_Lead ers.pdf (accessed February 12, 2013) Rapley, Tim. 2007. Doing Conversation, Discourse and Document Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. Rendle, Gil. 2008. "Intergenerational As a Way of Seeing." Alban Weekly, January 14, 2008. Number 182. https://alban.org/archive/intergenerational-as-a-way-of-seeing/ (accessed October 16, 2013) Responses to English Ministry Vision. 2009. Markham Chinese Presbyterian Church Robertson, Archibald Thomas. 1930. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Volume III. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. -----. 1931. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Volume IV. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Rogers, Everett M. and Thomas M. Steinfatt. 1999. Intercultural Communication. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Rogers, Jeffrey S. 2008. Building A House For All God's Children: Diversity Leadership In The Church. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. Rumbaut, Ruben G. 2004. "Ages, Life Stages, and Generational Cohorts: Decomposing the Immigrant First and Second Generations in the United States." International Migration Review. Vol.38, Number 3. Fall 2004, pp.1160-1205. Saldana, Johnny. 2013. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Samovar, Larry A., Richard E. Porter and Edwin R. McDaniel. 2009. Intercultural Communication. 12th ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. [ Page ] 269 Saunders, Mark and Philip Lewis and Adrian Thornhill. 2012 Research Methods for Business Students, 6th ed. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited. Schaff, Philip. (Ed.) 1931. The Creeds of Christendom: History of the Creeds. Volume 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Schirmer, Jennifer. 2007. "Conflict Resolution Through The Simple Art Of Conversation." Anthropology News: Vol. 48, Issue 8, November 2007, pp. 9-10. Schramm, Wilbur ed. 1954. The Process and Effects of Mass Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Schwartz, Tong, Jean Gomes and Catherine McCarthy. 2010. The Way We're Working Isn't Working: The Four Forgotten Needs That Energize Great Performance. New York, NY: Free Press. Selman, Jim. 2012. "Empowerment" ParaComm International. URL: http://www.paracomm.com/empowerment-article/ (accessed May 23, 2014) Shannon, Claude E. Shannon and Warren Weaver. 1949 The mathematical theory of Communication Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Shipley, Joseph T. 1945. Dictionary of Word Origins. New York: The Philosophical Library. Smidts, A., A. Pruyn and C. Riel. 2001. "The Impact of Employee Communication and Perceived External Prestige on Organizational Identification." Academy Of Management Journal. Vol.49, Number 5, pp. 1051-1062. Smith-Lovin, Lynn and Charles Brody. 1989. "Interruptions in Group Discussions: The Effects of Gender and Group Composition." American Sociological Review. Vol.54, June, pp.424-435. Stanfield, R. Brian. Ed. 2000. The Art of Focused Conversation. Canadian Institute for Cultural Affairs: New Society Publishers. Statistics Canada 2011. URL: http://www 12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as- sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm (accessed January 31, 2014) Steinberg, Sheila. 2007. An Introduction to Communication Studies. Wetton, Cape Town: Justa & Co. Stewart, Edward C. and Milton J. Bennett. 1991. American Cultural Patterns: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, Inc. [ Page ] 270 Stringer, Ernest T. 2007. Action Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Sun, Lung-kee. 2004. Zhongguo Wen Hua De Shen Ceng Jie Cou (The deep structure of Chinese culture.) Guolin, China: Guogshi University for Teachers Press. Tan, Weichong Joshua. 2010. Cross, Culture, Confusion: Conflict and Community in a Chinese Church in Canada. Unpublished Master of Arts thesis. Vancouver, BC: Simon Fraser University. The English Dictionary. "Conversation." URL: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/conversation (accessed December 7, 2015) The Presbyterian Church in Canada. 2012. The Book of Forms. Toronto, ON: The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada. Thomas, Gary. 2009. How to do Your Research Project. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Thompson, Ross A. 2006. "Conversation and Developing Understanding: Introduction to the Special Issue." Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. Issue 52. Number 1. January 2006, pp. 1-15. Toronto Chinese Evangelism Ministerial Fellowship (TCEMF) Directory 2013. Todd, Matthew R.S. 2015. English Ministry Crisis in Chinese Canadian Churches. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers. Vengel, Alan. 2010. 20 Minutes to a Top Performer. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Waters Mary C. 2014. "Defining Difference: The Role of Immigrant Generation and Race in American and British Immigration Studies." Ethnic and Racial Studies. Vol.37, Number 1, pp. 10-26. Wheatley, Margaret J. 2009. Turning to One Another: Simple Conversations to Restore Hope to the Future. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Wiebe, Katie Funk. 2001. Bridging the Generations. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press. Wiersbe, Warren W. 1989. The Bible Exposition Commentary New Testament Vol.l: Matthew-Galatians. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing. [ Page ] 271 -----. 1989. The Bible Exposition Commentary New Testament Vol.2: Ephesians- Revelation. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing. Williamson, K. 2002, Research methods for students, academics and professionals, 2nd ed, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia: Charles Sturt University. Wilson, Brady G. 2009. Juice: The Power of Conversation. Toronto: Bastian Publishing Services Books. Wood, Julia T. 2011. Communication Mosaics: An Introduction to the Field of Communication. Boston, MA: Wadsworth. Wright, Brenda. 2002. Gender and Language: Challenging the Stereotypes. Unpublished Master of Arts thesis. Birmingham, UK: The University of Birmingham. URL: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/collegeartslaw/cels/essays/socio linguistics/FOlivieraSocioling.pdf (accessed May 3, 2014) Wu, Chunxia and Ruth K. Chao. 2005. "Intergenerational Culture Conflicts in Norms of Parental Warmth among Chinese American Immigrants." International Journal of Behavioral Development. Vol.29, Number 6, 2005, pp.516-523. Xu, Youqing. 2009. Gender Differences in Mixed-Sex Conversation: A Study of Interruptions. A Course Work Paper. Oresund, Sweden: Kristianstad University. URL: http://www.diva- portal.org/smash/get/diva2:303562/FULLTEXT02 (accessed May 3, 2014) Yang, Fenggang. 1998. "Chinese Conversion to Evangelical Christianity: The Importance of Social and Cultural Contexts." Sociology of Religion. Vol.59, Issue 3, pp.237-257. -----. 1999. Chinese Christian in America: Conversion, Assimilation, and Adhesive Identities. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Yankelovich, Daniel. 2001. The Magic of Dialogue: Transforming Conflict into Cooperation. New York, NY: Touchstone. Zhang, Qin. 2007. "Family Communication Patterns and Conflict Styles in Chinese Parent Child Relationships." Communication Quarterly. Vol.55, Number 1, February 2007, pp.l 13-128. [ Page ] 272 Zhang, Yan Bing and Mary Lee Hummert. 2001. "Harmonies and Tensions in Chinese Intergenerational Communication: Younger and Older Adults' Account." Journal of Asian Pacific Communication. Vol.l 1, pp.203-230. Zhou, M. 1997. "Growing Up American: The Challenge Confronting Immigrant Children and the Children of Immigrants." Annual Review of Sociology. 23, pp.63-96. Zodhiates, Spiros. 1993. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers. [ Page ] 273 ***** This is the end of the e-text. This e-text was brought to you by Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library - Tyndale Digital Collections *****