October 17- 2018 – Talking Taboos: Race
Sunday we started our four week Talking Taboos worship series with the topic of Race. So why is race worth talking about in church? There are several different reasons that this discussion matters to our faith. Perhaps most importantly, though, is that religion has been and is used as a justification for racist attitudes, systems, thoughts, language, and action. We cannot challenge this misuse of religion if we do spend time reflecting on the significance of race.
I suggested that there are at least 3 approaches to race in our scriptures (of course, race was understood differently when the Bible was written, but scripture still provides us with a mirror to reflect on ourselves and our time). These are:
- Racism – example: Matthew 27:24-26
- Ignoring race and upholding an ideal of unity – example: Galatians 3:28
- Different, not divided – example: Acts 10
Of these, we can quickly reject the first (although we do need to be aware of the way scripture has made room for racism in our thoughts and actions) but we also need to recognize the problems of the second. This places the emphasis on what we have in common, seeing connections rather than differences, but this approach can elide difference and we run the risk of viewing whatever is dominant culturally as the norm that everyone else is the same as. In a book review of Robin DiAngelo’s book White Fragility by Katy Waldman in the New Yorker this July, Waldman notes: “Whiteness, on the other hand, scans as invisible, default, a form of racelessness. ‘Color blindness,’ the argument that race shouldn’t matter, prevents us from grappling with how it does.” Instead of either of these first two approaches, I think our faith calls us to a third, harder approach – different, not divided. We need to find real ways to talk about the significance of race, and of the many kinds of difference, without allowing these discussions to become barriers and divisions.
Our scripture describes a diverse world, and begins (at the very start of Genesis) with the claim that this diversity is good, and is named so by God. The deep claim of our faith, that God is Love, and that love embraces us all, and all the world, not despite of who we are but because of who we are, calls us to a response – an attempt to reflect that abundant love in our own lives and actions. We cannot do this if we do not take the time and energy to learn about others, and to allow our lives to be changed by those we meet.
During our listening session at General Council this summer on Intercultural and Dominant Privilege Lenses, we heard that of the many characteristics that contribute toward having a position of power, including age, gender, ability, class, and others, there is a strong argument that the single most pivotal characteristic is race: “Race is the pivotal characteristic. It has more potency than any of the others.” In our faithful work life-long work towards God’s vision of a place where power is shared, where injustice and oppression no longer exist, and all are valued as precious reflections of the divine, we need to examine the reasons that this vision is not yet our reality, which brings us again to the importance of race. How do we work towards this vision, God’s vision, of what our church, our city, and our world can be? First, we start by listening, and listening.
Here are a few quotations to reflect on as we move into this conversation, beginning by a Canadian opinion piece from the Globe and Mail, “Whiteness is a racial construct. It’s time to take it apart.” by Denise Balkissoon :
“There is one word that is largely anathema in mainstream Canadian conversations about race, one that has been excised from my work throughout my career. That word is “white.” People, especially white people, really don’t like to say it.
“Yes, I know that “white” doesn’t mean anything specific. There are millions of people with peach-to-ivory skin whose genetic makeup, histories, geographies and experiences vary wildly. The terms “indigenous,” “black” and “Asian” are similarly unsubstantiated, yet none of them have ever been removed from one of my stories when used to describe a person. The reason we don’t say “white” is because white is the control group – white people are people and race is a thing that happens to everyone else.”
Omid Safi writes in his interesting article “I Am Not Your Other” : “It is not a level playing field. It has not ever been, and it is not level today. This is the difference between a simple affirmation of ‘diversity’ and a genuine commitment to creating a level playing field for those who have been systematically and structurally marginalized for years, for decades.”
Anna Kegler’s article for Huffington Post “The Sugarcoated Language of White Fragility” has an excellent discussion of the problematic language we use even when we try to talk about racism and white privilege includes these insights:
“Scholars of color have been writing about the nuances of privilege and oppression for a long, long time while watching White people invent different ways to either wriggle out of, dominate, or shut down the conversation. These same scholars have also been watching White writers and educators whisper the same exact thing they’ve been shouting, and magically draw a crowd.”
“The thing that bugs me about ‘inclusion’ is that it sounds like a neutral word but it’s not. It begs the question: ‘Who is including who? Who does this space belong to?’ It sounds like an act of welcoming instead of everyone being on equal footing. And I guess that is what’s happening: predominantly White spaces are trying to be more welcoming, without having to relinquish White ownership of the space.”
“The words we use to talk about race are very revealing of our investment in our own comfort, even when we’re trying to learn and to do better.”
Here are some more articles if you are interested in reading further, starting with another Canadian:
Melayna Williams’ opinion piece “2018 Will Be The Year of Allyship.”
Gina Crosley-Corcoran’s article “Explaining White Privilege to a Broke White Person.”
Nandini D’Souza’s reflections on being the brown parent of a mixed child, “Mistaken for the Nanny.”
I want to thank everyone who has talked to me after Sunday’s service and sermon – I am so happy to hear the ways you are reflecting on this topic, and for all the ways you agree and disagree with what I said. I am also pleased that nine people are already signed up for our two sessions this week following up on this topic and thinking about racism in our church – please let me know as soon as possible if you would like to join us . If you are interested, but not able to attend in person, please let me know and I can send you the link to watch the livestream (or set up a third session at another time).
Interested in this Talking Taboos series more generally? Be sure to come on Sunday over the next three weeks – and watch online for more Weekday Wonderings, because we’ll be covering even more “taboos” here!
Blessings, Rev. Emily Gordon
You must be logged in to post a comment.