Why I Miss the Segregated Church

Sometimes God has a message for the 1 and we're the 99 that's left behind.

As children we are taught to be tolerant and inclusive. It is in our very nature (well, for most of us at least) to reject the idea of being exclusionary. Yet, not quite a year ago, I found myself deeply missing the segregated churches I grew up in. I missed Negro Spirituals and Black History programs. I missed how black pastors related the trials of the Israelites to the trials of black people today. I missed the fact that the people at city hall fighting for justice where the same people sitting in the congregation. I missed the unity that comes from shedding some aspects of diversity.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28

The Straw That Broke The Camel's Back

Last May, after the death of Ahmaud Arbery, Breona Taylor, and George Floyd, mayhem insued. I don't mean the riots. I mean the conversations between members of "the church." We were 2 months in to COVID, and where the church was already struggling to maintain meaningful communication, the fracture of race and culture became truly apparent. It felt like every day some non-black church member was saying something insensitive. Leadership was quiet and when those of us with a short fuse (like myself) chose to speak, we were repremainded. The ire I felt culminated with me blurting out that I no longer wanted to attend a multicultural church and removing myself from all church communication.

I thought I was reacting in the moment. I thought a month would pass, and the feeling along with it. I thought I didn't really mean it...

Months passed, and to my surprise, I ended up in a few more heated conversations. I didn't feel any different, and realized I actually do miss attending an all African-American church.

The History of Racism and the Church

The western church (re: Catholicism and it's offspring, known as Protestantism) is responsible for racism. Europeans twisted the curse of Canaan into a non-existant curse on Ham and attempted to legitimize the mistreatment of Africans based on this fradulent interpretation. From there, we saw "devout" Christians torture, maime, brand, rape, and otherwise dehumanize black people. From Europeans whitewashing the people discussed in the Bible during the renissance, to white Americans refusing to let blacks worship in the same spaces, to the KKK, racism and Christianity in America are almost synonymous. I did a three part series going over some of this history along with my personal experiences last year. I'm linking them below instead of repeating myself.

Previous Blogs on Racism in the Church

• A Personal History of Racism in Church
• Healing the Wounds
• Promoting a Culture of Inclusion

The Colorblind Church

Instead of admitting to the role white America has played in racism, there is a push to leave it in the past. Instead of white pastors openly admitting that the white man pictured in churches and homes accross the world is not Christ, they defend those who don't want to part with the tradition of breaking the second commandment to honor some random European man. Instead of addressing white flight, pastors ask minority congregants to make sure they invite their white friends. Instead of uttering a truth that might offend one group, we stick to sugar coated messages that don't challenge anyone. And while churches are fighting desperately to create these diverse congregations to show they are colorblind, black youth are leaving God becuase the message they need to hear is too much for the white people who put us in this position in the first place.

A Lesson In Colorblindness

I've known for a long time that homes owned by black people appraise for less than similar homes owned by whites. We're not going to derail the post by getting too deep into that (I'm sure you're already confused as to why I brought it up, just go with me for a minute). If you're curious about the validity of my statement, read up on some of the recent incidents involving the appraisal of black homes.[1][2]

I'm currently in the process of selling my house to move and for the first time, had to assess the "blackness" of my home.

There was a portrait of an African woman I painted with my friends that needed to come down, as well as a professional painting of a black Southern Belle. Of course any and all personal photographs of me or my family. Just as I'd tucked away all the photos, a book on my bookshelf caught my eye: How Long Til Black Future Month Scanning the shelves, I saw enough black literature to open a library. So I started removing the obvious ones: Is Christianity the White Man's Religion, Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry, The Autobiography of Malcom X, a collection of African folk tales, everything by Toni Morrison, Zora Neale Hurston, Nikki Giovanni...

As I struggled to move the heavy box to the garage, I passed my DVD collection. I stopped to remove the obviously black DVDs from the shelf: The Boondocks (season 1-3), The Babershop, First Sunday, Eve's Bayou, For Colored Girls..., Drumline, Stomp the Yard... It was too many to fit in a box. So I loaded the self back up, and stacked Disney movies in front of them. Then placed a decorative candle on the now empty Disney shelf.

I thought I could finally relax, so I went to my bathroom to take a relaxing bath. There I was greeted by my bonnet, the various oils and moisturizers for my afro-textured curly hair, the wide tooth comb and wooden-handled brush... This was obviously the bathroom of a black woman.

Every where I looked my house testified to the fact that I am black. Even after removing as much as I could, there are still things that made it into the staging (e.g., the poodles that decorate my house which are actually a reference to my sorority, which has non-black members but is a historically black sorority). In the end, I could not completely separate who I am from the space I live in without getting rid of everything.

As I stared at the house that only represented a fraction of me, I felt empty and unsettled. It no longer feels like home and wash day means I have to trek all the way to the garage to dig out my deep conditioner. As I reflected on the inconvience, I realized my life is like this house.

One of the posts above talks about my experience with racisim in the church, but it doesn't detail all my experiences with racism—we might need a book for all of that. Nonetheless, these traumas, hurts, lessons, and conversations have shaped who I am. It is from these experiences that I have the boundaries I have. It is from these experiences that I react the way I do. It is from these experiences that I value this or that. It is from these experiences that this passage hits differently than when you hear it...

When I approach the throne of YHWH, the Most High God, those expereinces come with me. YHWH was there when I watched my grandmother panic over the possibility of white men taking our family's land. YHWH was there with me when little white kids were calling me a n*****. YHWH was there with me when my Asian aunt told me she was glad her half-black daughter didn't have hair like me. YHWH was there when my white teacher said I'd end up pregnant or in jail because that's what happens to black youth. YHWH was there the Asian department chair told me I didn't have what it took to earn a PhD (and YHWH walked across the stage with me when I earned that PhD). YHWH was there when I learned to love my hair. YHWH was there when I learned not to shrink myself into a corner trying to blend into the whiteness around me. YHWH understands my blackness, my womanness, my Americanness, my singlness...

And sometimes YHWH has a message just for me.

“What do you think? If any man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains, and go and search for the one that is lost? Matthew 18:12

Leaving the 99

A few weeks ago, I watched a sermon that spoke straight to my heart.[3][4] Seven men and women of God spoke on the last seven things Christ said before He died on the cross. Each message was tied into justice and the black experience here in America. The speakers were black, the audience was black, and the message was specifically for black people. It ranged from a reminder about forgiveness, to a warning about protecting our spirit. There were messages and nuggets of truth that anyone could (and should) appreciate, but the core of the message was a message of hope for the down troddened souls of black America. It was a reminder that YHWH is our YHWH too.

As I listened to the sermon, I realized that was what I was longing for. I wanted to hear that message that God had for me in my time of need. Contemporary churches love to sing "Reckless Love" and belt out the line about Him leaving the 99 to search for the one, but we often forget we're not always the one. In a society where certain groups of people are being mistreated, abused, and belittled, those groups are the people God is going after. He's going after the black person longing for justice. He's going after the people in the LGBT community with questions. He's going after the Asain person scared to step out of their house. He's going after the women who have been abused. He's going after the immigrants who were locked in cages. He's going after the refugees that survived brutal wars. He's going after the poor/homeless, the drug addict, the orphan, etc. And that message may hurt your feelings—it may hurt my feelings—because maybe we didn't do enough for that group, maybe we are part of the reason that group is hurt... But it's not about us, it's about the message for the one.

Finding Love in Diversity

Most of my friend circles have been characterized by diversity. Even here, in South Florida where 90% of my friend group is black, there is diversity—some are Jamacian, some Hatian, some Bahamian, and some Canadian. It is amazing to learn about different cultures and to experience the world through someone else's eyes. It is equally heartbreaking to expreince trauma in the midst of people who refuse to acknowledge the trauma (or the history of that trauma). You cannot obstruct the message for the one because the 99 aren't ready to admit the church has played a role in the suffering of the one. A year later, and I understand where that longing is coming from. I can't say what type of church I'll seek out when I move in 3 weeks, but I can say I want to belong to a body that isn't afraid to leave the 99 to go after the one.

References & Footnotes

1. Julian Glover. "Black California couple lowballed by $500K in home appraisal, believe race was a factor". ABC 7 News. February 12, 2021
2. Debra Kamin. "Black Homeowners Face Discrimination in Appraisals". The New York Times. August 25, 2020
3. Mount Sinai Church. "The Seven Words of Justice". YouTube. April 2, 2021
4. No one is perfect; we're all human. If I gave a sermon, my human-ness would creep in as well. The only reason I'm pointing out this particular nitpick is because it's about doctrinal truth and since I'm "promoting" the sermon, I need to point out what I disagree with doctrinally. Good Friday is tied to the pagan Easter. Passover was last week (March 28). Even if the Bible asked us to celebrate "Good Friday," based on Biblical doctrine, it should occur before Passover and would have been last week.

Whitewashing the Bible

Jesus was not and is not a white man--neither were most of the people discussed in the Bible.

⁵“I am black and beautiful,
You daughters of Jerusalem,
Like the tents of Kedar,
Like the curtains of Solomon.
⁶ Do not stare at me because I am dark,
For the sun has tanned me. Song of Solomon 1:5-6 NASB

definition

Whitewash [1]

noun

1. : to alter (something) in a way that favors, features, or caters to white people: such as
   a : to portray (the past) in a way that increases the prominence, relevance, or impact of white people and minimizes or misrepresents that of nonwhite people
   b : to alter (an original story) by casting a white performer in a role based on a nonwhite person or fictional character

Genesis

• Adam is from the Hebrew word meaning red (Edom is from the same word)[2]
• Red, like red clay--remember Adam was created from the "dust of the ground" (Genesis 2)
• Dirt around the world actually matches human skintones (generally) and the dirt that would have been near Eden would have been the kind good for growing plants; this type of soil is dark brown or black
• If two people possess only recessive traits (e.g., blue eyes), the cannot create a baby with dominant traits (e.g., brown eyes)
• Two "pure" white people cannot give birth to a black baby
• Two "pure" black people however can have white babies; there are also black people in Africa with naturally blue eyes and blonde hair

The Non-Existant Curse of Ham

• To justify the mistreatment of Africans, "Christian" Europeans came up with the non-existant curse of Ham (it is actually Ham's son Canaan that is cursed in Genesis 9)
• The curse was said to be dark skin
• Below are some things to consider about this "theory"
  • Canaan actually settles in the Middle East, not sub-saharan Africa
  • The Canaanites intermarry with the Israelites—specifically, the entire line of Judah stems from a Canaanite woman (Genesis 38)—so if the curse is dark skin, the Israelites could not have been white
  • Cush, Mizraim, and Phut who eventually migrate into the main African continent are never cursed

Confusion of Nationality

• The Israelites and the Egyptians had to look similar because they're always being confused for each other
• Joseph's brothers don't notice he's Hebrew when they journey to Egypt during the famine. (Genesis 42:23)
• Pharaoh doesn't say anything about his daughter taking in a Hebrew baby when he's just ordered all of them killed
• The Midianites confuse Moses for an Egyptian (Exodus 2:19)
• Paul is confused as an Egyptian (Acts 21:38-39)
• Mary, Joseph, and baby Jesus flee to Egypt to avoid Herod's decree; in fact the Israelites alway fled to Egypt iin times of trouble. Likely they blended in better, just as I would blend in better in Brazil than in Japan.

The Curse of Whiteness?

• DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to suggest that white people are white because they are cursed; it is merely to point out the irony of claiming a curse of blackness to inflict harm when the Bible suggests something closer to the opposite
• In 2 Kings 5 a man named Gehazi, and all his offspring, is cursed with leprosy--the description is that he turned "white as snow" (2 Kings 5:27)
• The leprosy of the Bible which is not the leprosy of today[3] is acutally associated with whiteness multiple times:
  • Miriam's leprosy is associated with turning white (Numbers 12:10)
  • Moses' white hand is called diseased (Exodus 4:6-7)

References

1. "Whitewash". Merriam Webster; visited February 2021
2. "Strong's H119. אָדַם". Blue Letter Bible; visited February 2021
3. Dr. Alan L. Gillen. "Biblical Leprosy: Shedding Light on the Disease that Shuns". Answers in Genesis. June 10, 2007

The BLM Controversy

Black lives matter, period.

Anyone still arguing about the phrase has larger issues they need to work out. I'm not going to explain the phrase because you've already seen the memes and the comic strips. It's been almost a decade since the phrase became popular, and I'm certain someone has explained it to you since then (in fact I may even have a post from way back that does just that). So we're not wasting time on that today. Today, we're talking about a very different type of controversy.

The reason I created this post is because I have used "#blacklivesmatter" both on the blog and in social media before, and I wanted to acknowledge the controversy surrounding the official organization.

Photocredit: Unsplash.com/Clay Banks

What is BlackLivesMatter?

BlackLivesMatter is actually multiple things:

• It's a phrase/slogan/rallying cry
• It's a movement
• It's an organization

When people say "Black Lives Matter," they aren't necessarily claiming allegiance to the organization—they might not even know there is an organization. The ideas and intentions behind the people who agree with the basic statement may vary. When the phrase began it's rise to prominence in our society, there was no organization around it, and that gave people freedom to approach the same underlying belief that black lives are just as valuable as any other human life even if they had different opinions on how and why. Now, it is difficult to separate the idea that black lives matter from the organization Black Lives Matter, which makes usage of the hashtag a little messy.

The Organization "BlackLivesMatter"

The official organization of Black Lives Matter was created by Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi in 2013. Within the past year, I began to see several people denouncing the organization and others wrestling with what they feel comfortable with. Despite accusations that the black people struggling to accept the organization are "sell-outs," there are two valid concerns many have raised about the organization itself (along with conspiracy theories, but we're going to stick to verifiable information), both of which center around it's beliefs.

When I first became aware of the controversy, denouncers pointed me a page on their website entitled "What We Believe." Since the heavy scrutiny of statements made on this page, it has been removed from the site. I was a able to find an archived copy and have linked it below.[1]

While the beginning of this page spoke about ending police brutality, by the time you reach the end, there was a call to dismantle the nuclear family structure and language perceived to be anti-male. Several things on this page are in direct conflict with Christian principles—

Here I want to insert a bit of opinion/commentary/clarification. One of the prominent features of the "What We Believe" page was the support for the LGBT+ community. This has also come up in discussion about the organization. In my opinion, statements such as "We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum."[2] are not in contradiction with Christian beliefs. While I may not agree with how people live their lives I do believe their life is valuable and I do think it is a tragedy that the LGBT+ community experiences death by homicide and suicide at higher rates than any other community (particulary people from the black LGBT+ community). I agree with statements such as "Black Trans Lives Matter," because they do. Within the original "What We Believe" page, there was language that seemed to promote homosexuality that I did not agree with, so I do understand why this comes up in conversation, but in general I do not see an issue with affirming the value of life no matter the belief, sexual orientation, lifestyle, gender, etc. of the person. Black LGBT+ Lives Matter just like Black Muslim Lives Matter and Black Atheist Lives Matter. Black lives matter, period.

—so the question quickly became, is it OK for a Christian to align itself with a organization that promotes ideas it doesn't agree with.

Many point to Amos 3:3 to say "no," but many of us work for or shop at major corporations that stand for things we don't agree with. Is this different? Should we be assessing everything in our lives this way?

The second thing I started to hear about the organization, was that there was a lot of spiritualism. The founders of the movement have said that the reason they invite people to chant the names of the dead is to "invoke spirits."[3] This is likely the origin of hastags like "#SayHerName."

I'm not about that life at all. The Bible condemns necromancy (the act of calling up spirits, invoking the dead, talking to the dead, etc.).[4]

In addition to the way these beliefs clash with Christianity, there are people who accuse the the organization of Marxist intentions. This accusation stems from an interview in which Patrisse Cullors admits the founders are "trained Marxists."[5][6]

Problematic Statements

Below are some of the contraversial statements from the original "What We Believe"[1] page (in case the archived page disappears one day as well). In some I have added emphasis to highlight the part that is questionable.

We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.

As a woman, I have experienced sexism and misogny and applaud the goal of creating spaces free of this, but the part about being free of environments in which men are centered is questionable. Ideally, I want the most qualified person to lead, whether that person is male or female. I think there should be groups that are centered on men and groups centered on women and groups for everyone (for example, I am part of a young adult group that is open to everyone, but there are also women's groups and men's groups; all three have their place).

Part of the disruption of the black community has stemmed from the emasculation of black men and the removal of black men from our society. I feel that this statement goes beyond creating an equal and safe environment for women, which is concerning to me.

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

I agree that it takes a village to raise a child, but I also know that it has been proven that there is an advantage to growing up in a two parent home (re: a nuclear family structure). I agree that we should support each other, but I'm not trying to "disrupt" two parent homes—the support should be in addition to not in place of.

Further I find it interesting that the mention "mothers" and "parents" but never mention "fathers." Once again the message written between the lines leaves little space for men in the equation.

We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence. ... We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

These are the statements made that I believe go a bit further than simply protecting members of the LGBT+ community (which as they have accurately stated are disproptionately affected by violence and need to be protected), into promoting the ideals and working to make it normal.

Final Thoughts

As I've mentioned throughout this post, I do believe that black lives matter, and regardless of gender, religion, sexual orientation, political party, educational status, economic status, etc., there is work that needs to be done to protect our community from systemic racism (particularly with respect to the criminal justice system and police brutality). There are definitely things that the organization believes that I do not agree with. Truthfully, there are alot of companies who have employees, CEOs, and shareholders that hold beliefs contrary to mine. A perfect example is a restaurant near my job that has great food; all of their food is halal because the owners are likely Muslim. No one would say that I'm making a statement about Islam because I eat there.

When it comes to the Black Lives Matter organization, I think the question we should be asking ourselves is about what we are taking part in. If I were to show up to a march or rally hosted by Black Lives Matter and they were chanting to "invoke the spirits," I would most certainly leave. If they were pushing for legislation that I disagreed with, I would not cosign or otherwise support that legistlation. If I suspect they are using donations for purposes I don't agree with, I wouldn't donate. However, if they're organizing something that we agree on, I will show up to support that. If they're pushing to get rid of no-knock warrants, I support that. If they're pushing for police reform, I support that. If they're educating the general public about injustice, I support that. In short, I only support the organization on issues that align with my beliefs.

References

1. "What We Believe". Web Archive; visited October 4, 2020
2. "About". Black Lives Matter; visited October 3, 2020
3. Ryan Foley. "BLM leaders practice 'witchcraft' and summon dead spirits, black activist claims". The Christian Post. September 1, 2020
4. Leviticus 19:31; Deuteronomy 18:10-12
5. The Real News Network. "A Short History of Black Lives Matter". YouTube. July 22, 2015
6. Tom Kertscher. "Is Black Lives Matter a Marxist movement?". PolitiFact. July 21, 2020

Book Review: The Feast of All Saints

I can't remember whether I saw the movie or read the book first, but The Feast of All Saints by Ann Rice is a book I hold very dear to my heart. The book covers the life of a young man who is a member of the gens de couleur libres (free people of color) in New Orleans during the 1800s. Despite being penned by a white woman who specializes in gothic horror and erotic ficion, the story moved me in a way no other historical fiction novel has.

I read this novel in high school, and given the subject matter, wouldn't recommend it for anyone younger. The story is wonderfully written with a few tastefully done references to sex. (I didn't know the author had a history of writing erotic fiction until well after I read the novel, so fear not, it isn't anythin too racy). The characters are wonderfully fleshed out; there will be times when you despise characters, but every character makes perfect sense and because of that, you will yearn to see where they end up.

This book should be required reading. The author did a wonderful job of researching the history of the gens de color libre and bringing that history to life. I learned so much about complexities of racism and American histrory from this novel, and I wish everyone understood these complexities.

Lessons I Learned

The following section is for those who have already read the book or seen the movie (or don't mind spoilers). Since the bulk of why I love this novel stems from what I learned from it, I feel it is impotant to share that, but I'm not sure I can do that with out spoilers. As such, anything you read from this point on may contain spoilers.

The Love of A Mother

By far, the worst character in the book is Cecile Ste. Marie, the mother of Marcel. The first time I read the book, I despised her character. I thought she was just a horrible person with no redeeming qualities. Truthfully, I still think she's a horrible character with no redeeming qualities; however, as over time, I actually came to undestand her character. Cecile was born and raised in a world where white people were the only ones with rights. By participating in plaçage,[1] Cecile sets her children up to have the best chance she can give them in the world they live. Her "relationship" with a wealthy white man grants her son a promised college education in France (even though this fell through) and her daughter the ability to pass for white. Although this is recognizably problematic in today's society, the truth is, she set both of her kids up for a privileged life. There's a lot about her character that I think was selfish and not particularly motivated by the desire to better the life of her children, but it did remind me that there were women during this time who made similar decisions for their children.

Black Masculinity

Marcel and his best friend Richard are young boys growing into manhood. Marcel is privileged and looking forward to a trip to Paris; Richard is in love and ready to marry. However, when tragedy stikes Marie (Marcel's sister and Richard's fiancee), neither of them have the right to do anything because the perpetrators are white men. Throughout history black men and the black family structure have targeted. Today you will often hear black men say things like "black women won't let men be men," and while we could probably do a whole post on that sentiment, the origin of emasculating black men started in slavery. White men could defend their wives and children, even their property. However, black men were powerless to stop white men from raping their wives, selling their children, beating their family members, etc. The trauma of this dynamic has been passed down and learned throughout our generations.

Colorism

Colorism is another topic that is too large to fit into a single paragraph, but The Feast of All Saints surprisingly taught me a lot about colorism. Colorism actually has many layers. Black people were taught to hate ourselves and developed an unhealthy desire to fit European standards. We bought into the lie that they were the standard of beauty. Within the black community there has been a history of favoring light skined women over dark skinned women. It has only been in recent years that dark skinned women such as Lupita Nyong'o have been showcased as the beautiful women they are. Yet, colorism is a lot deeper that. One of the things I learned from this novel was that proximity to whiteness wasn't just about color

In the novel, Marcel's family lives lavishly because their white father is footing the bill. Though relationships between slaves and masters can only be considered rape, sometimes these white slave owners took a "liking" to their bi-racial children. In real life, the only slaves Thomas Jefferson set free were his own children. In the novel, Marcel's father renegs on his promise to set his slave child free, but does spare both the child and the mother from having to work in the field. Marcel was granted a "gentleman's education" and in real life, many children of white men were able to learn how to read because they were raised in the house with the white man's white children (who wouldn't have understood at young ages that black children were not allowed to read).

Remember how I talked about the fact that Marcel and Richard couldn't do anything to avenge the crime committed against Marie? Marcel's father's brother-in-law (a white man) takes it upon himself to avenge her honor. You see, being lighter was simply the evidence of a white benefactor. The man who avenge's Marie's honor states that the white men who harmed her "should have seen the family resemblance." A white man encountering a light skinned black person didn't know if their white father was "attached" to them or not. A black person with black family had no recourse, but one with a white family could be avenged.

Seeing how proximity to whiteness wasn't just about color explained a mystery of my own life to me. When a new girl came to my school, she was welcomed with open arms into the rich white circle of my classmates and my teachers. I had never experienced that. We were both black, we were about the same color, and we both came from middle class families. The difference is that she was raised by her white mother. Her mannerisms and influences were very white, while mine were still black. When parent teacher conferences happened, teachers interacted with her white mother, whereas both of my parents are black. She had a different proximity to whiteness because there was a white benefactor directly involved in her life, not simply because she was light skinned. This realization added another layer of complexity to the topic of colorism for me.

Generational Wealth

Speaking of privilege, the book also subtly speaks on generational wealth. The fact that these white men could afford to keep two families is one thing, but the ability to pass something on to your children is a huge deal. Despite America not having an offical caste system, being born into wealth increases your likelihood of continuing in wealth. Marcel's father inherits a whole plantation simply because he is related to a man who's son is too young to take over the reigns. The gens de couleur libres have the money to give their children opportunities and education as opposed to sending them into the field. For example, Marcel ultimately becomes a photographer, but the only reason he is able to jump start this career is because he inherits the house a white man built for his mother and uses it for collateral.

The Fate of Women

The main character of the book may be a boy growing into a man, but the book gives a heartfelt commentary on sexism and the hardships women of that time felt. Every single woman in the novel experiences some form of trauma and heartache. Marcel's grandmother kidnaps his mother in desperation because she is barren and lonely. Marcel's mother resigns herself to sharing a man who doesn't really respect her just to live a comfortable life. Marcel's best female friend, Annabella, is forced into plaçage when Marcel can't (or won't) speak up for her. Dolly Rose runs a brothel of sorts to avoid the lies of plaçage but maintain an income. Marie is drugged and gang-raped in her attempt to escape the cycle of plaçage. Each woman in the novel experiences loss and heartache because they are not allowed to be independent. This was my first experience with the concept of intersectionality, though I wouldn't learn the word until much later.

I Highly Recommend

Despite the adult themes, the harsh realities of this book still effect the world we live in today. You could read scholarly articles on the topics I meantioned above, and you probably should, but this story will make the topics come alive. It humanizes the theories and philosphies.

References

1. Plaçage". Wikipedia; visited September 11, 2020

Acts 16: Timothy Was Biracial...Sort Of

Timothy

Acts 16 tells us that Timothy was born to a Jewish mother and a Greek father. The Bible doesn't concern it self with "race" because the concept of race that we have today didn't exist; however, we are often told of tribal or national affilliations. These affilitions, like race, came with assumptions and prejudices that have parallels with the racial issues we see today.

Many of the stories I've heard from biracial friends have been about reconciling identities and getting others to accept both parts of their heritage. Although, Timothy's story is not about this specifically, I see a similar pattern. The begining of Acts 16 alludes to the pushback Timothy received (or was expected to receive) from the Jews because he had a Jewish father. The "need" to prove oneself to one side (or both sides) of one's heritage is still felt by people today, unfortunately.

Israel is a patriarchal society, so tribal identity is passed by the father.[1] We see this throughout the Bible and from the formation of Israel. Arguably, it is possible that a non-Jew could convert to Judaism, marry a Jewish woman and their children would still be considered Jewish, but that does not seem to be the case for Timothy.

We know that Timothy's father didn't convert or adopt Jewish customs because Timothy is an adult and uncircumcised. This is where we see the struggle in his lineage come to fruition. Despite having just concluded that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised, Paul circumcises Timothy. We're going to talk about this act separately, but for now I want to talk about how it relates to Timothy's identity

Timothy's Struggle

The Jews would not accept Timothy as a Greek but they couldn't accept him as a Jew either. While there isn't anything that suggests he should deny his Greek father, there is a strong suggestion that he has to fully embrace his maternal roots to be part of that world. In some cases it may be possible to fully embrace two difference cultrues, but in many cases today there is contention, especially concerning nationality. I've heard many immigrants expressing strife with reconciling their "American-ness" with their heritage. I believe Timothy could relate.

What Can We Learn From Timothy?

Unfortunately, because the purpose of Timothy's story is not to inform us on the dynamics of nativigating multicultural identities, there is no real statement on how to handle such a thing, only interpretations. The act of Timothy's circumcision seems to be an act of him choosing his Jewish identity over his Greek identity, but we have to remember that this was really a statement about worship. Race, as we define it today, is not about religion or values, but in Timothy's case, it was about identifying who he worshipped. Greeks worshiped pagan gods and goddess but Jews worshipped YHWH, who had required all male children descended from Abraham be circumcised.

Notice, we get no information on how Timothy spoke. It is likely that he spoke both Hebrew and Greek, but did he speek like a Greek or like a Hebrew? In our society people judge "outsiders" based on dialects and accents, taste in entertainment, and many other trivial matters. You may be told you don't embody a particular culture for many insignificant reasons. These are not things we should trouble ourselves with; I believe God would have you to be confident in being yourself. What I took away from Timothy's identity struggle is that our identity in Christ should trump all things, as cliché as that might sound. Our actions should testify of our faith and that's all that really matters.

Why Did Paul Circumcise Timothy?

Now, let's come back to this act of circumcision. The last chapter we read (Acts 15) was literally an agruement about circumcision. During the arguement Paul advocated that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised, and the council eventually agreed. So why is it that all of a sudden Paul is circumcising Timothy? I don't know the exact answer but I do have a few thoughts (and questions).

Did Circumcision Stop Being a Requirement for Jewish Men?

Christ Himself says He didn't come to change the law, which makes me wonder about the old covenant and the new covenant... There are multiple covenants in the Bible: the rainbow (Genesis 9:12-14), circumcision (Genesis 17:10), the laws of Israel (Exodus 24:7-8), Christ's resurrection (Hebrews 8:8), etc. The covenant God made with Abraham did not nullify the covenant God made with Noah. So why do should the covenant God made through Christ nullify the covenant He made with Abraham? In most of the discussions about circumcision, the New Testament is addressing whether or not Gentiles need to be circumcised. There's never a debate about the Jews. Customarily the Jews would have already been circumcised so there was no need for this discussion in reference to adults, but we also don't see parents opting to forego circumcision.

Unlike the average Gentile, Timothy had Israelite blood, thanks to his mother. The covenant of circumcision applied to Abraham and his descendants (including Ishmael), which technically still could be applied to Timothy. Conversely, God had never required the Gentiles to be circumcised physically, so circumcision of the heart was the only thing they needed to worry about. Perhaps those born Jewish by blood were still bound by the covenant with Abraham (which was not the same as the covenant made with Moses)?

It Was Not a Salvation Issue

One thing is certain, in Acts 16, Paul does not make Timothy's circumcision about salvation. It is evident that this has to do with his identity as both Jewish and Greek. In previous discussions, the argument was that Gentiles could not be saved if they were not circumcised, which Paul rejects. In Acts 16, Paul isn't the least concerned with Timothy's salvation; the issue is how the Jews will receive him. Paul circumcising Timothy in this case is like wearing a cardigan to church—I'm not saved because I covered my arms and shoulders, but because some people have a problem with seeing skin,[2] it is easier to focus their attention on the message if I eliminate the distraction.

The Israelites were very legalistic and had been taught that uncricumcision was unclean, but more importantly, a Jew who was not circumcised was an anathema to them. The knowledge that he was uncircumcised would have distracted them from his message. (Yes, this is a lot more painful than simply putting on a jacket and yes, to the modern mind it is befuddling that the Jewish men and women would be so caught up on the state of someone's private body parts—that is why it is important to focus our mind on the time period so that we can understand the context.)

Increasing in Number

Acts 16:5 says the church increased in number daily. Does your church get new members weekly? Can you imagine new people joining your church daily? To have new members daily, you have to spread the Word daily!

Forbidden to Preach in Asia

Can you imagine the Holy Spirit telling you not to preach somewhere or not to tell someone about God? That's counterintuitive. However, in Acts 16:6-10, the Holy Spirit blocks the apostles from preaching in certain places. Perhaps it wasn't the right time, or maybe they just weren't the right people. Nonetheless, God directed them to where they were supposed to preach. Many Christians today are discribed as pushy—trying to force God on people. Yet, there are multiple passages where we see God tell His people to move on. The Holy Spirit is to direct us when to speak and when to be silent.

Now when they had gone through Phrygia and the region of Galatia, they were forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in Asia. Acts 16:6

Lydia

Acts 16:11-15 tells us of the conversion of a woman named Lydia. She was from Thyatira (one of the 7 churches of Asia Minor mentioned in Revelation). Outside of being a refuge for Paul and Silas after they escape jail, the importance of Lydia is not really given. One thing I did notice is that she was already a believer in God; it seems that this is a conversion from Judaism to Christianity. Also, her entire household is converted, but neither her husband nor her father is never mentioned or named. This implies that she took the most active role in the conversion and subsequent interactions.

Imprisioned

One of the more interesting things I found in the chapter is the events which led to Paul and Silas being thrown in jail. A woman who was possessed by "a spirit of divination" begins following them around. We know that this is a demonic spirit because Paul and Silas cast out the demon, however, the woman is both aware that they have information about salvation and announcing it. When we think of possession and demonic spirits, usually we think of people trying to hinder God's Kingdom. We would expect this person to be getting in the way their preaching or harassing those who stop to listen. There is no mentioning of this type of behavior though.

I find this interesting for a few reasons. I see it as an example of how to treat "lost" people. One might argue that the woman is lost because she is participating in soothsaying and possessed by an ungodly spirit, however she seems to be reaching out in spite of her demons. In response, Paul does not scold her or make her feel like an outsider, but instead rids her of the demon. When people come to us seeking Christ, it is very possible that they have a demon or multiple demons that are being exploited by others. It is important for us to help them instead of judging.

I have two major questions about the situation, however. First, was the woman seeking help or was she causing a distraction? There are many who claim truths (usually mixed with partial truths and lies) that appear godly to the spiritually untrained eye. These people then lure away God's people under the pretense that are of God. I have met many who buzz around the Church, proclaiming The Most High as king of the universe, but are actually there to stir dissention. Second, why did Paul wait so long to cast out the spirit?

Regardless, once the woman is free of the spirit, she is no longer of value to the men exploiting her. In anger, they have Paul and Silas arrested. While in prison they continue to worship God, and just as He did for Peter, God delivers them from prison. Its interesting that despite being set free, they do not try to escape. As a result of this, they end up saving the life of the guard and converting him. How many times are we so concerned for ourselves that we flee a situation without concern for those around us? Only a connection to the Holy Spirit would convince you to stay in jail when you have been given a way to escape—most of us would have made a bee-line for freedom!

One final point on this section concerns the baptism of the guard. He was baptized the very hour he chose to be saved. Many churches make their members go through training and classes before allowing their baptism, but there is plenty of evidence in the Bible that people were baptised as soon as they confessed, not later.

What is Started in Public is Resolved in Public

Those who put Paul and Silas in jail agreed to let them go, but wanted them to leave in secret. Paul is angered by this and refuses to do so. He argues that they were publically mistreated so they should be officially pardoned. This is still an issue today. The media is quick to publish sensational news, but rarely do they print as large of an article to pardon someone wrongfully accused.

References & Footnotes

1. Jews today claim lineage through their mothers but that is not Biblical. If lineage was passed through the mother, the entire lineage falls apart as Jacob, the father of Israel is the one descended from Abraham and at least two of his sons (Joseph and Judah) marry Hamitic women. Most Jews today descend from Judah (some may be the tribe of Benjamin or Levi). Within the lineage of David are 3 non-Israelite women: Tamar (the Canaanite who bore Judah children), Rahab (the Canaanite who bore Boaz), and Ruth (the Moabite who married Boaz). If identity was passed through the mother, David would have been an illegitimate king.
2. I really don't understand this, but I have encountered several people (always men) who lose their minds over seeing a shoulder. That conversation however, is probably better suited for a post on misogny and modesty.

Book Review: Is Christianity the White Man's Religion?

Is Christianity the White Man's Religion?: How the Bible is Good News for People of Color by Antipas L. Harris caught my eye while scrolling through Instagram. I've had my share of conversations on this topic, and though I've already been able to navigate this questionfor myself, I thought the book might introduce more information that would make such conversations easier. Based on the title, I expected the book to provide historical and theological answers to some of the age old questions people have by delving into the true history of the Bible, the Church, and white Christianity. Unfortunately, if I didn't have answers to the titular question, this book would not have helped me on that journey.

A Surface Level Mess

At 70 pages in, Dr. Harris has mentioned police brutality, racism, the Hebrew Israelites, Nation of Islam, African Spiritualism, and Megyn Kelly, but he hasn't answered a single question. Not only has he not answered questions, he has lead the casual reader to have new questions. For instance, he introduces the Hebrew Israelite theory that black people are the true Israelites and even provides the scriptural reference they use to support their idea (one of the few scripture references we see written out thus far), but as he complains about this group pulling young blacks from the Church, he doesn't give any push back as to why they are wrong. If I was unfamiliar with the group and the theory, I would have been more interested in researching their theory than continuing his book. This is just one example, but there are three main issues I have with the book: it lacks a clear focus, doesn't know who its audience is, and has questionable language when it comes to the theology.

A Lack of Focus

In one section, Dr. Harris has a heading "Does Jesus Care About Black People?" In this section he starts to discuss how racial identity informs how we relate to people, thus provoking black Christians to desire a black Jesus whom they can relate to. He follows this up with an example of Megyn Kelly asserting Jesus to be white, and then states that she needs Jesus to be white. Dr. Harris then leaves this conversation to discuss his time pastoring in prisons. He begins talking about racial bias in incarceration rates and how the Nation of Islam empowered black prisoners (also members of Nation of Islam are allowed to wear the Nation of Islam bow tie in jail). At the end of the chapter, I have potentially useful tidbits strung into an incoherent mess.

1. Dr. Harris never answers the question "Does Jesus Care About Black People?" in the section. Why did he make that the heading if he wasn't going to answer the question?
2. The discussion of how racial identity drives our interaction with God could have been flushed out much deeper. There are historical and pyschological aspects to this topic. What's more is that Dr. Harris asks if Christ can relate to the ghettos and barrios, but he neglects to talk about Christ's position at the bottom of society. Not only was Christ considered lowly in Jewish society, but the Jews were conquered by Rome and considered low among the larger society.
3. When Dr. Harris brings up Megyn Kelly, he names the woman she was responding to as though it is of importance, but it doesn't actually have any relevance. In fact, he spends time bemoaning her need to view Jesus as a white man, just a paragraph after explaining why minorities want to see him as a man of color. He doesn't give any reason why one is justifiable and the other is not. Nor does he offer any suggestions...
4. Instead of addressing the questions he has already brought up, Dr. Harris goes off on a tangent about people in prison. Why do we need to know about bow ties in prisons? Why are talking about the Nation of Islam instead of answering the question? If we're going to tie prison in to identity, why aren't you discussing the fact that most of the disciples were wrongfully accused and thrown in prison?

The entire book reads like this.

Who is Your Audience?

Another big issue in the book is that there's a disconnect between the title/synopsis and who the intended audience is. Based on the title, I assumed the audience was someone who was either asking the question "is Chrisitianity the white man's religion?" or someone who deals with people asking this question (pastor, youth leader, parent, etc.). Instead, the book reads as though it is written for someone who doesn't know this question exists and has no idea why anyone would ask the question. The first chapter should introduce the problem, but subsequent chapters should move you closer to an answer.

There are definitely larger issues of structural racism or concepts of racial identity that warrant deeper discussion in an individual chapter, but there should also be answers within these chapters. For instance, in the above example about racial identity informing the relationship one has with God, we should have also had discussions about how we can identify with God. If the audience is already asking the titular question, they aren't reading the book to hear more questions.

If instead the book is meant for those who are confused as to why one would ask the question, the title and synopsis should have been written to indicate that the book is meant to guide people through the minds of those asking the question. It should not purport to answer the questions if it's not going to deliver.

The Language of What You Believe

Several sentences in this book made me pause and ask about the authors beliefs. We're going to discuss 3 of them.

The incarnation is about a God who came among us in Jesus Christ and set up residence in our neighborhoods (John 1:14)

On page 72, Dr. Harris refers to "a" god coming amongst us and not "The God" who came into our life. If this was the only questionable sentence in the book, I would write it of as poor wording. However, just a few pages later (page 75), he seems to question the Biblical narrative of history.

From this child, the Hebrew people—the nation of Israel—are said to have eventually emerged.

Dr. Harris doesn't seem convinced that the nation of Israel descends from Abraham and Sarah's child Isaac. He leaves room for other possibilities, making me question his loyalty to the scriptures. This is excerbated by his sudden confidence in the worldly narrative.

Finally, when Constantine's own mother converted to the faith, the emperor saw the light. Constantine became the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity.

On page 86, Dr. Harris seems fully convinced that Constantine actually converted to Christianity. Most scholarly sources admit that Constantine had a very superficial understanding of Christianity. In fact, Constantine's "conversion" is a crucial part of the problem the book is supposed to be addressing. The Romans had a habit of taking the religions of the regions they conquered and meldng them with their own beliefs for the benefit of the kingdom—a weird form of assimilation if you will. This is how may of the pagan practices crept into the religion, but more importantly for Dr. Harris' book, this is how the religion went from be the religion of brown people, to the religion of Europeans. The pattern of him questioning the Biblical narrative of Israel's formation (the words of Moses, a man of color) but boldly asserting the narrative of Constantine, is the exact issue he's supposed to be addressing in the book!

What Dr. Harris Got Right

I like to end on a positive note, so lets talk about what Dr. Harris did acheive. Eventually he does get to issues such as "the curse of Ham" (there is no curse of Ham, the curse was on Canaan), and discussing the African presence in the Bible. Really, the meat of the book doesn't start until about half way through. By the time I had reached this part of the book, I was exhausted and had no interest in finishing. If you must read this book, I suggest starting in chapter 6, then you might actually finish.

Promoting a Culture of Inclusion

Defining Inclusion

Ironically, my job just did a survey about diversity inclusion and one of the definitions given for an "inclusive environment" was the ability to be your authentic self. Even after desegregation, black people were considered unprofessional if we wore our hair in it's natural state. Our way of talking, our style of dress, etc., are often dubbed as "ghetto" and labeled inappropriate. There's a long standing tradition of black people "turning off" their identity to fit in to white spaces. The multicultural church I attend often plays CCM during service, and will even sing from the catalogs of Tasha Cobbs or Travis Greene, but they've never brought in Christian rap. In fact, on one occasion I searched for a song they'd sung in service and found there is a "rap" verse in the song that they just skip over. Most Christians, regardless of race have framed their entire view of Christianity and holiness out of Eurocentric ideas. In doing so, we force people to hide the ethnic parts of themselves to fit in. To have a truly inclusive church, it's not just about being polite to those entering the building. We have to make people comfortable being themselves.

In high school, most of my close friends were white because I was often the only black person in my class. I didn't talk to them about racial things I experienced because I didn't think they'd understand or care (and it's embarrassing). My Asian friends didn't tell me about the things they were experiencing. It wasn't until we were out of college that we started truly expressing ourselves to each other. I felt alone in high school, but in the past few weeks, the people I was afraid to be my authentic self around in high school were the first people to condemn what was happening and ask if I was ok. How can I be your sister in Christ if I don't know you?

Because our society is broken, there are issues specific to each culture. There are things immigrants go through that I do not. There are injustices being done to people in the Asian and Hispanic/Latino communities that I may not understand. An inclusive church does not bury these topics to avoid offense, but instead seeks to educate its members on how to assist those effected.

It is important that we create an environment where people feel comfortable bringing their whole self into the relationship. Regardless of race or class or gender, you should be able to tell me something is bothering you or that you're excited and I should be able to cry with you or join you in celebration. You shouldn't have to clam up because the topic makes me uncomfortable and I shouldn't be clueless to your experiences in this world.

Subconscious Racism

In the U.S. we talk about racism as though it's a black and white issue (I mean that literally and metaphorically), but it's a lot more complex than we want to talk about. Most people think as long as they aren't using racial slurs and actively hating people who are different than them, everything is ok. Unfortunately, there's subconscious racism. Subconscious racism is a bias toward what society has told us is good versus bad. We do it without thinking.

The mind is a lot like a computer, or rather computers are modeled after the mind. In computer science there is a field called machine learning, in which the goal is to train the computer to make decisions based on data. This is how Netflix suggests movies for you to watch. If you watched every RomCom in the database, there's a high probability that you'll like the newest RomCom. Similarly, if the only people you've ever seen with tattoos have been inmates, you will start to associate tattoos with criminals. That's how our brains work.

The problem is that our circles and the media are biased, so our brains are making correlations with corrupted data. Let's compare my own circle to national stats for an example. About 4% of the U.S. population has a PhD,[1] but probably 60% of my friends have a PhD. About 5% of the U.S. is Asian,[2] but closer to 70% of my coworkers are of Asian descent. The numbers in my personal experience are skewed; if I didn't look outside of my circle, my perception of the world would be off. When I was in college, I did an internship in which I met a girl who had never had a conversation with a black person before. She was from the middle of nowhere Iowa and everything she knew about black people was what was taught to her by white teachers or shown to her on TV. I have a whole series on the blog about how the media portrays black people so we won't derail the conversation to get into details. The bottom line is that regardless of your race, everything you consume is shifting your perception of the world and we live in a Eurocentric society. Each of us is conditioned to think European ideals are the standard (if you are unfamiliar with this, please take this time to research The Doll Test[3]).

These ideas are deeply implanted into our brains. Most of the time, we don't understand the complexities of them ourselves. No matter what our religious affiliation is, we bring this baggage with us. If we live in a Eurocentric society, it makes sense that people giving their lives to Christ may have a Eurocentric ideas. They bring those into the Church.

Eurocentric Worship

A major ramification of subconscious racism is the Eurocentric style of worship. Conservative churches, both black and white, often consider things associated with black culture to be unholy. In the conservative black church I grew up in, we weren't allowed to have drums during worship. Amazing Facts, a conservative 7th Day Adventist organization, condemns Christian rap (and Christian rock).[4] Shouting, praise dancing, and many other forms of ethnic worship styles are often seen as inappropriate.

Usher Gloves

If you attend an old black church, you've probably see ushers in their white uniform, with white gloves. Did you ever wonder why? There was a time when black and white people did attend church together. Black people sat in the balconies, segregated from the white people, or served just as they would on the plantation. The black people that served during the service were ushers. While ushers are responsible for many things, their biggest role in the service is collecting offering. It is rumored that white people didn't want to risk touching a black hand or have those black hands touching the money/collection plate, so they made the ushers wear gloves. The discipline and stance of ushers that was kept when black people formed their own churches likely stems from the internalization of how they were treated and expected to behave previously.

Music

The first time I went to multicultural church and they started singing, my first thought was "oh, this is why we have separate churches." If we're being honest, music is cultural. How you grow up influences your taste in music; this isn't always racial, but statistically, you'll probably find more black people favoring genres such as Jazz, R&B, Reggae, Hip-Hop/Rap, etc. and more white people favoring genres such as Country, Bluegrass, Rock, etc. One person may feel the Spirit when they hear hymns, another when they hear Gospel, and another when they hear CCM. Unfortunately, like Amazing Facts, many ministries have dubbed whole genres of music inappropriate simply because it isn't their cup of tea. The Amazing Facts website uses Philippians 4:8 to justify their stance, yet one could literally take the words of a hymn and make it into a rap song, after all rap is just poetry over a beat. By condemning Christian rap they imply that either the music is unholy or that there is something unholy about the way the words are expressed. If I were to contact someone from Amazing Facts about this, I'm sure they would say it has nothing to do with race, after all they condemn Christian rock too, and I believe in their conscious mind and heart, its true. They don't have a problem with black people. They have a problem with people who don't fit into their definition of Christianity, which is based on European standards. Despite being predominately associated with white culture, if you trace the roots of rock, it was inspired by R&B and black culture.[5] Many churches (black churches included) still shy away from ethnic music in service because of the way they've been taught Christianity.

History in the Church

The black Baptist church I attended always celebrated Black History Month. We did Black History Month plays and speeches the same way people put on productions for Easter and Christmas. Black churches do this because our history isn't taught in school. If we're already bringing pagan holidays like Easter and Christmas in to the church, why can't we celebrate the history of different cultures in our churches?

The multicultural church I attend is proud to have a multi-ethnic pastoral staff and to host sermon series with pastors from various backgrounds, but we don't anything for Black History Month, Asian & Pacific Islander Heritage Month, Hispanic Awareness Month, etc. What if we allowed people to speak to their unique experiences? What if we learned about their unique experiences in Christianity? What if we made it a priority to understand other people? What if we invited people to truly share themselves with us?

References

1. "About 13.1 Percent Have a Master’s, Professional Degree or Doctorate". Census.gov. February 21, 2019
2. "QuickFacts". Census.gov. July 1, 2019
3. "The Significance Of “The Doll Test”". Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc; visited June 4, 2020
4. "FAQs". Amazing Facts; visited June 4, 2020
5. Greg Kot. "Rock and roll". Encyclopædia Britannica. April 4, 2019

Healing the Wounds

We all enter the Church broken. We have prejudices and problems. We bring with us the faults of the society in which we are raised and it is a process to shed it. People often use the analogy that a church is like a hospital, pointing out that it is for the sick. What people miss is that like patients in a hospital, we aren't supposed to stay sick forever. We're supposed to grow and heal in Christ, and as we grow and heal we become the doctors that help heal others. Of course, in order to heal someone, we also have to identify the wound.

How to Treat a Wound

If I were to go to the hospital with a large gash in my arm, the staff would quickly move to stop the bleeding. They would clean the wound and they would stitch it up. After the fact they may give me instructions such as to refrain from using that arm for some length of time to allow it to heal. These steps are crucial to the healing process and also represent how we have to heal as a Church (and a nation).

Stop the Bleeding

The first step with anything is to identify the problem. You have to cut off the source of the injury before you can treat it. If I'm being assaulted, you can't stitch me up until you stop my assailant from attacking. Once you stop the assailant, you have to identify where I'm hurt. You can't heal me from a head injury if you only look at my arm. The same thing is true in our Church. We can't heal as a body or help an individual to heal if we don't stop the attack and address the hurt.

In the previous post I discussed the fact that Southern Baptist Church didn't admit it was wrong for supporting slavery until 1995—that is more than 100 years after the end of slavery. However, they didn't try to rectify the situation until 2015, another 20 years later. Baptists aren't the only ones with this issue, though. I currently attend a 7th Day Adventist Church. In Florida, there are two conferences for the church—one for black churches and one for predominately white churches. Like the Baptist and the Methodist, it is because the church followed society's racial standards instead of God's. Digging around in their history, you'll find the particularly atrocious crime they committed against Lucy Byard. Ms. Byard was a black woman who arrived in critical condition at an Adventist hospital in the 1940s. When they discovered she was black they refused to treat her because it was a white only hospital. Instead they made her wait until they could transport her to the black hospital. They didn't bother to use an ambulance. She died.[1][2] Do you really think Christ would have turned this woman away from the hospital because of the color of her skin?

White Christians have to admit that the "Christianity" trolled out by Europe was more like the scribes and pharisees than like Christ. No Church that is actually in relationship with God would behave the way churches in the U.S. behaved. In many cases, the assailant for black Christians is the church itself. So the first step is openly admitting to past wrongs.

Clean the Wound

When I was a kid, I hated when my grandmother was the one to treat my scrapes and bruises. As soon as she saw blood, she'd pour alcohol on it. She said it wasn't just enough to rinse out the dirt, but that we had to really clean and sterilize the wound. If you've ever done this you know it burns something terrible. Often putting the alcohol on the wound hurt more than the scrape itself. Despite all the pain, I am indebted to her because most of the scrapes she treated didn't leave a mark. In contrast the ones I lazily addressed without proper cleaning left visible scars that will never go away. The biggest danger of not properly cleaning a wound, however, is that bacteria can fester and cause an infection.

Admitting that you've done something wrong is hard, and it can hurt. Forgiving someone who has wronged you is hard, and it can hurt. Bluntly speaking out is hard, and it can hurt. I imagine there are a lot of churches in which a pastor would lose his job if he went before the congregation and said #blacklivesmatter. There are people with repressed memories they don't want to dig up—it's easier to pretend like nothing happened than to confront someone about how they've hurt you and risk them not caring. Having an open conversation to clean out the wounds inflicted on blacks (and other minorities) by the church will be painful for everyone involved. Unfortunately, most churches skip this step. They simply declare themselves post-racial and colorblind (note, no one wants you to be colorblind, we just want you to appreciate and respect the colors you see). This is a lazy way of cleaning and guarantees a permanent scar. Confrontation of racism (conscious and unconscious) in the church has to happen before proper healing can take place.

Stitch Up the Hole

After cleaning the wound, you have to do something to protect and help it heal—maybe you need stitches, or maybe you need a bandaid. There has to be an action, some sort of resolution to ensure the same thing won't happen again. Sometimes this looks like policies (think Brown v. Board of Education), but in the Church, this should be relationships. This should be an active attempt to win over those you've hurt.

From the time blacks were brought to America, we have suffered at the hands of white people who claimed to be Christians. The KKK claims to be a Christian organization. White slave owners who beat and raped their slaves, claimed to be Christian. Segregationists claimed to be Christian. Most of my white Christian friends have been silent after every single case of police brutality. We have no reason to trust you! The onus of repairing the relationship is on you—yes we have to accept the olive branch, but you have to offer it. In a time like this, white Christians should be showing "how far they've come" by leading protest. These are the moments when you have the opportunity to be the older brother who stops the bully from harassing his younger brother. These are the moments when you can protect your brothers and sisters in Christ from reliving pain. When you are silent, we have even less reason to trust you and the wound is reopened.

Rest

Things don't heal overnight. It takes time. No one expects someone with a broken leg to go run a marathon—we expect them to need crutches for a while. In some cases, people require physical therapy to resume normal function. Part of the Body of Christ is hurt; we need support. You cannot expect us to operate at full capacity when we are wounded. You have to create or be the crutches that help us move forward until we are fully healed.

²³Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; ²⁴Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.Matthew 5:23-24 KJV

Conclusions

In the last post, I shared a lot of racial experiences in the church, not to throw Methodists and Baptists under the bus, but to show the pattern of hurt. I'm only 31 years old, and those weren't all the experiences I've had with racism. Can you imagine what my dad would tell you? My grandfather? It's hard to relive moments like that. It's hard knowing that at the very least, white Christians aren't teaching their children to be anti-racist and at worst they're teaching them to be racist. So you don't think about it. It's hard to focus on God and remember not to hold the sins of that person against the next person. So you don't think about it. This is what I meant when I said the healing has to hurt. The list of events I shared yesterday, I haven't even spoken with other black people about. My cousins and I don't talk about the fact that we all got suspended from riding the bus at some point because someone dropped the n-word on us. It hurts. But I'm telling you so that you know what it looks like. I'm telling you in the hopes that you'll raise your kids to be anti-racist instead of letting them pick up racist behavior from society. I'm telling you so we can start healing as a Church.

The next post in this series will discuss subliminal ways white supremacy and Euro-centric ideals have infected Christianity.

References

1. Cleran Hollancid. "Seventh-Day Adventists and ‘Race’ Relations in the U.S.: The Case of Black-White Structural Segregation". Western Michigan University. 2016
2. Jason A. Hines, JD, MA, PHD. "Black History Month: Lucy Byard". AdventHealth University. February 27, 2017

A Personal History of Racism in Church

I wanted to make this a podcast, but when I started talking, I realized it was too much to fit in one episode (and as I started writing, I realized it was too much to fit into one post). With all that is going on, it was hard to order the memories and speak calmly—I've always found that writing about things that make me emotional is the only effective way of expressing myself. Upfront I'm asking for three things: 1) forgiveness for not recording this, 2) forgiveness for disrupting the podcast schedule and posting this as a series over the course of this week, and 3) that you will read the entire series.

I'm going to start this series by recounting a few personal memories involving race and Christianity.

Preschool

The first time I was made aware of race was actually at a church. My parents had placed me in a preschool that was run by the United Methodist Church as soon as my mother went back to work. So from the time I was about 6 months old until I went to kindergarten, I went to this preschool at the Methodist Church in my home town. Generally speaking, I have fond memories (which start at about the age of 3) from this preschool and of the kids I met there, but this is where I was first told I was black. Before I tell you how that unfolded, I need to point out a few things:

• I was christened at an African Methodist Episcopal (AME) church—not a United Methodist Church and not the church that ran the preschool I attended
• My mom's family is United Methodist, not AME
• The AME Church was founded by blacks amidst racial discrimination at the hands of white Methodists. This tension culminated in an event in which white Methodists physically removed black Methodists who were on their knees praying. Established in 1787, the AME Church became the first independent denomination founded by African-Americans [1][2]
• When I was born in 1988, 201 years later, there was still no integrated United Methodist Church in my hometown
• There were significantly less children at the AME church, as well as less resources, therefore they did not have a preschool
• During the four years I spent at this preschool, there was only one other black child there; she is a year younger than me and we are still friends

Now, for what happened. I was about four years old and one of the (white) girls from my class approached me and out of the blue said, "I'm white and you're black." I thought she was referencing literal colors. So I did what any good friend would: I took her to the Crayola box, pulled out a black crayon, a white crayon, a peach crayon, and a tumbleweed crayon, and then showed her which colors did and did not match our skin tones. I was deeply concerned, because you have to know your colors to enter kindergarten and clearly she did not know her colors. I don't know if my teacher watched this interaction and then told my parents, or if I told them myself (the little girl was my dad's coworker's daughter), but somehow these events were relayed to my parents who began "the talk" in which they explained to me that I am what society calls "a black person."

To this day, I don't know why she felt the need to inform me that I was black. It seems that it meant something to her and I can only imagine that's because of the context in which she picked up the concept.

The After School Program

Once I started elementary school (at the public school), some friends of the family convinced my parents that the answer to after school care was an after school program at the Catholic Church. They each had a daughter who attended the program and I knew those 2 girls well because they took piano lessons from my grandmother. Since our families were close (to the point of us claiming to be related most of my childhood), my parents enrolled me as well. We were the only black people in the program.

Since the 2 girls I knew were 2 years older than me, we were supposed to be in separate classes. I'm not sure what prompted the beginning of this practice, but every day, they would casually sneak me out of the line going to my class and into the line going to their class. The teachers had to know—if not there are bigger questions that need to be raised—but they never sent me back to my age group. I made friends with a few of the white girls from their class and the guys let me play video games with them (but only if I played as Peach 😒).

One day, neither of them were there. I was 6, and I was scared to sneak myself out of line to go to the big kid class. Besides, what if the big kids were only nice to me because there were two other big kids "protecting" me? So I stayed in my line, and for the first time, I went to my class with the other 6 year olds. We were sitting at a very long table and one of the girls in the class was making her way around the table. When she got to me, she stopped, looked me in my face and called me a n*****. I'm not proud of what happened next, but I'm going to tell you because it's what happened.

By that age, I understood what the word meant (my first time hearing it had been 2 years prior, fortunately not at a Church), so I punched a girl who was mentally disabled. I didn't know what mentally disabled was, and truth be told, she probably didn't fully understand what the n-word was. The adult in the room saw the whole thing and recounted the story to the director. There was no "he said, she said" about it. The girl didn't deny calling me the n-word; I didn't deny punching her. When our parents showed up, my dad and her dad almost got into a fight. Her dad was, understandably, concerned that his daughter had been punched. My dad was, understandably, concerned as to why a 6 year old mentally disabled girl not only knew the n-word but also knew enough to know who to direct it toward. Her dad called for me to be kicked out of the program. My dad argued that if they kicked me out, they should also discipline the girl who called me the n-word. As is so common with people today the director didn't want to "offend" anyone. She didn't want my parents to get mad that she wasn't disciplining and condemning racism, but she didn't want to upset the white man who's disabled daughter had been punched.

So it came down to the moment when adults expect you to be remorseful and apologize. Since she was mentally disabled, they didn't expect her to understand what she had done was wrong, but they expected me to acknowledge my wrong in punching her and apologize. "Shiree, what do you have to say about this?" Clear as day, I can hear myself say, "I bet she won't call anybody else a n*****." I had no remorse. I didn't feel bad about punching her until I met a (white) boy with cerebral palsy and saw kids picking on him. It took me understanding what it actually meant to be disabled to realize that I hadn't understood that she was mentally disabled in that moment, and just like I didn't understand her condition, she was just saying something she'd been taught.

I can't honestly say I would have done something differently if I had known she was disabled, because 6 year old me was impulsive and hot tempered, but I can say that in hindsight, I think the director should have disciplined both of us. Instead, she chose not to offend anyone and agreed that I would always go to the older class so we would never cross paths again. She failed, and my parents withdrew me from the program by the end of the week (as soon as they set up an alternate).

VBS at the White Baptist Church

Once I started elementary school, I favored my dad's Baptist church—it was across the street so I could go even if my parents didn't, and my cousins who were around the same age as me also attended. The Baptist church I attended was all black. The white Baptist church is less than a mile up the road from the church I grew up attending. I rode the bus with the kids who went to the white Baptist church (some of whom called my cousins and I the n-word on the bus). One of my best friends from elementary school, and one of two people to hold a sleepover that my parents actually allowed me to go to, went to that church. Her parents and my parents were volunteer fire-fighters together. My AP English teacher went to that church—she graduated high school with my mom and taught my older cousins when they were in school. The people who attend that church have lived in that community for well over 100 years. I know, because my family has been living there in the same community for the same 100 years—the Church has even been declared a historical landmark and has a plaque commemorating its age.

It's very possible that some of their ancestors owned mine.

Because I had friends that went to the white Church, they always invited me to Vacation Bible School, and my parents would take me. Their VBS never overlapped ours so I went multiple times—but I've never been to a service there and they never accepted an invitation to come to our VBS. Black Baptists and white Baptists don't go church together.

Baptist Funerals

As I said, the families in my community have been there for generations. Everybody knows everybody and everybody's parents grew up together. So, when someone died everyone knew them. Everyone comes to pay respect. Everyone goes to "the other" church to attend the funeral. But on Sunday morning, black Baptists and white Baptists don't go church together.

Voting at a Baptist Church

The polling place for my precinct is the white Baptist church less than a mile from the black Baptist church I grew up in (it's much larger so that makes sense). The people who man the polls are people who go to that church, because the people who go to that church are also the community. There were exactly 4 Democrats at that polling place when I was a child—my mom, my dad, my grandmother, and my aunt. Sometimes I went with them to vote, and often there was a problem. Usually it was because they didn't want my 80+ year old grandmother (who had cataract surgery and grew up in the era when neither women nor black people were afforded much education) to have assistance reading the ballot. When I turned 18, I became the 5th Democrat on their roster. I voted there twice, and both times I had a problem. The first time there was "an error" and my name wasn't on the roster. Despite me showing them both a valid voter's registration and ID, I had to go to the county voting office and get an official letter from the county confirming I was eligible to vote. The second time, I had filled out an application to vote absentee because I thought I would be 4 hours away in school. When I discovered that I would be home, I canceled the absentee ballot, went to the county office to confirm, got the official letter/documents, presented them at the polling place and was met with opposition. This time a phone call had to be placed (since I already had the documents verifying that I never received an absentee ballot).

White Visitors at the Black Baptist Church

Once, a white couple who was new in town accidentally came to our church instead of the white church. There was an audible gasp from them and stunned looks from us when they entered. They did not stay and they did not come back, because black Baptists and white Baptists don't go church together.

College

I gave a little history regarding the split between the Methodist and AME church to point out the irony of my preschool, now I want to dive into the history of the Baptist church. The only thing I learned from Baptists themselves about sub-denominations within the faith is that Missionary Baptist Churches are most likely black,[3] and Southern Baptist Churches are most likely white. Unlike the Methodist Church, Baptists don't have the same hierarchal structure. There isn't a council that votes to make all Baptist churches integrated and then fires pastors who disobey. At least, Missionary Baptists don't. When I left for college at 18, I had never seen an integrated Baptist Church. The closest thing I've seen is a token person who is there because of interracial marriage/dating.

Despite having predominately attended a Baptist church from the time I was 5 onward, when I went to college at 18, I proclaimed myself a Methodist and looked for a Methodist church to attend. It had nothing to do with doctrine. I was afraid of walking into the wrong Baptist church. From a technical standpoint, the Methodist Church was already integrated when I was born. By the time I was a pre-teen, that trend spread into my hometown. At one point there was a Methodist Church with an all white congregation and a black pastor. When I left for college, Methodist churches seemed safer. That sentence that I just wrote, that should not be a sentence. At no point should a church that is following God feel unsafe.

Did you know that when given the chance to speak out against white supremacy, the Southern Baptist church did so with controversy?[4] It was not an unequivocal, unified, one accord, condemnation of racism. Despite the New Testament giving clear examples of a multiracial Church—in the first round of converting non-Jews, there was an Ethiopian and Roman (Acts 8; 10). Of course, that makes sense when you consider that the Southern Baptist Church split from the Baptist Church because Baptists in the North fought to free the slaves. They didn't acknowledge this or change their stance until 1995. It took another 20 years for them to call for reconciliation.[4] For reference, I graduated from college in 2010.

Thoughts

This is not what this Christianity is supposed to look like. You cannot claim to love God and hate your fellow humans. Most people know that, but you also can't claim to love God and idly watch some one else mistreat your neighbor. Do you think Christ would have watched someone disrespect and abuse another person in His presence? Did He not stop them from stoning a woman caught in idolatry (which was lawfully punishable by death at the time)? Did He not offer entry into the kingdom to a Samaritan? Did His disciples not convert an Ethiopian? How can the true body of Christ be silent when injustice is all around them? In the rest of the series I want to talk more about the "church"'s connection to racism in America historically, and what the Bible says about the nature/response of a true Church.

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You pay a tenth of mint, dill, and cumin, and yet you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy, and faithfulness. These things should have been done without neglecting the others.Matthew 23:23 CSB

References

1. Dennis C. Dickerson. "Our History". The Official Website African Methodist Episcopal Church; visited June 1, 2020
2. "Richard Allen ". PBS; visited June 1, 2020
3. "What is a Missionary Baptist Church?". GotQuestions.org; visited June 1, 2020
4. Judith Valente. "Southern Baptist Pastor Confronts His Own, Church's Racial Past". NPR from Illinois State University. June 22, 2017