1. Envisioning the Use and Impact of the Project’s Findings
With the completion of our initial oral history project—focusing on first-generation East Asian American Christians and their richly layered experiences—we find ourselves holding a set of narratives and insights that could inform multiple constituencies. We want these findings to move beyond academic circulation, influencing pastoral training, theological education, and community-based initiatives.
A key aspiration is to see the project’s findings integrated into practical ministry resources. Consider a scenario where a Korean immigrant pastor, after reading synthesized reports from our interviews, decides to host regular intergenerational dialogue sessions within the church. Armed with the knowledge that older members interpret denominational identities loosely while cherishing familial obligations as sacred values, this pastor might encourage second-generation leaders to facilitate “family faith nights,” where members openly discuss how migration shaped their religious choices and spiritual formation.
Similarly, a seminary instructor designing a course on “Global Christianities in North America” might incorporate anonymized interview excerpts into the curriculum. By doing so, students can learn directly from first-generation narratives, wrestling with questions such as: How does religious practice reconfigure when language barriers impede traditional Sunday school formats? What theological adjustments occur when politically charged events in the homeland—like the 2019 Hong Kong protests—reshuffle a believer’s priorities around justice, prayer, and lament?
Beyond local churches and classrooms, denominational leaders could use these findings to inform cross-cultural mission strategies or pastoral resource materials. For instance, if a denominational committee notes how many interviewees downplayed the importance of confessional boundaries and instead emphasized practical, relational aspects of faith communities, that committee might develop guidelines or workshops that train pastors to be more ecumenical and flexible, focusing on hospitality, social networks, and inclusive worship practices tailored to the immigrant experience.
2. Potential Next Steps for Continuing and Deepening Research
Our initial abductive approach revealed thematic terrains that merit more targeted exploration. Future research steps could include:
- Comparative Studies Across Asian Diasporas:
While our current interviews mostly spotlighted Chinese and Korean Christians, expanding the research to encompass other Asian ethnic groups—such as Filipino Catholics, Vietnamese Protestants, or Indian Orthodox communities—could highlight both overlapping and distinct patterns. For example, would Filipino communities emphasize social devotions (e.g., processions, Marian devotion) as sacred values differently than Chinese groups do? Would Vietnamese Christians incorporate political memories of the Vietnam War era into their theology, reshaping how they understand suffering, exile, and hope? - Focus on Specific Themes Uncovered En Passant:
Our interviews frequently touched on mental health issues, such as how believers processed trauma (e.g., death of a parent in a new country) or navigated anxiety related to language proficiency and socio-economic adaptation. A follow-up study could zero in on mental health as a central axis—interviewing pastors who attempted to counsel struggling congregants or lay leaders who created support groups. This would deepen our grasp of how spiritual frameworks and religious resources intersect with psychological well-being in immigrant contexts. - Longitudinal Studies and Generational Shifts:
Another avenue is to revisit some interviewees or find new participants from the same communities after a few years, observing how their perspectives evolve. Does the role of family as a sacred value shift as grandchildren grow up and acculturate more fully into North American contexts? Do church governance structures adapt to reflect the diminished importance of denominational identity over time? - Developing a Public Digital Archive and Interactive Tools:
Building a digital humanities project that offers a user-friendly interface—where excerpts, short video testimonies, and cultural annotations can be explored—would enable laypeople, pastors, and educators to engage directly with the data. Visitors to this archive could browse themes like “Conversion Narratives,” “Family and Faith,” or “Politics and Prayer,” gaining insights through curated story clusters.
3. If We Were to Begin Anew: Applying Lessons Learned
Were we to launch this project today, armed with our current understanding, we would refine our approach and tools to be both more strategic and more collaborative:
- Targeted but Open-Ended Interview Protocols:
Initially, we kept interviews very open to discover emergent themes. While this method yielded productive surprises, in a renewed phase we might incorporate more targeted prompts, informed by what we have learned. For example, since we now know mental health and intergenerational tensions are significant, we would include questions like: “Can you describe a season of disappointment, anger, or stress related to adjusting in a new country, and how did you find spiritual support?” This ensures a richer dataset on crucial but previously under-probed matters. - Incorporating Visual and Material Culture:
Understanding faith is not just about words. We might ask participants to show us meaningful religious objects, such as a cherished family Bible annotated in Chinese or Korean, or a photograph of their first worship service in North America. Documenting and analyzing these material artifacts would add a layer of interpretation: How do these objects mediate memory, belonging, and doctrinal understanding? - Earlier and Deeper Community Engagement:
From the start, we could form advisory committees with local pastors, denominational representatives, and lay leaders. Their early input could refine our interview questions, ensure cultural sensitivity, and expedite the return of findings to the communities. Collaborative relationships mean the project’s insights would be put to use more quickly—perhaps through immediate workshops or resource distribution at the community level. - More Systematic Comparison and Contrasts:
Drawing on lessons learned, we would design comparative frameworks from the outset. For instance, if a certain pattern—like skepticism about denominational labels—appears in Chinese congregations, we would deliberately seek interviewees in Korean or Indian churches to see if the phenomenon recurs. This comparative logic would help us more confidently generalize or qualify claims about Asian American Christian life.
4. Evolving Perspectives and Personal Transformations
Engaging these first-generation narratives has shifted how we, as researchers, understand theological discourse, ecclesial life, and migration studies. Initially, we might have underappreciated how intricately political memories and moral imaginations are woven into religious identity. Hearing a Cantonese respondent link the trauma of recent Hong Kong events to her fervent prayers and a reimagined eschatology taught us that theology is never abstract; it is always contextually embedded.
We have also become more attentive to the function of silence, ambiguity, and in-betweenness. Some narrators struggled to name their denominational affiliation or were uncertain about articulating doctrinal beliefs. Instead of viewing this as a deficit, we now appreciate these hesitations as indicators of how lived faith often exceeds the available categories. This pushes us to embrace conceptual humility. Rather than forcing experiences into neat theological “types,” we can remain open to new terminologies or hybrid concepts that better reflect people’s lived complexities.
Moreover, the project underscored for us that Asian American religious life cannot be fully understood by imposing Western frameworks. People navigate a vibrant interplay of Confucian ethics, Buddhist or folk religious remnants, Christian liturgies, and postcolonial political legacies. As scholars and practitioners, we leave this project more convinced of the need to decenter Eurocentric or purely doctrinally oriented lenses, making room for polyvocal forms of Christianity that speak multiple languages—literal and symbolic.
Our views on methodology have likewise deepened. The abductive approach now seems not just a useful technique but a philosophical stance—an ethic of listening and learning from the ground up. We understand that “data” are not raw materials to be slotted into pre-existing theories; they are narratives with texture and meaning that challenge us to rework our theoretical assumptions. This mindset can inform future projects in other religious communities, ethnic groups, or contexts of diaspora, ensuring that we remain attentive to voices that complicate our mental maps.
Conclusion
Reflecting on what should happen next with the project’s findings, possible research trajectories, hypothetical redesigns, and personal transformations reveals a dynamic interplay of scholarly rigor, pastoral utility, and cultural sensitivity. We envision the project’s insights fueling more refined academic debates, improving ecclesial training and resources, and inspiring integrative approaches to diaspora theology and spiritual care.
In short, the journey does not end here. The insights gained are seeds, ready to sprout into more focused research, more responsive community engagements, and deeper pedagogical innovations. The transformed perspectives we carry forward—more humble, more contextually aware, more appreciative of complexity—promise to enrich not only our own future scholarship but also the broader academic and ecclesial fields, guiding them toward more holistic, inclusive, and responsive understandings of transnational religious life.
