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:
Post a Comment