Monday, July 8, 2019

RACIAL UNITY: A MODEL FOR THE CHURCH



Where should Christians stand when it comes to racial unity? This question is forcing itself upon us as many evangelical churches are adopting secular social-justice models in disregard of the Scriptures. For example, one formerly evangelical church included in its “statement of faith”:

·       ANTI-RACISM (Galatians 3:28) Understanding racism means that our church must be aware of how race and racism affects the lived experience of people of color and how people participate, often unknowingly, in acts and attitudes that have a negative impact on people groups. We follow the example of Jesus Christ, who didn't treat people equally but rather equitably based on their lived experiences within society. We prayerfully strive to do the same.

Oddly, after citing Galatians 3:28, which asserts the equality of all believers in the eyes of God, this church’s statement of faith seems to downplay the concept of equality within the Church. Instead, this declaration on “Anti-racism” seems to be an embrace of racial preference, a form of “affirmative action” espoused by the proponents of secular social justice issues.  This is not the Scriptural model:

·       My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.  For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing…have you then not made distinctions among yourselves…? (James 2:1-3a, 4a)

Racial preference has no place within the Church. It is Scripture and Scripture alone that should dictate church conduct.

Having said that, though, it must be admitted that there is indeed a place for “partiality” among Christians. One person might feel led to reach out to Asians, while another might be called to people of color (POC). Knowing the pain and alienation that some POCs experience, some have chosen to extend themselves in ministry to POCs, but without sacrificing the unity in Christ that all believers are impelled to uphold. However, to impose by fiat some form of affirmative action within the Church would inevitably cause division and resentment.  Furthermore, it would create an entitlement mentality that would be highly detrimental to the Church. Implementing policies like this would show a flagrant disregard for the priorities of the Scriptures.

One head of a racial justice group within a large metropolitan church spoke at our church and demonstrated this disregard. He advocated for placing more POCs in positions of leadership to compensate for past injustices. I think we would all agree that where unjust practices have been committed, they need to be addressed. However, this church leader argued his case by assuming that whites were still profiting from racial discrimination on a large scale. Whether that same sort of discrimination was actually being committed by my church was immaterial to him. He had his agenda. A stance like this completely ignores what the Bible has to say about the criteria for leadership in the church. For example, what are the guidelines for choosing elders and deacons?  It seems to be the case that some churches are allowing secondary considerations to usurp the role of Scripture. 

What position does the Bible take to counteract the problem of racial unity? Unless we fall into the trap of marching in lock-step with the secular culture’s opposition to the Scriptures, we need to grapple with this issue.

Although we must stand against injustice, the Church has not been called to create global racial solidarity. Our first calling in this area is to maintain the unity of the Spirit within the Body of Christ.

While the Bible requires us to love all people, this must begin within the Church (Galatians 6:10), where the Spirit has already created a basis for unity among the people of God:

·       …with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:2-6)

Therefore, any attempt to achieve a real and deep unity among all people—extending even to those outside the Church—is Scripturally prohibited:

·       Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, “I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” (2 Corinthians 6:14-16)

There is no inherent basis for a real, non-superficial unity among all people in a universal sense. However, many churches are gravitating towards such a stance, ignoring the warnings of Scripture. One progressive evangelical church that was hosting a seminar on racial equality sent me a list of definitions. The organizers of the seminar were hoping, by these definitions, to frame the discussions and their vision of racial equality. For example, in order to participate at the seminar, one had to agree to be an “ally”:

·       An “ally” is defined as “Someone who makes the commitment and effort to recognize their privilege (based on gender, class, race, sexual identity, etc.) and work in solidarity with oppressed groups in the struggle for justice…Allies commit to reducing their own complicity or collusion in oppression of those groups and invest in strengthening their own knowledge and awareness of oppression. WWW.RACIALEQUITYTOOLS.ORG

Well, what if I am not able to see my “collusion in oppression”? What if I can’t see how I have benefitted from my “privileged” position? Would this be considered a sin?

Was Paul in sin when he claimed the privileges of Roman citizenship, something available to only a chosen few? And what about the Apostles? Had they sinned as well, since they had also benefitted from the Pax Romana, enabling them to travel an empire to preach the Gospel? According to this mind-set, even Jesus had sinned.  After all, did He not benefit from the order of Roman rule? Did the advantages afforded to Him by an oppressive regime not allow Him to preach for three years against the Jewish establishment?

Clearly, none of these examples comprise sin. However, there is an increasing contingent of Christians who are willing to indict whites for having been “privileged” by a “racist system.” I found their next definition equally problematic:

·       “Cultural Racism…refers to representations, messages and stories conveying the idea that behaviors and values associated with white people or “whiteness” are automatically “better” or more “normal” than those associated with other racially defined groups. Cultural racism shows up in advertising, movies, history books, definitions of patriotism, and in policies and laws. Cultural racism is also a powerful force in maintaining systems of internalized supremacy and internalized racism. It does that by influencing collective beliefs about what constitutes appropriate behavior, what is seen as beautiful, and the value placed on various forms of expression.”

Many whites would be surprised to learn that they are part of a “powerful force in maintaining systems of internalized supremacy and internalized racism.” If a prospective participant in the seminar accepted this viewpoint, then they would first have to acknowledge their “guilt” and humble themselves before their supposed victims. After all, who wants to maintain the repressive system of “white privilege”? Anyone who refused to comply would immediately be branded a racist.

But what kind of submission would be adequate? Would it be enough for white Christians to admit, as all Christians most certainly could, that they have not loved as they should have loved? And, should we not all willingly admit that we have a responsibility toward those who are oppressed? If these admissions could bring about reconciliation and put the bitterness behind us, I would be glad to confess my wrong-doing. In fact, it is a confession that I make already, on a regular basis, before the Lord.

It seems that I couldn’t possibly be considered an “ally” if I refused to concur with this progressive but racially divisive narrative. Perhaps I would even be seen as an enemy. What a sad state of affairs for those who are supposed to be brothers and sisters in Christ.
Let us be clear—if anyone has committed a racist act, there are laws on the books against such things. There is also Church Discipline (Matthew 18:15-19). Rather than the wholesale indictment of all people who possess certain skin tones, let those who are actually guilty of racist acts be prosecuted. The impugning of guilt on the basis of color and class is a violation of true justice. 

In contrast, the Bible teaches that all Christians are to examine themselves, because we are all prone to sin:

·       Let a person examine himself…But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged [by God]. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. (1 Corinthians 11:28, 31-32)

Once again, when we assume that certain people are more guilty than others because of their skin color, we will find ourselves on a slippery slope that leads to the establishment of destructive racial distinctions. Scripture warns us against this:

·       …for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:26-28)

Honoring verses like these and many others that say essentially the same things, the Church must challenge any system of racial preference. Justice requires that we address actual offenders and not particular skin colors. We need to address racist policies and not alleged racist thinking. The preaching we hear in our churches should help us to be on guard and to confront any who claim that one race is more entitled than another…or, that one race is more evil than another. Justice demands that we treat one another as individuals and not as the impersonal, nameless, faceless components of a whole race or ethnicity.

The progressive agenda might include some sound principles, but those principles are being applied in an unjust and unbalanced way. The following “definition” makes it seem as if some skin colors are guilty, while others are not:

·       “Individual Racism… refers to the beliefs, attitudes, and actions of individuals that support or perpetuate racism. Individual racism can be deliberate, or the individual may act to perpetuate or support racism without knowing that is what he or she is doing. Examples:  Telling a racist joke, using a racial epithet, or believing in the inherent superiority of whites over other groups; avoiding people of color whom you do not know personally, but not whites whom you do not know personally (e.g., white people crossing the street to avoid a group of Latino/a young people; locking their doors when they see African American families sitting on their doorsteps in a city neighborhood; or not hiring a person of color because “something doesn’t feel right”); accepting things as they are (a form of collusion).

By such definitions, it seems that only whites can be guilty of racism, while non-whites are exempt. In fact, the way the above definition is worded, non-whites cannot be racist. The group leader had written me that such reverse racism “is NOT real and doesn't exist.” The good guys—the “oppressed”—are not capable of wrong, while it is a necessity that whites be re-educated. Some of this re-education is being carried out by university-sponsored shaming seminars that readily accept the racist notion of “white guilt.” However, Shelby Steele, Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, has argued that white guilt and its associated progressive entitlement initiatives have brought more destruction upon the black community than racism.

This doesn’t mean that we should ignore racial sins within the Body of Christ. However, Jesus presented a model by which we may pursue healing and real justice:

·       “If your brother [not a class of people] sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17)

With true repentance, there should be immediate reconciliation and healing. However, the same cannot be said of the failed secular models that have been adopted by many churches. As the clear directives of the Bible have been abandoned and replaced by progressive solutions, there has been an increase in racial alienation, division, and even hatred. In fact, according to current politically correct dogma, the guilt that comes from being white can span many generations. If the wishes of some came true, whites would remain guilty forever. Progressives who espouse this cock-eyed thinking are guilty of holding children accountable for the “sins” of their parents, about which the Bible warns us:

·       “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” (Ezekiel 18:19-20)

Clearly, the one who has sinned should confess and be restored and forgiven.  However, some social justice solutions enable the retaining of an offender’s guilt for generations in order to use it for manipulative purposes. Some who call themselves progressives refuse to see their own sins. That is why they are unable to acknowledge the reverse racism that has crept into their way of thinking. Refusing to admit their own sins has opened the door to the eager and angry denigration of others.

This leads me to the next principle:

Christian unity must be voluntary and not coerced.

I found that I could not conform to the expectations of this racial justice group. I couldn’t force myself to believe as they believe, and they wouldn’t regard me as their “ally” if I spoke openly about my beliefs. There is another way forward for those who share faith in Christ. Instead of shaming one another and coercing uniformity, we are required to serve one another in love:

·       But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave. (Matthew 20:25-27; 1 Peter 5:1-3; 2 Corinthians 1:24)

We know that it is better to give than to receive. Scripture tells us so. No one has to coerce us to live this way. The wisdom of the Bible is self-authenticating. When we practice it, we discover that it is true and edifying. In contrast, heavy-handed, top-down solutions have always been oppressive.

One last Biblical principle - Love is a verb! Jesus calls us to love one another. Apart from loving our Lord, this is the greatest commandment. It is through love that others see the reality of Christ in us:

·       “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34-35)

How does love achieve this? Love is not a matter of receiving a demeaning and disempowering welfare check. Instead, love is able to penetrate into our heart:

·       And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. (Colossians 3:14)

Love brings unity. Love is so powerful that we tend to remember acts of love years after they occur. But, it must be said: love requires work. I am not a particularly loving person. However, as a probation officer, I would regularly offer my visiting probationers a cup of coffee or hot chocolate to show them that I cared and that they were valuable. Even though I tended to be strict and went-by-the book, they knew that I cared. That made a difference. I took them on walks and even met with them after hours if I thought they needed it.

I miss that. Why? Because it is better to give than to receive! Scripture would not allow me to patronize my probationers, to convince myself that I was superior to them, or to look down on them. Instead, I knew that if it wasn’t for the grace of God, I would be in jail or even worse. I hope that the guys I worked with understood that they were giving to me as much as I was giving to them.

Love transforms. It opens eyes. Jesus prayed:

·       …that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. (John 17:21-23)

Jesus’ love has transformed those it has touched. He loved us so much that He died the worst possible death for us even when we were His enemies (Romans 5:8-10). It is therefore tragic that the Church is turning away from such a transforming power and turning instead to the failed solutions of the world.

If we unleash this transforming power upon our churches, neighborhoods, and nation, transformation will result. The love of Christ is making its mark on the world even now, but we live in a world that refuses to see this.

Love is also about forgiveness. Forgiveness heals; it restores hope. The survivors of the Emanuel AMC Church shooting in Charleston, S.C., forgave white supremacist Dylan Roof. This touched the hearts of many and is even being made into a motion picture.

Let us remember: love transforms; guilt and coercion do not! I cannot remember the secular model even mentioning love. Either you are an ally or you are not! However, love is at the core of the Bible. It centers on Jesus dying for us when we were still His enemies (Romans 5:8-10), and then it becomes a model for us. Consequently, to refuse to love is a violation of everything that Jesus stood for:

·       If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother. (1 John 4:20-21)

To love God is also to love His brethren. To leave out this one requirement is to reject the Lord and to forfeit the honor of calling ourselves “Christian.”

No comments: