15 minute read
Migration, community and belonging
Next Article
By Clement Dachet
Clement Dachet, der er nigeriansk migrant i Danmark, beskriver i denne artikel ud fra sine personlige erfaringer de vanskeligheder, der er forbundet med at forlade sin egen kultur og søge efter at høre til i en anden, fremmed kultur. Kulturmødet udfordrer både identitet, selvopfattelse og værdighed hos den tilkommende, men også den modtagende part må vælge at være villig til at lide et tab, for at skabe plads for den “anden” – uanset om det drejer sig om samfund, ægteskab eller kirke. Dachet ser ikke i alle tilfælde multikulturelle menigheder som et ideal, men opfordrer til med empati og gæstfrihed at skabe rum for migranter.
A migrating
Migration is as old as man himself and people migrate for all sorts of reasons, either forced or by free will. For example, in Denmark, immigrants are represented in different categories that highlight their purposes of being in Denmark. The categories are migration by asylum status, migration for education, economic migration, migration due to reunification with family and lastly but not least, migration for tourism. Each of these categories often underlines, to a great extent, the very condition migrants find themselves in within their host countries.
Therefore, it is possible to talk broadly about the shared elements within migration experiences that relate to all migrating people but to be equally cautious of the varying experiences conditioned on the class of migration. For example, one who migrates for educational purpose, the reality is that it is often within a specified period which invariably determine the extent of self-investment into the host society. On the other hand, the person who was forced to migrate as a refugee or in inter-nation marriage cases often knows that it might be for a lifetime. Without doubt, it places some form of a lifetime commitment, to invest themselves in their newfound life in another country. The conditions for migrants, by class or type of migration, are not to assume that those who migrate for a limited duration of time do not experience the challenges of moving into a new culture such as culture shocks, stress and the need to adjust to culture
and building of new social network. Migration generally can be daunting and extremely tolls taking more so for those who have moved into a new culture with an indefinite time of stay or those who must accept a new society as their own. Herein is why it is worth talking about, the challenges of identity, identification or belonging to a community for migrants.
From the concentrated to the diffused
The very idea of leaving one’s home country to an entirely new location entails a move from the known to the unknown, and it is ultimately a severely defining decision with diverse consequences. Like a ”fish in the water”, so is it for one within their own culture. Thus, the ”concentrated” idea is the notion of the ”dominant” and in this case that of a ”culture”. People who are in their own culture of heritage are a part of it. They are within the familiar and with little concern or consciousness of distinctiveness; society’s structure, the language, food, dressed code and general etiquette, values, customs, and traditions are shared within one’s group. It is within such a group that a person’s identity is formed and nurtured. Therefore, a person’s culture can be the sum reference point or the locus to which a person’s perceived identity derives from. In this case, it is the concentrated culture.
When a person ventures out of his own culture (highly concentrated space) into an entirely different culture (less concentrated space of familiar cultural elements), one’s initial lack of a sense of distinctiveness becomes heightened by a new sense of distinctiveness as the new culture begins to confront the person with a new reality that is distinct from that which they are familiar with; this thus creates a diffused sense of self in a rather unique and dominating cultural space of the new ”other”. For example, however, the population size of Arabs in Denmark, they will still be a minority and cannot, by their presence in Denmark make Denmark an Arab ”concentrated” society. Instead, leaving their dominant Arab regions, their own culture gets diffused within the Danish culture, which happens to be the defining culture they would have to adapt by virtue of them migrating into Denmark. The transition from a familiar culture to an unfamiliar culture, one begins to face the sense of ”shock” to a new culture both in all its exciting and challenging ways. It is not only that one comes into another culture but also the one entering the culture becomes an”other” to the new culture they find themselves in. Consequently, within this new matric of cultural encounter
emerges a new form of mutual penetration between immigrants and their host culture.
As a migrant myself, my initial encounter with a culture outside of my own was characterized by an early-stage excitement. Many of the things I saw and experienced were unique and different from those I was familiar with. This first encounter often occurs in interaction with the material and concrete elements within a new culture: the architecture and arts, fashion, food, music etc. Over time, this slowly begins to branch into the more ideological such as matters of faith and beliefs, values, politics and sense of nationality and identity. Far often, the differences could either be minor or extreme depending on ethnographic proximity. Swedes, Norwegians and Germans would not experience the same level of cultural distance as migrants coming to Denmark from eastern Europe and even more for African and Middle East. Consequently, the degree to which these migrants interact with the culture varies based on these cultural proximities and the demand for cultural translation of forms and meanings.
For example, migrants coming from the so-called Global South to the cold-winter countries of the northern hemisphere, the climatic conditions have predisposed these two groups to specific ways and unique ways of living in either culture. Any person from either of these parts of the world would require a seismic shift in the person’s orientation to life to survive and carve a life for themselves. Sarah A. Lanier uses the concept of ”hot” and cold” cultures to distinguish between two broader types of cultures. For hot (sometimes rural/tribal) cultures the ruling value is relationships, while for cold (sometimes urban) cultures, the ruling value is efficiency. For myself, coming from a hot culture with a substantial value in a relationship, a cold culture started becoming rather challenging. People appear to have a very work-focused life, and meetings and communication with people were mechanical and transactional rather than relational and warm. For most first movers, this early experience creates an immediate sense of alienation, loneliness, which reenforces a deep feeling of homesickness hardly mediated by memories of family, friends, smell, food etc.
Seeking Belonging
With limited social networks, the search for community is crucial for every person’s general well-being and more so for a migrant navigating an entirely foreign culture. Sadly, for many, this becomes a very daunting task owing
to prejudice, language barrier, personal social limitations and social status. For migrants who come into a culture vastly different from theirs, for example, an African or a Middle-Easterner coming to Europe, encountering stereotypes held towards their people becomes a challenging reality and hurdle towards communication with the natives impacting their participation in the community. This is because most migrant’s crisis of identity is not a crisis of self-perception but is caused by that which they believe of themselves being challenged by another who suddenly and simplistically, defines or identifies them in a category entirely outside that which they know; such categorization can result in crucial sociological and psychological problems, and withdrawal from a community.
Conversely, the question of participation is not one-way traffic. Most recipient cultures also must learn to create the space for an ”other”, in this case, a foreigner. The sense of loss happens not merely as an involuntary act but also as a conscious and intentional choice. For example, in the context of inter-cultural marriage, this sense of loss is mutually experienced. Although it always seems like the spouse who has left their culture for the other spouse’s country is the one experiencing the loss, the reality is that the host partner equally suffers a loss of a different kind to create a space of accommodation for the foreign spouse. This may come in the form of language, food and time taking the commitment to enable the ”other” find adaptation. Similarly, migrants who have made attempts to join the Church community, often experience a more protracted process of being accepted and end up stopping their attendance, because of their experience of not being able to feel a sense of acceptance and belonging to that community. Most regular churchgoers do not often see the need to take it upon themselves to actively participate in hospitality towards a foreigner if it was not appealed for.
Finding a belonging
Migrants married to natives of their host country often have easy access to an existing community through their spouses; however, alienated they eventually may get to feel in the new community. The story can be different for migrants who do not have any such connection. ”Social-spaces” occur in different ways; students can find a default community in their institution of learning; others would become part of such a default community at the workplace. For those who are in neither space, like asylum seekers, the story may be quite different even after they can gain the
legal status of residency. Most foreigners have dealt with the lack of community by forming parallel diaspora communities with people with a common regional or with common socio-cultural affinities, religion and mentality. By this, they can bring a miniature of their home country and culture into a foreign place to create that sense of belonging or a home away from home. Such communities are made possible too by existing social stratification largely created by the socio-economic status of individuals.
Another vital aspect to consider in the search for belonging for migrants is its transcending nature beyond the first generation to the next generation. While the first generation is caught in between their place of origin and the newfound home, the second generation’s life is, by default, influenced first by their parents’ background-experience and secondly by the country they now are either brought into by migration or birth. There is a split of identity for the next generation. At home, their life is a parallel world – in terms of language, food, upbringing and values, but when they step out of that space, they become a participating member of the larger society, which demands of them to act, speak and behave in another way than they do at home. Thus, the second generation is often conflicted on self-identity because of this dual existence they are raised in.
A case for the church
The church has a universal identity in terms of its reach and inclusion. Where language may be a limitation in bringing people together, religions have been such large tents that accommodate diversity. However, it is a debatable matter since religion in its forms and practices can create denominational enclaves mostly on biblical conviction, history, institutional structure, liturgical traditions and ethnic identification and similarity.
Here, I will use the Danish church as an example. The Danish church (referred to as the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Denmark) is equally identified as the Danish Peoples Church. Its history, tradition and practices are rooted within the Danish ethnic identity. That means the church plays more than just a religious function in society but also that of a cultural custodian. Little wonder the holidays and customs are interwoven with cultural expressions as language and art form. However, the kind of function the church plays, it is nonetheless still in its form and practice expressed as a private matter thus creating a dichotomy between faith as practiced within the walls of the church and that which must remain private when one goes to public
spaces such as office, school or even in matters of politics.
Furthermore, membership in the Danish church today is voluntary. However, it has in the past been linked to citizenship. This is seen in the form of functions, the church at the local level play in a person’s life from the cradle to the grave. Such an ethnically rooted image of the Danish church only becomes more apparent with the rise of Christian migrants who are forging a space for their identity and faith. Most people encounter a form of faith ”identity” crisis as the form of worship, and the role of the church is markedly different from what they are familiar with from their places of origin. Speaking with Migrant Christian, particularly from the Global South, there is often the language barrier, the foreignness of liturgy and traditions within the Danish Peoples Church. Most of these Christian migrants, particularly those from a charismatic and Pentecostal background whose church services are loose and non-liturgical, often encounter enormous shocks at the procedurally rigid and slow pace of worship in the Danish church. These and the language barrier often force church newcomers to stop coming for worship meetings.
While many turns to a church community organized for non-Danish speakers within an existing Danish church or planted by another migrant, the longer risk is for further alienation from fully participating in the society they are supposed to be a part of. The less use of the Danish language and being further carved out as a separate ethnic enclave separate from the traditionally Danish church. This of course enforces the designation of these new churches as migrants thus perpetuating the idea of foreignness and challenges the identity formation for migrants considering integrating into their new home.
Towards a multi-cultural church?
Being in an inter-cultural marriage has, as mentioned above, taught me over the years that the spouse that receives a foreign spouse also suffer a form of loss in order to accommodate and forge ahead in their relationship. It means a mutual sacrifice for accommodation touching on language, food and familiar family traditions. Such a view on accommodation of foreigners will require a willingness from the foreigner and the host church to suffer a level of loss to create a space for mutual accommodation. There are a few examples of such, for example, the churches who have had to stretch their budget to make room for translation equipment or hire a translator. Others have
expanded their church’s space to allow other ethnic groups to have worship services in their languages. A local congregation in the city of Aarhus has allowed two foreign groups to be a part of their community while carrying out activities in their language and intermittently do a joint program.
The idea of a multi-cultural congregation comes with both its opportunities and challenges. In some big cities, we see several congregations working toward accommodating people with other ethnic back than ethnic Danes. Such an inclusion reflects the change in the Danish demography and recognizes migrants as part of the Danish church’s landscape; there are many of these stories in places like Kolding, Esbjerg, Copenhagen, Aarhus etc. However, not every congregation may be able to accommodate such a change. In order to illustrate one of such impediments towards a multi-cultural congregation, one must look at other issues beyond commonality of faith and be honest about socio-economic factors that can define a social group. Migrants live in the so-called ”ghetto areas” which are often described as areas with a predominantly migrant population. These areas are known for high unemployment, high crime rates and usually a lower level of literacy. Therefore, a congregation that would serve such a community must take seriously these realities and speak in ways that are relevant to the experiences of the people living within such a context. On the other hand, while some migrants may readily fit into a middle-class, suburban congregation with affluent members or, what if the middle class, due to their affluence, cannot relate to the sub-culture of a migrant ghetto life experience, the question of the challenges of immigration and immigration laws, high unemployment and little access to resources, psychological stress exacerbated by cultural pressure in a new culture? The idea of a multi-cultural church is great, but it should not be built on an assumption of cultural assimilation as an end goal but that of accommodation, within which intentionality to accommodate a foreign person is emphasized.
Building inter-church engagements
Therefore, since there are both opportunities and challenges in building a multi-cultural congregation, not every congregation needs to move towards a multi-cultural reconstruction. A congregation can work towards a different model, for example, seeking eventbased engagement with a migrant congregation towards shared activities in their local community. Such engagements could foster mutual participa-
tion which creates a further sense of belonging for most foreigners. A local parish congregation, e.g., has an inter-church activity with a migrant congregation. They do not share the same building, but they have made mutual engagement by participating in prayer, music, and sharing meal events. These simple acts have gone a long way into helping members hear each other’s stories and better understand each other. As a result, they have partnered on other small projects relating to youth and children work, concerts etc.
Conclusion
Diverse factors trigger migration, therefore determining the short and long implications of migrant’s experiences and the impacts these would invariably have on their identities and self-perceptions are complex. Consequently, within such a complexity, this article has attempted to work a canvass that gives the reader an opportunity into the complex whole, not in an exhaustive way, and how to approach migrant related issues with the seriousness with which it demands. Such an approach will humbly recognize the shared humanity of our humanness and shared experiences and accord us a sense of empathy when speaking of another human who happens to be a migrant from another culture. How would the church respond? How can the church intentionally work towards hospitality and indeed creating space for those with whom they do not share common ethnic and national heritage?
Clement Dachet is originally from Nigeria and lives today in Denmark with his wife, Louise Stensig Dachet and their 3 children, Josefine, Benjamin and Joachim. He is a trained theologian and works as a partner coordinator in Mission Africa and is an external consultant in the Danish Church’s Interchurch Council on Migrant Churches. He is also deputy chairman of the Cross-Cultural Center in Denmark.
