Hi, DMcG - I think if we strive for "accuracy" in religion, we're missing the point. If we strive to depict the evangelists accurately as first-century middle-eastern people (whatever they looked like back then), we create an expectation of factual accuracy that simply does not (and should not) exist. I think we're far better off having people of European ancestry portraying their holy people as European, knowing full well that they weren't Think of all the artistic depictions of biblical scenes with people in medieval costumes in front of medieval buildings. Sure, it's anachronistic and all shades of other inaccuracy, but that inaccuracy keeps us away from the temptation to "factualize" what is and must be myth. When people start viewing sacred myth as incontrovertible fact, that's when we get into trouble.
Myth is meant to capture the imagination of humankind - that doesn't happen when myth is forced into a false conception of accuracy and historicity.
I'm sorry, but I relate to European saints far better than I relate to Filipino ones. And I think that's OK (as long as I don't force European saints upon the Filipinos). To a great extent, my religion is expressed and understood through my culture, because that's who I am and what I understand.

-Joe-