The Institute (協会)

Hey Anthony,

What would bring the lasting change many desire? Do you think that the problem is that there aren't really that many who desire it, or just that they're not in a good position to do anyting about it?

Thanks for the post and good questions to wrestle with (as usual).

Good questions as usual, but can I ask why we still use the term race?

Does is not originate in the notions of Race Theory/Racialism? By using "race" and a term for ethininc distinctions endorse eugenic conotations?

These aren't meant as confrontational questions, I just really want to know. Because to me it seems that in propogating the terminology that origninated out of these philoshpies we in someways perpetuate the division these notions caused.

Early morning thoughts before coffee. Please read them with the humility and inquisitive nature in which they were written.

Peace.

Chris asked, "What would bring the lasting change many desire?"

Ahh, I think lots of people want all congregations to look like the United Nations.

Stelmo, a GREAT book on the subject, is "A Biblical Theology of Race." It addresses you were questions directly. Good stuff.

We don't know whether the Columbia incident is real, or a hoax. Ann Coulter's column today points out that an awful lot of "racial" incidents on campus recently have been perpetrated by members of the supposed "victim" groups. If you don't take her word on it, she does give her sources.

I don't deny that real acts of racism occur. However, I would suggest that a LOT of the animousity that exists today exists precisely because frauds are not punished as the "incitement to riot" that they are.

I read the post and all the comments at WORLD. I wish that folks like "Night Train" wouldn't hide behind their internet anonymity. While he has some valid points he is surprising unaware of his sweeping generalities. I think that he misses AB's overall premise: Where is the evangelical church when such matters arise? Does the evangelical church have any credibility on matters of race?

From my perspective most evangelical churches/leaders/pastors are simply too busy pursuing their own programs and ministries to care. Unfortunately much of that programming is based on church growth methodology which is, inherently racist (like wants to be with like). It cuts both ways: whites focus on reaching whites. Blacks focus on reaching blacks.

At WORLD AB wrote:
"At 6:00 pm we retreat back to our racially homogenous marriages, families, neighborhoods, and the like, only to reintegrate for work, entertainment, or commerce. Our Sunday associations represent nothing less than those relationships we choose to enjoy throughout the week...America confuses institutional diversity with relational diversity. The races tolerate each other at work or school because our private lives are designed for affinity associations, “people like me.”"

I didn't see too many comments addressing this part of his article. Lot's of tip-toeing around this issue. Keep raising the questions.

Dave, you mean "like wants to be with like" is a racist notion? That seems crazy to me. In my neck of the woods, predominately white churches have an entirely different liturgy from predominately black churches. The songs are different, the style of the music itself is different, and the sermons are preached in an entirely different style. Does the fact that I like "Nothing But the Blood of Jesus" to be sung in a certain way make me racist? Does the fact that I would rather attend a church that sings it that way make me a racist? I don't want to attend an ultra-hipster church that sings it in an even different way. Does that make me a 'hipsterist' (didn't know how to make the anti-hipster parallel to racism, hopefully you know what I mean).

I just thought of a different interpretation of what you said. If you meant it to be something along the lines of "whites want to be with whites and blacks want to be like blacks" then I agree with you. It is racist to say all and only other whites would prefer the style of "Nothing but the Blood" that I prefer. There may be a positive correlation between race and preference, but of course two things being correlated doesn't mean they're the same.

Paul, no, none of those particular preferences make you a racist. However, the reality of "like wants to be with like" becomes a convenient excuse for racism for many people.

Christians ought to know that liking something, or preferring something, or feeling more comfortable with something, is a totally inadequate reason for doing it. We are to live soli deo gloria, but God is not glorified when His church misrepresents the gospel. And the church does misrepresent the gospel when it conveys the message--explicitly or implicitly--that Christ cannot unite His people.

stelmoedit: "By using race AND a term " should read "By using race AS a term..."

Paul,

"Like wants to be with like" can be racist.

You bring up the interesting question about order of worship, liturgy, musical style and preference. No need to repeat Nick's fine post.

The question for whites and blacks (and any other ethnic group) is this: Are we willing to find forms of worship that are both faithful and meaningful to folks from different ethnic backgrounds? To simply allow each group to go its own way and worship according to its likes and traditions is wrong.

Anthony--Why do you not respond on WoW? The case has been made fairly convincingly that none of the nooses you refer to were intended the way you interpret them. Interestingly, no one who has "attacked" you on WoW qualifies for "usual suspect" status. In fact, the real usual suspects have been totally mum.

And, I really think you need to come clean on the whole Duke lacrosse thing. You called them guilty. When they weren't, you made excuses about "jumping to conclusions." If you were in their shoes, would that qualify as an apology?

So, there are two examples here of your citing racism where there isn't any, but you don't correct yourself. It hurts your journalistic credibility, to put it delicately.

My .02

Phil M needs to get on that Night Train guy's case for his racism. Of course, now that we need the guy, he isn't here. Figures.

Here's my thing about nooses: no matter what the intent is behind a noose, the connotation implied is always the same. The fact is that due to the prominence of nooses in lynchings, and their use as a threat, any use of a noose carries these weighty connotations. It cannot be escaped.

Nick & Dave, I agree that people often use 'preference' as a cover for their racism, but in those cases we should address their racism directly. If instead we just say "You should put your preferences aside and encourage people with different backgrounds to worship alongside you" then we still haven't dealt with the important issue: those people being racist.

For those that aren't racist but prefer different styles, we need to be concerned with a different question. Leaving all racial issues aside, is it okay to attend a church because it suits your preferences? I think for most people in most situations it is okay. If I'm right about that, then we shouldn't be shocked to see churches divided along ethnic lines because people with the same ethnic background tend to have largely similar preferences.

The funny thing about segregation is, the more we say we hate it, the more we try to stop it, we still see it. Groups are a natural part of any society. The issue is, how are we to treat a person who comes in who is distinct from the group in any number of areas (ethnicity being only one factor). The Bible is clear in several areas of the Pentateuch that as Christians, The person coming into the group is to be treated as our own and not mistreated as the heathen mistreat their own as well as strangers. We are to be equitable toward him in our dealings with him as we are anyone else. We are all strangers to God's grace and covenant, and He has welcomed us to Himself. We are bound by God's Word to extend grace and hospitality to others.

However, it personally doesn't bother me that Koreans have their own churches or that Blacks worship together. As long as they're worshiping Christ, I'm happy to call them my brothers in Christ. I don't care if Whites don't worship in the same building as I do. And if anyone comes into our church, they're welcomed just like anyone else. Just come to worship and fellowship and don't come to our church with some political agenda. And that goes for people as white as the day is long.

"I'm attacked by the usual suspects" - AB

No. I'm not the usual suspect. Please consider that integration and segregation are terms that make assumptions about different races being UNABLE to co-mingle, and thus, requiring policies that force people of races into relationships that should occur naturally through freedom of association. Integration and segregation are both forms of racism. Is a church that happens to have all whites racist? If you say it is, aren't you making assumptions about the beliefs of white people. Isn't that racist?

"Christians ought to know that liking something, or preferring something, or feeling more comfortable with something, is a totally inadequate reason for doing it."

Often it is entirely adequate, but in church it is not sufficient.

"To simply allow each group to go its own way and worship according to its likes and traditions is wrong"

Are you a fascist?

"Leaving all racial issues aside, is it okay to attend a church because it suits your preferences"

No. It's not sufficient. I go to the church I go to because I believe it's worship and confessions are biblically based. The cultural black church is very different than mine. Does that mean our church should do what they consider unbiblical in order to attract blacks to our church who are used to a "pentecostal" or "charismatic" or "gospel" church? Should I act like people in a culturally predominately black church do in order to be acceptable to them? Like it or not, american blacks tend to have their own distinct culture. Some whites have assimilated themselves into that culture. Is that their preference or do they consider it a biblical imperative?

AB,
You wonder why evangelical Christians are "nice." Maybe you should review your own expectations of white evangelicals. Why does the PC culture require them to cater to blacks? Why do we have to integrate with other cultures? Why the "multicultural" push? Isn't this PC culture that requires whites to tread softly and carry a feather pushing whites to be "nice" and to not be confident in their own heritage as Christians and Europeans? Are whites to be defined by the fact that some whites had slaves past? Is that how many in our culture wish European/American white culture to be defined? Isn't that narrow minded and unfair?

Should blacks be defined by the fact that African blacks are STILL engaging in slave trading (Sudan)?

Dave,
You also state something else besides your fascist remark: "Are we willing to find forms of worship that are both faithful and meaningful to folks from different ethnic backgrounds?"

I thought Christianity has it's own culture that transcends race and gender? If you are a Christian, you share an ethnic background with Christians around the world. If you are a Christian, there is one form of worship that is faithful and meaningful; the Christian form. Suggesting that other ethnic backgrounds can be integrated into Christianity is nothing by syncretism.

"but" not "by"