In a recent conversation, I heard someone use the acronym “MEMA”–Multi-Ethnic, Mostly Asian, to refer to churches. This refers to churches that aim to be multi-ethnic, and end up being mostly Asian. Many times this assessment is aimed to be used in a negative connotation towards such churches.
Why is this? What’s wrong with MEMA? Personally, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with MEMA, just like I don’t think there’s anything wrong with multi-ethnic or ethnic-specific. It’s just that there’s a significant segment of the churchgoing population that believes that MEMA isn’t ideal. Some thoughts:
- Mostly Asian is not politically correct.
In the name of tolerance, Americans at large seem to find something inappropriate with an ethnic group dominating a group, saying it’s exclusive at best, racist at worst. Mostly Asian just looks bad.
- It seems like a failure.
Churches like this work very hard to put forth a multi-ethnic image, showing “diversity” on their websites, preaching integration, and doing their best to have their congregation be mixed. But often they end up attracting more Asian-Americans. Granted, these are Asian-Americans who want to be part of a multi-ethnic church, but it seems like they attract more of the same.
What happens to MEMA churches? How do we assess these churches? Should they make more efforts in a new way? Should they accept their identity? Have they succeeded or failed?
Oh, drats, I missed this post. There is some similarlty or overlap for the phrase I coined as “multi-Asian church” in the book “MultiAsian.Church” – which would be adjacent to this term “MEMA.” While some may use this term with negative connotation, I don’t think the term is inherently negative, and I think it can be a useful bookmark of sorts, to acknowledge the demographics and intended vision, that of a multiethnic church led by Asian Americans or currently composed of largely Asian Americans, and that this is worth noting and noticing.
thanks for your comment, DJ! You’re right, it’s not inherently negative. It was about the tone I’ve heard it said. In my experience, I heard the first part “multi-ethnic” used in a sarcastic tone with the second part “mostly Asian” said in a tone of resignation. It does exactly what you say: acknowledge both the demographics and intended vision.