I’ve been reflecting on some of the ideas I’ve been learning about in my Ministry Across Cultures class, and also what I just heard in my class about Paul this morning. The dichotomy that has been trying to hold in tension is between boundaries and borders. I think that distinction is an important one in the way we think of ecumenism and multiculturalism.
Boundaries are something we often talk about in Seminary. As a leader in the Church it is vitally important to recognize and maintain healthy boundaries. This can mean obvious things like keeping boundaries that prevent sexual harassment, embezzlement, or things like that, but healthy boundaries also means knowing when to say “no” to demands for time and energy. I have been trying to recognize those less obvious boundaries in my life and be aware of what limits I need to set to maintain my own sanity.
There is also another kind of boundary, the unhealthy or at least unnecessary boundary. This is where I see the issue of multiculturalism coming to the forefront. We often think in terms of the boundaries of our own cultural identity. In order to try to preserve that identity we labor under the mistaken idea that we need to set strict limits to how we interact with those on the other side of that boundary. I suggest instead that we start thinking in terms of borders. A border is different from a boundary. A border can be crossed and when we do, we leave our own place and enter the place of our neighbor. Sometimes this isn’t appropriate, some borders are also appropriate boundaries. I know that my next door neighbor doesn’t mind if I walk in to his apartment when he’s watching the football game. But, if I were to walk in at 3am while his family was sleeping, I would not just be crossing a border, I would be crossing a boundary. Obviously I also hold that boundary, I’m not some creepy weirdo who likes to walk in to peoples apartments in the middle of the night.
But when a border is not also a boundary, it invites crossing. I think the crux of multiculturalism shouldn’t be about eliminating borders, I think it should instead be about crossing borders, and welcoming others to cross our own border and participate in all the things that happen on our side of the border.
This brings me to another point in this idea that I have been considering. In my opinion, the most interesting new cultural developments (and even personal developments) happen right at the border. Using food as a primary metaphor for cultural exchange, I think the statement holds very true. “TexMex” or other “fusion” food cultures are a source of great innovation and exciting new ways of appreciating not just the best of two cultures but of creating a new and unique border culture. I also see this when a food culture is transported to a new place with a different agricultural climate. Haute cuisine in the past 30 or so years has embraced this border food concept, generating things like California pizza, a whole panopoly of French inspired fusions, and unusual reworking of ethnic foods in new and exciting local contexts.
Although this may seem like a new trend, this is as ancient as civilization itself. The Romans, for instance, initially thought that the French climate was too cold to raise good wine grapes, but now France is known for some of the best wine in the world. If that border between the Mediterranean and France had remained a boundary, we would have never known the possibility of French wine.
So I think the true task of multiculturalism is to recognize and celebrate borders, to cross them and to invite others to cross ours, and to see the possibilities that exist when we live close to those borders. Boundaries should still be respected, and we should always bear in mind that they should not be crossed even when they seem inappropriate. For a boundary to become simply a border requires an invitation from the person or people on the other side, and a willingness to cross.
