Race and the Emerging Church

Rebecca Murphy, leader of the Chicago Emergent cohort, also has an important post on the emerging church and race following her attendance a few weeks ago at the SCUPE (Seminary Consortium of Urban Pastoral Education) Conference, one of the top urban ministry conferences around. Check it out.

The URL for Rebecca’s post is:
http://princessmax.blogspot.com/2008/04/seminary-consortium-of-urban-pastoral.html

this is a complex issue – much better discussed among a diverse group of friends than within the limitations of the blogosphere…

but i would like to add a personal note to what was said about Bell…

mars hill went through a very difficult time a while back when Bell decided to begin discussing the role of women in ministry and when then eventually move women into leadership positions within his church.

a lot of this came out of Rob’s reading of “Slaves, Women & Homosexuals” by William J. Webb….all of this to say that i believe Rob truly HAS given “adequate consideration to these questions” – at least that of gender equity …and within his own congregation he has taken a very personal hit for considering these questions as well.

a lot of other leaders, however, still have a long way to go…

i found out about all this (stuff with Bell) while attending the “Isn’t She Beautiful” church leaders conference at Mars Hill last year. During a break-out session on the leadership structure of Mars Hill,it was depressing to see the number of questions being asked by pastors and church leaders that were more concerned with challenging the scriptural basis for Bell’s decision, than learning from the elder (a woman) who was leading the session.

it seems as if our hangups over issues of sexuality (and race) will continue to plague the church well into our “emergence”.

Scott,
Just a few thoughts in response to your post. I agree that the blogosphere has its limitations. I do, however think these complex issues need to be discussed in many arenas. Part of what I was trying to get at with Rob (I don’t have any angst with Rob personally. I have the deepest respect for him) was this; once we have made the theological shift toward women in all levels of leadership in the Church, how do we (those that hold power in our particular Christian tradition) facilitate the change needed in the existing structures to give women access? I have heard several accounts of how Rob has led his church through change and I applaud him. The break-out session you describe sounds depressing. Unfortunately those are the kinds of conversations that still need to take place in order for change to occur. I would add not only for women, but for any group that sit at the margins in the Church.

If you haven’t yet viewed Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s speech from this morning at the National Press Club – find it and do so. He addresses directly many of these issues. He says that the recent coverage of his sermon snippets is not an attack on him – but rather on the Black Church. Wright’s speech is a challenging speech – that will most likely be mis-interpreted and mis-quoted in the dualistic dialogue of commerical media conversation.
If we are part of an emergent church – then an open and honest and humble conversation about racism in our churches must be a part of the conversation. This well publicized episode with Rev. Wright and Barack Obama’s explicit invitation to deeper conversation on this issue – is our opportunity to demonstrate that the emergent movement is open to the Grace Moments that God’s Spirit is making evident.
Racism is a open wound in the Body of Christ. Are we courageous enough to begin to take steps towards healing? The first step is admitting that we are wounded and that only by the humble opening to God’s Grace we may be healed.

Sitting and staring at blank comment box.

There is language which is designed to be shocking, designed to be prophetic. This language is needed fighting against the unseen powers.

But at the same time, that is not the language of a conversation. How could Rob Bell do otherwise than fumble in the face of that confrontation. Is he supposed to admit that he’s evil, or deny that he’s evil, or claim that he was evil and is trying to reform.

I’m hoping that we do continue to speak about that which is uncomfortable and difficult to deal with. I’m hoping that we might also make room for the prophetic voices without forcing them to “be reasonable” I’m hoping that we don’t spend too much time tearing down reasonable people because they aren’t prophetic enough.

I was there to hear Rob and Rose. She asked some very penetrating and important questions. Rob gave a very sincere and enlightening answer (on a slightly different topic). They were both beautiful and the dialog continues. Both showed a willingness to engage, which sometimes takes a bit longer than a portion of a program. For some of us, perhaps a lifetime. But let’s keep talking. We need to hear the voices of Rose and Rob, both on the bleeding edge of where we all need to be.

This was informative to a prayer I’ve been praying about things the church I serve needs to consider in its next season. Thanks!

well, all to say- this is my soap box of mine for many years. i recently moved to kansas city from texas, and surprisingly enough, the issue of race and or race relations has become the sore spot in my everyday life. it’s THICK here, and people turn a blind eye to the real issues, esp within the body.

i’m asian american- born and raised in texas. i grew up very bi-culturally, so i’m both korean and american. so, i have a unique position, being mistreated and slighted by both white people and those of color because i’m asian. but i also feel, i have a unique voice in the whole race conversation because i am asian.

this last week, i sat in on tim keel’s conference and couldn’t help but take a demographic count. of about 60-70 ppl in the room: 13 women (including me), about a dozen “my age” (20’s-30’s), and those of color? only me.

brian mclaren spoke on sunday at church, and i couldn’t help but poke back at a point he made during his teaching. he said that “most people look in the mirror and don’t think about the color of their skin. it’s because you’re privileged, and don’t have to think about it. you’re white.” i sat on the 3rd row and thought, well, so much for the 12 (of 300) whole people sitting in the church who weren’t white. so i said to him: “brian, i understand that you’re making a strong point to your majority demographic in the emerging church, but when you make statements like that, you marginalize those who aren’t white or middle class, and perpetuate the problem that the emerging church is full of white middle-class people, and particularly men. when and how could the body become more diverse when the teaching is directed specifically at a specific SES population?”

he didn’t have a full response, and i realize i opened a can of worms. but it’s true. i think the body can only begin to become diverse if it becomes conscious of the small things that marginalize others… one way is to re-evaluate language.

i kind of got excited when i saw the title of this blog post. but i also let out a sigh after i read it. i’m tired of talking about the wound like the weather. i’m ready for the church to full acknowledge it as an issue and do something abut it. the little things we do/say everyday need to be untangled from racism.

I am amazed that some people in this conversation are still using the half-baked response that this is too complex to be in the blogsphere. I started hearing that 4 or more years ago on the old EV blogs. And we make excuses for champions of new church thinking who ignore this critical issue for the church, country and our world. As

I’ve blogged this is why the emergent conversation lost credibility with me a person of color, leading a racially diverse emerging community of faith.

The issue of racism is much larger than we think. Like Rob Bell, white men have to work very hard to understand the issues of racism and diversity. I have worked very hard to do so, which includes admitting I don’t know what racism feels like to its victims. I have come a long way thanks to those of race who I have had the blessing to work alongside and have helped me – a Latino man and an African-American woman. I have been directly responsible for issues of diversity within the organization where I work. I know that I will never completely ‘get it’ but I’m trying. I also come from a denomination (Methodist) that has a moment of shame in its history when black members were literally banned from attending services with whites. The church has undergone a process of atonement and redemption, and I have had the honor of participating in a public way. Yet, Sunday does remain the most segregated time in America. On one hand, that is shameful, but I also consider that religion in general and Christianity in particular absorbs the culture where it is practiced. Sunday morning worship service is different in Brazil which is different than in the Phillipines, etc. So the fact that African-American worship is different from White American worship should come as no big surprise.

For several years an African-American woman occasionally attended our worship services. She was well known in the community and made to feel welcome in our church. But she also attended a local African-American church. Her reason was that sometimes she needed the latter as much as she sometimes needed the former.

Our church once had a relationship with a local African-American non-denominational church because the respective pastors struck up a friendship. At least once per year, our two churches got together and worshiped on a weekday night. It was a bit of both and was always a joyful time. Both choirs sang; both pastors preached. What a blessing! More churches should consider doing the same.

I understand that racism is something I will never completely understand from the victim’s point of view. But I have to keep trying, while recognizing and celebrating the differences.

Thank you for posting this! The lack of dialogue on race is something that has kept me reluctant to engage with the emergent conversation. I hope this is a sign that the conversation can become more inclusive.

Peace.

I appreciate this conversation as a sociology student entering grad school and as a person of faith. Like Teresa, I’m from Kansas City where a distinct line of segregation still exists from the 50s and even back to the time of slavery really. It’s hard to miss that the emergent movement, which takes on issues like environmental and international social justice, turns a blind eye to the racism within our own cities (I know that is a very blanket statement). Racism is part of social justice. It’s intimidating to tackle, especially in KC, where there are deep roots of resentment and bitterness. Conversations about racism seem to only represent white people or black people, but rarely both. At times, churches have tried reconciliation services with no real success. It always seems unnatural and forced, not from genuine relationship and humility. It’s something that I don’t see a clear solution for within institutions like the church, other than loving your neighbor and caring about issues that affect the poor. Issues of race are really about power which can be really hard to address, especially from a position of privilege (I’m speaking as a white middle-class woman myself). It’s hard to see a connection being formed between faith that is socially conscious and the poor, because most solutions cost money, which as a student I have a hard time doing myself. Buying local food, fair trade, sweatshop free, etc. costs money that the poor usually can’t spare. I’m getting off topic. It’s a very complex issue that revolves around more than just race, but class as well, and sex if you want to really get into it. How inclusive is the emergent movement? Is it good for everyone? Does it see the needs of everyone? Of course we can critique to the point of paralysis, a flaw of the post-modern movement, but they are questions that do need to be addressed.

If I might jump back to comment #11 – we’re all victims of racism (and classism, sexism, and all the other isms.) White people are victims of racism in a different way than people of color. We have our white privelege true, but our racist systems and attitudes damage us deeply – even if we don’t always see it.

As long as white people (or men or the rich or the straight or whoever is in power) think that “diversity” is this optional thing we can participate in, then there will always be this subtext of feeling like being inclusive or opening up the power structure is doing people favors.

I had someone say to me this weekend, “You don’t know what you don’t know.” White people in America – we don’t know what we don’t know. We have no idea how much our homogeneity and racist systems (and it is very much about systems, not just individual interactions) hurt us, until we can get outside them a bit and see what we have been missing.

My perception, as in interested observer of the whole emergent thing, is many emergent types have NO idea how narrow their experience is and how much they have to GAIN by being intentional about stepping outside their comfort zones and seeking the wisdom that lives in other communities.

Another friend once told me “You need the Other for your healing.” She was completely right. I would not trade the healing I have found in my interactions with people very very different from me for anything.

It’s a tiring conversation but it’s one worth having.

I also want to make it a point that I have nothing against Rob Bell and wrote a follow up post to attempt to articulate that:

http://eugenecho.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/rob-bell-is-my-homeboy/

He was there and was asked a question and he did what he could with that question.

My point though is that we need to be having this conversation and it takes great courage. It takes great courage because folks in positions of power and privilege need to allow this conversation to take place. And when this conversation takes place, the posture – for those in power – is that we need to take more time to listen than to speak.

That’s my two cents.

What will not move us toward eliminating discrimination against women and ethnic minorities in our churches and broader culture, and will only hurt the cause, are bogus accusations of sexism and racism. Wright’s outrageous rants and the suggestion by many, including you, that Sean Bell was killed because of racism are classic examples. You have no evidence that the cops that shot Bell were motivated by racism. Reckless accusations and sweeping generalizations of racial injustice, epitomized by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, only further racial division in our country. I’m all for speaking up for victims of discrimination (which we should remember can go both ways), but let’s do it carefully and responsibly. Concerning Rob Bell, I don’t think white people, including pastors, are morally responsible for past discrimination, therefore they (especially powerful and influential white people) should not participate in further discrimination by favoring minorities in any way. The way to eliminate discrimation is to treat people according to their character traits, knowledge, skills, etc., not gender, skin color, etc. So yes Bell should support women and ethnic minorities when they truly are wronged by discrimination. But it’s wrong to support them in any different way than he should support men and white people. Why would we think a new form of discrimation, even if it based on good intentions, would solve the problem of discimination?! We should imitate God by not showing favoritism!

I’m a 26 yr old white female attending seminary and just beginning to see the bag of worms that the gender equity question is opening up for me. One thing I find interesting is that I never once was not expected in my public university to bring all of my intelligence and fervor to my studies and to my on-campus ministry. But now in seminary (and mind you, it’s multi-ethnic, multi-denominational and holds to a gender inclusive language policy) I have been questioned for my calling, my desire for ordination, and given “extra consideration” because I’m a female. I don’t want extra consideration. Or extra help to feel needed in God’s work. I just want to be treated equally for being the capable servant that I am.

I became a Christian in my teens after growing up in an atheist/new age household and I find it hard to stand the idea that the church’s presence and impact is declining minute by minute and someone would seriously not accept my two (very hard-working) hands outstretched, ready to get to work, doing the Lord’s work. I just don’t understand it… it’s unbelievable to me that Jesus can set me free but that the church wants to shackle me back up. I mean, we just don’t have time to sit around and wait for people to figure out that I’m qualified to do this. Children are starving and people are dying without ever knowing Jesus. It’s time for us to get to work!

I don’t think Rob Bell’s evil but I do think it’s time for sincere Christians to quit fumbling around these issues and start answering these questions in light of Jesus’ ministry (he was a big fan of all the lower classes, eunuchs, women and lepers) because the world is dying and we’re sitting around debating…and that doesn’t sounds like the children of God to me…it sounds like the Pharisees.

i didn’t mean to suggest that we shouldn’t be having this conversation through our blogs – and i certainly didn’t mean my comments to come accros as “half-baked”...

(in fact, I have blogged about race issues myself…hypocritical?)

no,the point that I was trying to make is that the back and forth commenting on this has its place – and needs to be done, but will ultimately do little to solve these issues.

i like Steve Knights t-shirt – “no one cares about your blog.”

seriously folks, its great that we can blog about race – but have any of us said anything thus far that made you stop and think (much less encouraged you to think differently?)

all I see is a group of (mostly) middle-class, educated white folks sitting around talking about something for which they have little first-hand experience. (myself included)

I’m not saying we ignore this issue on our blogs…no, if fact, blog on!...but I was simply stating that this is a very poor substitute for sitting down and having a beer with someone of another race and trying to see how this works in the real world.

God forgive me for thinking my own blogging has any significant meaning in this world.

a real resource in all this is the work of Eric H.F. Law, an episcopalian 1st generation chinese american from Los Angeles. His book titles include, The Wolf Shall Lie Down with the Lamb, The Bush Was Blazing But Not Consumed, Inclusion. He runs an orgainization called the Kaleidoscope Institute. A lot of writers talk about race and diverstiy, he actually offers processes and dialogue models to begin the work.

Nick,
You said “We should imitate God by not showing favoritism.” I think you may need to read the Bible a little more carefully. God clearly takes the side of the poor and the oppressed. To think that discrimination is a past thing and we don’t need to take responsibility for it is ridiculous. If we are to imitate God, we need to take the side of the poor and the oppressed, and the oppressed in our world are often the minorities. Favoring those who are discriminated against is not furthering discrimination, it is following the example of Christ and the command of God to love our neighbors.
Put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Would you want the church to reach out to you if you were oppressed?
These are systemic problems that we’re dealing with and to call these “bogus accusations of sexism and racism” is ludicrous.

Steve, your statement that “these (I assume you mean gender and racial discrimination) are systemic problems” is a misinformed, sweeping generalization of the reality today. Discrimination is not systemic like it used to be, thank God! Because discrimination is not widespread like it used to be, we must now address specific cases of discrimination, not operate as if discrimination is systemic. I said that we (the church and everyone) should show special support to victims of gender and racial discrimination, but I was referring to specific instances of racial discrimination. Favoring minorities in general, as if the problem was systemic, like affirmative action does, is only furthering discrimination and racial divisiveness. For example, when a church is deciding on who should be in leadership positions, gender and race should not be in the discussion at all, unless those specific minority individuals seeking the position are being blocked from obtaining that position because of their minority status. If they are the best fit for the position, then they should be appointed, regardless of gender or skin color. You eliminate discrimination by stop discriminating! If you favor the minorities simply because they are minorities and not because of specific cases of discrimination, you are discriminating against the majority. Helping the poor and oppressed and favoring people simply because of their gender or skin color are two completely different things and it is was unfair for you to correlate them as if they are one and the same. I challenge you to show me one instance where God favors someone, not because they are poor or oppressed, but simply because of gender or skin color. It seem that you believe that all (at least most) minority people are still being oppressed, and so all minority people deserve favoritism in order to alleviate their oppression. But you first need to powerfully show that systemic discrimination actually exists. Adding to your felt need to favor minorities over white men is your apparent belief that the majority white men have the moral obligation to make reparations (“take responsibility for”) for past discrimination against minorities. But this not true because we cannot be guilty of wrongdoings we did not do. Guilt does not transfer. Let’s vigorously fight discimrimination where and when it is taking place and show favoritism to victims of discrimination and all forms of oppression. But we can only end discrimination by not showing favoritism that is based on gender, skin color, etc.

The ‘oughts’ and ‘shoulds’ in front of this issue are difficult. The excavation and exorcism of racial imperialism is not an easy or obvious endeavor. It requires the diligence to listen and enter into the world of others, letting the history get into the sinews of our theological and philosophical committments, transforming our liturgies in such a way they challenge our imaginations to look beyond our racial/cultural cul-de-sac. This will require, from all parties involved, love, friendship, patience and the willingness to give up something.

first, amen to everyone who has posted and continue to grapple with these intractable concerns. i take heart that i wouldn’t have been able to tell the race of many who have commented had you not mentioned it. such emerging post-racial solidarity is beautiful.

btw, to teresa’s point about freeing ourselves of colonial language, (i know no one means any harm in the use of the term, but it does marginalize) i am not a “minority” (except in certain strict contexts in which one is using the word to refer to actual numbers of people); i’m a “person of color.” people of color make up better than 3/4 of the world’s population and people of african descent a good portion of that.

(nick, thank you for offering a direct example of this.) sad though it may be, my gut intuition is that people of privilege have done ‘bout all the apologizin’ they gonna do (don’t be offended: my gut sounds like that). as ridiculous as it sounds, i’ve been hearing more and more push-back that sounds absurdly reminiscent of this piece of satire from the daily show (about 2min in—http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=166410). so for all those who can appreciate that people of color have yet to see “40 acres and a mule” (don’t give up, brotha daley; we need you), please don’t get discouraged or embittered that we’ll never see it. we can still build a more just world—together.

[personally, nick, i have no interest in reparations: apologies and guilt are not where it’s at for me. if i were to ask for anything, it would be restitution: a legal acknowledgment that slave labor and other colonial exploitation created wealth that still benefits/privileges some over others, even today. btw, have you ever stopped to question what engenders within you the unassailable notion that you can determine (1) what accusations of racism/sexism are bogus, (2) who gets to speak to them, (3)what manner of discourse is appropriately careful and responsible, (4)when enough innocent people of color have died at the hands of police before we get to cry foul justifiably, (5)that “traits, knowledge and skill” are somehow a more valid discriminatory standard, (6)that the marginalized have any obligation to you or any other privileged person “to powerfully show that systemic discrimination actually exists”? these notions are partial evidence of what we mean we speak of “systemic racism/sexism.” systems aren’t just physically structural; they are also psychological.]

even as i type, i recognize that i too am privileged (albeit differently than my white friends). i have a voice, and though limited by comparison to some, i even have power and influence (u go, brotha cho). so the challenge i make, i make to each of us (however we are privileged in our different contexts): extend your privilege to others. that’s the difference between justice and charity.

Nick,
The fact that you think racism is no longer systemic is incredibly naive. That is exactly how racism is operational in America. Not only that but incidents like Jena and the nooses hangings last year show that not only is systemic racism alive and well but so in personal racial prejudice. But what scares me more than any of that is folks you say there is no racism and we just need to get beyond the race issue. This is the greatest evidence of the oppression of racism in our society.

Meanwhile the clear fact is that despite your assertion to the contrary the overwhelming number of the poor and oppressed in this country are people of color.

Thanks God have found favor with God because they sure haven’t with the church.

I get the feeling that you guys feel that discrimination is still so pervasive that virtually every majority individual is a victim of discrimination and every majority individual is guilty of discrimination. This od course would justify affirmative action because minorities and victims would be the same individuals. But there are only a small minority of Americans who discriminate and likewise a small minority of people who are victims of discrimation, because our culture strongly opposes discrimination. We have made so much progess, but have gone overboard in the other direction and found ourselves over-reacting with policiies like affirmative action, which is just reverse-discrimination. Now in 2008 discrimination is no longer pervasive in our culture, and so our policies should change as well. Are minorities bitter for past injustice (indeed some are suffering the consquences of past injustice) and feel white men must compensate for it? I don’t think this view is justified. We shouldn’t penalize people who are not guilty of discrimination, which is specifically what affirmative action does.

Nick,

Thank you for engaging in this discussion. I think your comments have reminded us why this conversation is so important and how much work there is yet to do.

I am assuming you are white (as am I). Do you have any friends who are “people of color”? (Let’s keep in mind Melvin’s admonition that “minority” is an inaccurate and potentially offensive term.) I’m sad to say that I did not until a few years ago. I am grateful to God for my friendship with Anthony Smith, in particular. He has helped me to see things in a much different light. The challenge is to see how our position of white privilege is clouding and distorting our view of reality.

As Melvin explained, “systemic” racism is mostly invisible, a “principality and power,” if you will. I think that’s a starting point in this whole discussion. If you are unwilling to consider that and allow your interaction (albeit “virtual”) here with people of other ethnicities to open your eyes to that, then there it is difficult to go any further. I’m not trying to shut down conversation here. On the contrary, I just want to challenge you, as a brother in Christ, to be open to really hearing and listening here. Instead, you are accusing “minorities” of being “bitter” and trying to “penalize” white people for discrimination. Do you see how antagonistic that is? Again, from one white guy to another: Your white privilege is what allows you to even hold this view in the first place. Just consider that for a moment. Let that sink in.

And let’s keep talking. Hopefully this conversation will lead to action in our personal lives and in our communities, and who knows? Maybe even more beyond that. Here’s hopin’ ...

Steve, our disagreement is not due to my ignorance of reality as a white man. I have had and still have several friends of various ethnic origins, my wife is a half-black, my cousin is half-black and ¼ Native American, and I have worked with inner-city (mostly black and Hispanic) youth and their families for years. Therefore, I have some first-hand knowledge of the lives of “people of color”. As with you, I believe these relationships have helped clarify my view of reality regarding racial discrimination. I imagine that my view on race would be highly clouded and distorted if I only knew other white people, even with all the literature and mass media available on the subject. I am of course willing to consider anyone’s argument. I enjoy “really hearing and listening” to people having different viewpoints than my own. However, I cannot agree with your proposed premise, or “starting point”, of this conversation that racism is still systemic in contemporary American society. The word “systemic” refers to something affecting a whole system. To me, it seems that racism has diminished over the recent past so that it no longer impinges on every sphere of society. Therefore, one is exaggerating when they label racism in American today “systemic”. You may be able to find racism everywhere because racist people are everywhere, but the suggestion that all our institutions and various spheres of society are beset with racial discrimination is an acute overstatement. Why do you insist everyone who wants to discuss the issues raised in your blog post agree about that premise? I also do not agree with your suggestion that racism is a “principality and power”, but that is a theological discussion for another day perhaps. No, I do not understand how I was being antagonistic. I do not see anything offensive about the word “minority” to indicate groups that form less than half of the whole population. I think it is clear what that word means by definition according to its proper usage. Your blog post shows your misguided views on race in that you suggested that (1) racial discrimination had something to do with Sean Bell’s death, and that (2) Rob Bell should use gender and racial preferences in the selection processes for church leadership positions in order to increase the representation of women and ethnic minorities in church leadership. Your former suggestion is indicative of your belief that racism is systemic and your consequent far-reaching suspicion of racial discrimination, even without sound evidence. Your latter suggestion amounts to discrimination in reverse with the proposed use of racial and gender preferences, instead of judging people according to the content of their character, skill relevant to the position, etc.

Check out this article about the specious claims of racial motivation behind the death of Sean Bell:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2006-12-04hm.html

Hey Nick,

Thanks for sharing a little bit more of your personal story. You inferred from my comments that I think you are “ignorant” about this issue, and obviously you are not. Ignorance is different than what I was trying to suggest, though: That the issue of race and the deep roots it has in this country are mostly hidden from our view. For example, you say that “racism has diminished over the recent past so that it no longer impinges on every sphere of society,” yet you acknowledge that one can “find racism everywhere because racist people are everywhere.” Those statements seem contradictory to me. And so, to use your definition of terms, if “systemic” means “something affecting a whole system” and you acknowledge racism and racist people are everywhere, how is it not then “systemic”?

As far as the use of the term “minority,” I am speaking as someone engaged in cross-cultural global mission, so that informs my perspective. The part of the world once referred to as “the third world” is now known as “the majority world” because we’ve come to realize that that imperialistic western mindset was clouding our judgment on how our language describes the global reality. In the same way, the statistics tell us that in this country (the U.S.) whites will soon be “the minority.” But we aren’t yet, so why bother being “politically correct”? (you might ask) The bottom line is: If you’re going to engage in this discussion, and an African-American (Melvin Bray) suggests (as he did earlier), “I know no one means any harm in the use of the term, but it does marginalize. I am not a ‘minority’ ... I’m a ‘person of color.’” My gut instinct is to listen to that voice and respect that opinion and abide by those terms in this discussion. How can you have conversation while insisting to use marginalizing language (whether you actually intend to marginalize or not)?

As for the two specific points you make about my post, 1) I think there’s a distinction to be made between whether the Sean Bell murder was “racially motivated” and whether it was a racial injustice to the Bell family to acquit the cops who shot and killed him with 50 rounds of ammo (and why had Sean Bell gotten involved with guns in the past, as the article you linked suggests?); and 2) why do you think I was suggesting Rob Bell should have some kind of “affirmative action” program? My intention was merely to suggest that white male leaders in the Church ought to be reflecting on this issue with more frequency and more seriousness. The Rob Bell incident was just a foil to ask the question that I posed at the end.

I’d also like to suggest you go back up and read comments 22, 23, and 24. Three African-American brothers commented after you, two of whom addressed you specifically with comments and questions—and you didn’t respond to any of them (only to me). I just want to encourage you to go back and give their comments some more thought and reflection. This is a grace-filled conversation, and I’m grateful for the space to have this and for everyone who has contributed to it. Let’s keep talking and building relationships that transform through Christ!

allow me to echo stevek’s comment. it’s not conversation if one’s response is “I totally disagree,” and then he tears off down a path of presentation that has nothing to do with ideas just presented him or the questions asked. conversation seriously considers and grapples with the thoughts of others with a humility that acknowledges that everyone has the right to tell their own story.

perhaps it would help if we were to define our terms. racism isn’t just a synonym for bigotry or prejudice. racism connotes the unjust power that privilege has to dictate or inconvenience the lives of others by virtue of their race, ethnicity or national origin. bigotry and prejudice are basically how one feels toward another. this is an important distinction. sexism operates in a very similar way. this is why we can speak of sexism/racism as being structural and systemic. one can do racist/sexist harm without feeling particularly malicious toward the other.

in the case of sean bell’s killers, blacks are just tired of seeing the power of life and death exercised over them. who cares if the officers who were acquitted do or don’t harbor general ill will toward blacks? i just know that i can’t remember the last time a white guy caught in the very act of committing a crime was shot (except in the movies; maybe that’s why the inequity doesn’t seem so glaring), let alone one who wasn’t. the same inequities can’t keep manifesting over and over and our only response as followers of God in the way of Jesus be “that’s the way the cookie crumbles, i guess.”

Nick,
I don’t believe that you understand the nature of racism in this country. Just because every black person doesn’t have crosses being burned on their lawn or isn’t being lynched in public doesn’t mean racism and discrimination doesn’t exist. Having a wife and relatives who are people of color also doesn’t give anyone special insight into what it means to be racially oppressed.

My wife is white and will be the first to tell you that she has no clue what is feels like to be a black person in America even though she is married to one and has many black friends and family.
She understands that she is still the beneficiary of privilege that automatically comes with her white racial designation in our culture. Something that I do not have and cannot ever have because I am black and the system of racism in this country does not allow for that.

I am thankful to Steven K for posting this as it proves something that I have been saying about the emergent conversation for years we cannot and will emerge as a church until we are able to put racism and its power of oppression into the conversation.

Steve, thanks for clarifying your points in the original blog post. I still don’t get how “minority” can be viewed as an offensive word – it is has nothing to do with discrimination. I object to the suggestion that we should stop using words when someone misunderstands their true meanings and consequently gets offended. Once could argue that “person of color” is more offensive, for we are all “people of color”. Is my pale skin tone not colored? My statements were not contradictory. I meant that racist people, while being a small minority of the total population, are spread out all over the country, not just in the South. However, this fact does not mean that racism is still contaminating our whole culture.

Melvin, it’s not very humble of you to suggest that I am not humble. I am the most humble person I know! ;) It’s hard to express our true feelings and attitudes online, so let’s not rush to judgment. Your definition of racism is interesting – I have never thought racism was the disadvantages of being a person of color. I understand racism as the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others (to some degree). I think it is important to distinguish in our language between racism (the belief/attitude) and the effects of racist beliefs/attitudes. People of color suffer the effects of racism, but these effects are largely due to historical racism, not necessarily present racism. It is very difficult to have a conversation of race when we are using different definitions of racism. I think it is best to use dictionary definitions of words. With the correct definition(s) of racism in mind, do you estimate that the belief of white people that their race is superior and they should rule over people of other races is still systemic in American society?

Andre, your unqualified statement that I do not understand racism is thoughtless and way off the mark. I never said racism/discrimination does not exist, just that it is no longer systemic – not pervasive in and affecting all spheres of our society. I agree that having friends/family members of color does not necessarily mean one will better understand issues of race, but I imagine that it normally does.

Nick,
Racism in this country is in fact systemic. Whether you see it or not that is an unqualified fact. So to say that racism is not systemic is to say it does not exist. Further more the fact that you don’t see it affecting every aspect of doesn’t make that the reality.

Unfortunately you choose to see this subject only through your lens rather than trying to see anything through the lens of the people who are being impacted by racism.

That my brother is the deepest cut of all. Because it promotes the exactly the white privilege based notion that white is indeed right.

i wrote a very long comment earlier today. i find it offensive that it was removed without event a reason why.

i wrote a very long comment earlier today. i find it offensive that it was removed without even a reason why.

yes, I’m an ethnic person of color (that’s not to say white Anglos don’t have ethnicity or color, but non-white isn’t a much better label either)

the issue of racism and the church, as well as racism in the church, is complex and difficult, and takes an enormous amount of time & energy to make further progress towards a resolution & reconciliation.

with many other competing priorities in the church (emergent church, in this case) on theology, diseases, and more “obvious” social injustices, the racism one get deprioritized, and in essence, falls off the radar and doesn’t surface into the dialogue about injustices. As emergent has self-identified as a conversation among friends, those friendships tend to be reflective of social networks among church leaders who happen to be majority Anglo or white, though not exclusively so.

now in circles that have been very intentional and keeping the racism issue on the short list of priorities, much of the work there is done by such a minority of the church leadership population, the progress towards resolution is frustratingly slow. We (assuming I’m including myself in these discussions, which I think I am) wind up revisiting the same old issues time and again, b/c neophytes to the racism dialogue have such a learning curve; e.g. it took what 20+ years for Bill Hybels to become aware of the church racism issue.

Where the racism issue needs to happen is among the majority white-”privileged” segment of church leadership, not on the margins as multiethnic church dialogue. The ball is in their court; do they want to play? do they want to put racism on the short list, high-priority of systemic social injustice? Or, shall we perpetuate the stalemate for yet another generation?

Teresa,

I’m sorry that your long comment was lost, but I can assure you that it was not deleted. I get an email every time someone posts a comment on something I’ve posted, and I did not see a comment from you come through the system yesterday.

I suspect it was probably the comment verification system here on this blog, which is not the greatest IMHO. I always have to select all and copy the text of my comment to my clipboard before hitting “submit,” just in case this happens! Frustrating, I know. I’m hoping that is something that can be fixed someday. But I just want you to know (and I hope you will trust me when I say) your comment was not removed.

My sincere apologies for the hassle. I hope you’ll consider re-writing it and submitting it again.

teresa, i’m so sorry we missed hearing from you. please jump back in.

nick, i’m sorry it came across as if i were singling you out when i spoke of humility. it was truly a general statement, as much a reminder to myself as to others.

you posed a question:
“With the correct definition(s) of racism in mind, do you estimate that the belief of white people that their race is superior and they should rule over people of other races is still systemic in American society?”

please forgive me for not knowing a better (more polite, yet equally poignant) way of saying this, but: YOU are my answer.

several persons from varying backgrounds have tried to share with you how your thinking has/does negatively impact them. and your response in general is ‘I don’t see/agree.’ the problem is, if i’m dealing with you in real space (not just cyberspace), that leaves me at the exact same disadvantage and you at the same advantage (which may be okay for you, but it cost sean bell his life).

it’s like you stepping on my foot repeatedly, and me going home every night to dress my wounds (toenails falling off, severe bruising, broken bones). when i tell you about it, your answer is ‘i don’t do that.’ i confess that not only you do it but most people in your position do it as well. you say, ‘that’s not the case. ’ what options am i left with? if the next time you do it, i turn around and stomp on your foot as hard as i can, you want to sue me, have me arrested or fight. if i somehow find a way to perpetrate one big collective stomp on everyone carelessly treading on other’s toes (or find some other way to dramatically get all your attention), i run the risk of being labeled a trouble-maker, unpatriotic, even a terrorist. only the most creative can ever figure out how to get you off their corns and bunions (without one of you launching into, ‘it’s your own fault you have corns on your toes’).

i’ve explained to you (with statistics nonetheless) that ‘minority’ is a diminishing term, unless you are speaking of actual numbers within an understood context (am i a minority even when i’m the majority in the room? doesn’t the title of “House Minority Leader” change depending on the numbers). you say you don’t see it. multiple people of multiple backgrounds introduce themselves as “people of color.” you take exception. andre, says you can’t know (fully understand) his experience as a black man. you say he’s wrong. i explain to you what many people of color mean when we use the term racism (racism=power). you tell me to refer to my dictionary (i don’t care what word you use, you pick one that means “the exercise of unjust power for racial reasons or having a racial outcome.” this is precisely your privilege as a white man in America: to maintain psychological constructs that make you always right—about everybody else! (c’mon, bruh, you’ve got to see that.)

and it’s not just you. there’s a whole hierarchical matrix of diminishing privilege in the West. at the top is everyone racially, anatomically and socio-economically like you. then it extends to those who are alike but of a different gender, then to those who are honorary, token and/or highly exploitable. there’s a whole system to it (there’s that word again). and as soon as one thinks they have it figured out. someone exercises the power of privilege and moves the damn cheese!

i do not mean to be harsh in any way (i say things the way i have for emphasis)—i’m not angry, to say the least—but it can be frustrating trying to get someone to see that he is parked on your foot, knowing that, if the police came out, as the “minority” i’m the one liable to be carted off to jail.

Really good conversation here on a very important topic. I don’t want to shift the focus too much but I wanted to mention an interesting book I recently read that takes a look at this from an even different perspective. Jon Entine’s Hyperlink:
Abraham’s Children: Race, Identity, and the DNA of the Chosen People is an interesting look at how our failures to deal with these conversations—not just in religious circles, but political, scientific and sociological circles as well—leads to many serious problems. Certainly worth reading and made me curious to read his previous, Hyperlink:
related book.

DJ thanks for chiming in it is good to have your perspective in the mix.

Melvin thanks for a helpful articulation and summary of what some of us have been attempting to get across.

It is so easy to avoid, deny or otherwise negate the impact of race in all sectors of the country, society and culture. Especially when it is uncomfortable. We need to start to wrap our brains around the reality that racial reconciliation is hard work which requires all parties to the conversation to step outside themselves. This is a tough step for many of my Anglo brothers. It is easily to just look through their own lens and react from a place of defensiveness without ever looking at their own privilege and power something most of not all people of color cannot do.

This is my opinion on why we cannot even talk emerging or being emergent with out dealing with the issue of race.