Racism in the Church

[M.Talkingsworth]

Hello All,

I am interested in your opinion of why churches in the United States remain so segregated (only approx 8% are multicultural with multicultural defined as no racial group making up more than 80% of the congregational body) and what individual Christians can do to promote racial integration.

Thanks,

Matt

[Secretary of Funk Jnthn]

Hello All,

I am interested in your opinion of why churches remain so segregated (only approx 8% are multicultural with multicultural defined as no racial group making up more than 80% of the congregational body) and what individual Christians can do to promote racial integration.

Thanks,

MattI think you'll need to qualify your question to place it into a particular locale. My church is 90% caucasian with a mix of Indian and Afro Carribean making up the balance. This is pretty representative of my home city's ethnic mix.

J

[M.Talkingsworth]

I think you'll need to qualify your question to place it into a particular locale. My church is 90% caucasian with a mix of Indian and Afro Carribean making up the balance. This is pretty representative of my home city's ethnic mix.

J

Good call. I am specifically speaking of the church in the United States in general.

[Secretary of Funk Jnthn]

Good call. I am specifically speaking of the church in the United States in general.<Scotsman bows and exits thread :smile:>

J

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Good call. I am specifically speaking of the church in the United States in general.You mean the whole church in the USA? Well, how can proportions there tell you anything about segregated congregations?

I'm also disturbed that you think, apparently, that if the population of a church congregation has one general ethnic group tha makes up at least 80% of that congregation, you think ti appropriate to invoke the accusation of "racism" (your words). Is that defensible?

[T-Shirt Ninja]

I wouldn't call such a thing out-right racism. I live in an area where a lot of churches either have a rather high population of black people or a high population of white people. However, I've also seen these churches quite easily come together for community projects. They're not racist people by any means. They just go to church because that's the church they go to, be it high in whatever racial population.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Hello All,

I am interested in your opinion of why churches in the United States remain so segregated (only approx 8% are multicultural with multicultural defined as no racial group making up more than 80% of the congregational body) and what individual Christians can do to promote racial integration.

Thanks,

Matt
If you cout children, my church would probably fall into that definition of "multicultural". (and being a very small church this is quite unusual. At least , in my experience, Most very small churches that I am familiear with are almost all homogenous with regard to culture)

However, I think that true test would be how the church reflects the community. If 95% of the community is one race/culture and the church is also 95%, that would be what one would expect.

I don't think a chruch should "seek" out to be multicultural, I think the church should reach out equally to all regardless of culture and if done right the result will be a multi cultured church.

[M.Talkingsworth]

You mean the whole church in the USA? Well, how can proportions there tell you anything about segregated congregations?

I'm also disturbed that you think, apparently, that if the population of a church congregation has one general ethnic group tha makes up at least 80% of that congregation, you think ti appropriate to invoke the accusation of "racism" (your words). Is that defensible?

Hi Jack,

first off, please don't shoot me or torture me

second, I am always pleased when a T-WEB charter member makes his way into one of my threads, so welcome

third, your reply supports something I read only yesterday in a remarkable way. Let me show you what I mean...

I was reading an article which covered a meeting aimed at improving race relations. The author interviewed George Yancy. The following is a quote that surprised me because it described me, as a white person, well.


First is differing racial ideas, he said. While whites tend to see racism as “something that is overt and only done from one individual to another individual,” people of color tend to see racism as “structural as well as individual, and social institutions perpetuate racism even when individuals do not tend to be racist.”


full text of article available here: http://www.abpnews.com/788.article

Your reply, and w00t's reply both indicate to me that, like me, you see racism as an individual problem manifested in plainly observable ways. However, to a person who is not white racism is something which can be hidden in the structure of society, in this case, churches which are primarily white, black, hispanic, asian, etc...

So from the perspective which defines racism as an act or belief of an individual, segregation in churches is not overtly racist, but from a definition of racism which sees it as a structure inherent in society, segregation in churches is racism.

At this point, one may be tempted to declare the other definition of racism "wrong", but I think that this may be a mistake if that view is held, as Yancy suggests, by a large population of non-white people. By doing so we simply marginalize them. It would be better, if Yancy is right, to acknowledge their cultural point of view and work to change the undercurrent of racism in society according to their definition as well as ours.

I feel like your perspective that racism is an individual attitude or action and therefore a personal sin, is valid. I also feel that it is possible to have an all-white or all-black or all-hispanic congregation filled with people who are not actively or willfully behaving or thinking in a way which is demeaning to another race. However, the very fact that there is such little racial integration sets up cultural conditions and subconcious ways of thinking which make racial tension far more likely and even inevitable.

Segregation in churches definitely contributes to the *system* or *culture* of racism, even if it does not contribute to the individual sin of racism.

In Christ,

Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

I wouldn't call such a thing out-right racism. I live in an area where a lot of churches either have a rather high population of black people or a high population of white people. However, I've also seen these churches quite easily come together for community projects. They're not racist people by any means. They just go to church because that's the church they go to, be it high in whatever racial population.

Hi Woot, cool smilie transformer type thing on your signature. Can it dance?


I can see your perspective and addressed the matter in my response to J.B.

To sum it up, there is the individual problem of racism and the cultural/institutional problem of racism. Self-segregated churches naturally feed into the problem of cultural/institutional racism even if they may not be comprised of individuals who actually seek to participate in racism. It is a more subtle form, but contributes to the problem, IMO.

In Christ,

matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

If you cout children, my church would probably fall into that definition of "multicultural". (and being a very small church this is quite unusual. At least , in my experience, Most very small churches that I am familiear with are almost all homogenous with regard to culture)

However, I think that true test would be how the church reflects the community. If 95% of the community is one race/culture and the church is also 95%, that would be what one would expect.

I don't think a chruch should "seek" out to be multicultural, I think the church should reach out equally to all regardless of culture and if done right the result will be a multi cultured church.

Hi Faramir,

I agree that a Church should ideally reflect the racial composition of the community where it is found. Sadly this is generally not the case.

I disagree somewhat with your second statement regarding a church seeking to be multicultural. I feel that there is such a natural tendency toward segregation in our society that if one does not actively combat it and make a concerted effort to overcome it, one will unintentionally fall into it. It is like walking on a slope, unless you focus on counteracting the effect of gravity, you will unintentionally walk downhill without knowing it. I think segregation is the same. It must be specifically addressed to be overcome.

I also think that a church is better if it reflects the multiculturality of the neighborhood it is is. This allows the church to reach out to families from many cultures far more effectively, it sets a good example for society on how to react to the multicultural aspect of our society, and it diffuses some of the problems of racism by promoting close interaction between people of different races.

In Christ,

Matt

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

full text of article available here: http://www.abpnews.com/788.article

Your reply, and w00t's reply both indicate to me that, like me, you see racism as an individual problem manifested in plainly observable ways. However, to a person who is not white racism is something which can be hidden in the structure of society, in this case, churches which are primarily white, black, hispanic, asian, etc...

So from the perspective which defines racism as an act or belief of an individual, segregation in churches is not overtly racist, but from a definition of racism which sees it as a structure inherent in society, segregation in churches is racism.

At this point, one may be tempted to declare the other definition of racism "wrong", but I think that this may be a mistake if that view is held, as Yancy suggests, by a large population of non-white people. By doing so we simply marginalize them. It would be better, if Yancy is right, to acknowledge their cultural point of view and work to change the undercurrent of racism in society according to their definition as well as ours.

I feel like your perspective that racism is an individual attitude or action and therefore a personal sin, is valid. I also feel that it is possible to have an all-white or all-black or all-hispanic congregation filled with people who are not actively or willfully behaving or thinking in a way which is demeaning to another race. However, the very fact that there is such little racial integration sets up cultural conditions and subconcious ways of thinking which make racial tension far more likely and even inevitable.

Segregation in churches definitely contributes to the *system* or *culture* of racism, even if it does not contribute to the individual sin of racism.

In Christ,

MattFirstly, I do have some serious problems with the idea that if another group holds a certain view of racism, then I have some sort of onus to accept their understanding of it. The fact is, I believe that it is immoral to label a person or group as racist simply because of their demographics.

Secondly, however, I'm just not sure that cultures other than my own would think it racist to have 80% of a church from a certain ethnic background, so even if I had such an onus, I'm not sure that it's an issue.

Thirdly, I did not - intentionally, at least - suggest that racism was and only ever could be an individual sin. I agree that structures and organisations can be structured and organised in a way that can be deemed "racist." But on the one hand you say that this is something that "non-white" people are more aware of, and yet you also seem to fault non-white churches if they are largely black, hispanic etc. - "However, to a person who is not white racism is something which can be hidden in the structure of society, in this case, churches which are primarily white, black, hispanic, asian, etc.."

Racism is necessary a demeaning or offensive thing. I suppose I struggle to see why the member of a minority group in a church should be offended or demeaned by the fact that he is in the minority.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Firstly, I do have some serious problems with the idea that if another group holds a certain view of racism, then I have some sort of onus to accept their understanding of it.

If another group has a differing view of racism than you do, the only onus you have to accept theirs comes if you are interested in facilitating understanding. For example, if an all-white congregation wants to facilitate racial harmony then it is important that they recognize as valid what a non-white may view as "racist". I will caveat by saying that I recognize that there may be extenuating circumstances in which a group may have a ridiculous and unreasonable definition of racism.


The fact is, I believe that it is immoral to label a person or group as racist simply because of their demographics.

I think I agree. However based on the fact that churches self-segregate, I still think there is a problem of racism. It may be possible to have an overall "racism problem" without necessarily having a host of "racists". What do you think?


Secondly, however, I'm just not sure that cultures other than my own would think it racist to have 80% of a church from a certain ethnic background, so even if I had such an onus, I'm not sure that it's an issue.


I am certain that there are many different cases. I naturally deferred to the knowledge of George Yancy, but he could be wrong.


Thirdly, I did not - intentionally, at least - suggest that racism was and only ever could be an individual sin.

My apologies for misreading.


I agree that structures and organisations can be structured and organised in a way that can be deemed "racist." But on the one hand you say that this is something that "non-white" people are more aware of, and yet you also seem to fault non-white churches if they are largely black, hispanic etc. - "However, to a person who is not white racism is something which can be hidden in the structure of society, in this case, churches which are primarily white, black, hispanic, asian, etc.."

An interesting little glitch in the system, isn't it? Either old George has his wires crossed, or those groups which see racism as a "system" are blind to the double standard inherent in their views versus their behavior.


Racism is necessary a demeaning or offensive thing. I suppose I struggle to see why the member of a minority group in a church should be offended or demeaned by the fact that he is in the minority.

I think that a member of a minority group in a church should recognize his or her role to contribute to the cause of increasing multi-culturalism in the Church. I really think that it is best to see this as a difficult challenge that all Christians must overcome instead of an issue where a certain group is wronging another certain group.

I think that making the Church in america more multi-cultural is less about making a certain racial group accomodating another racial group and more about all racial groups realizing the importance of working together to improve multi-cultural relations in the church. It is everyone's responsibility, I think.

Cheers,

Matt

[Turgonian]

Oh, come on... Are the Liberals going to bring 'affirmative action' into the church?

Blacks see racism as something structural because that is what the (white) Liberals have been telling them -- they like blaming culture and institutions for all evil in the world. I don't think multiculturalism should be actively encouraged in the church. If different races follow Christ, there will be recognition across the boundaries of colour. If they don't, forced multiculturalism isn't going to help and will result in people 'having a grudge against their brother' partaking of the sacraments.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Oh, come on... Are the Liberals going to bring 'affirmative action' into the church?

Blacks see racism as something structural because that is what the (white) Liberals have been telling them -- they like blaming culture and institutions for all evil in the world. I don't think multiculturalism should be actively encouraged in the church. If different races follow Christ, there will be recognition across the boundaries of colour. If they don't, forced multiculturalism isn't going to help and will result in people 'having a grudge against their brother' partaking of the sacraments.

Spoken like a true conservative!

I think that your response is very interesting in light of an investigation conducted by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod. In their document, they cited a few barriers to overcoming racism. One of them was the attitude that if we all just follow Christ that everything will work out by itsself.

I think that one facet of different races following Christ is to foster a cultural atmosphere in which races mix freely, thus removing the medium of segregation in which racism grows more easily.

The issue, I think, boils down to the question of whether it is "okay" that churches self segregate. The more I think of it, the more I come to the conclusion that this self-segregation is a problem and we should work to alleviate it.

In Christ,
Matt

[Turgonian]

Spoken like a truly wise man! It's always nice to talk to you, and I apologize for taking a tone that in retrospect seems far too harsh.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

IMO there is a fine line between "encouraging" multiculturalism in a local church and "planning". I certainly don't favor targeting certain neighborhoods based on race/culture. However, I do think member of a local church should make a concerted effort to reach out to all cultures and make all feel welcome. I think my church is a prime of example of this working just fine. (but I may be biased)

Edit to add: I may have not been clear. I do not favor targeting neighborhoods of one culture to the exclusion of others. Nor do I think we should target based on race (or economics or any other factor other than distance from the church and perhaps distance from church members."

[M.Talkingsworth]

Spoken like a truly wise man! It's always nice to talk to you, and I apologize for taking a tone that in retrospect seems far too harsh.

Think nothing of it my good man! If we are not passionate, then what are we?

Cheers,

Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

IMO there is a fine line between "encouraging" multiculturalism in a local church and "planning". I certainly don't favor targeting certain neighborhoods based on race/culture. However, I do think member of a local church should make a concerted effort to reach out to all cultures and make all feel welcome. I think my church is a prime of example of this working just fine. (but I may be biased)

Edit to add: I may have not been clear. I do not favor targeting neighborhoods of one culture to the exclusion of others. Nor do I think we should target based on race (or economics or any other factor other than distance from the church and perhaps distance from church members."

I agree that it is a difficult manner to address the volatile subject of race and integration properly. I am very glad to hear that your church is doing well in this area. Hopefully as our society becomes more and more aware of the necessity of racial unity, more people in the church will help make unity a reality.

Cheers,

Matt

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

I agree that it is a difficult manner to address the volatile subject of race and integration properly. I am very glad to hear that your church is doing well in this area. Hopefully as our society becomes more and more aware of the necessity of racial unity, more people in the church will help make unity a reality.

Cheers,

Matt

Interesing, one of our minority members says that she has been a minority all her life, and our church is the one place that she dosen't "feel Black". IOW, she is not aware of her minority status in the church.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Interesing, one of our minority members says that she has been a minority all her life, and our church is the one place that she dosen't "feel Black". IOW, she is not aware of her minority status in the church.

I think that reflects very well on the congregation at your church.

[darby]

Our church is somewhat unique. Started by a few mainly white people going into a mostly A-A inner city area, ministering, etc. The church, now 11 yrs. later, is in a more suburban area but is still very multi-cultural. We have over 40 different nations and all classes represented as well. A couple of reasons I think this has happened:

1. Kind of our DNA--it was normal, from the beginning, for people of different races, classes to worship together. It was not some new program of "reaching out"....it's how we started.

2. We have been intentional. By that I mean "diversity" is one of our core beliefs....we put thought to it, money to it, manpower to it, etc. Our goal of "diversity" is not the same as some government program. It's simply that any person walking in the door could feel welcome...see other people that look like them, worship with many different types of people, etc. Most churches would say that they are "open" to people of another race coming in...and they mean it.....but they might not be "intentional". That distinction includes things like asking "what type of music might that group like to hear?"......"do they see anyone that looks like them in leadership positions?"......"is my group 'tolerated' or truly accepted?". Politically, I'm not one for quotas, mandates, etc. But I have watched how much it has meant to my A-A and hispanic brothers and sisters as they have seen the church with pastors, elders, teachers, etc. who look like them. It has been powerful.

Our church is not perfect... but I have been blown away at how God has used this to draw ALL types of people to Himself. I believe it is a huge reason we have seen many salvations, baptisms, etc.

[Arminius_Wesley]

Hello All,

I am interested in your opinion of why churches in the United States remain so segregated (only approx 8% are multicultural with multicultural defined as no racial group making up more than 80% of the congregational body) and what individual Christians can do to promote racial integration.

Thanks,

Matt

being a white Anglo I probably don't have a great perspective on this -- but it seems to me that minority groups tend to find greater comfort worshiping among their own people. For example, Black churches have a long and deeply rooted tradition in this country (given their own history of discrimination in this country). Latino churches tend to be churches geared toward Latino's (e.g. they have Spanish services, which obviously will not attract non-Spanish speaking peoples). I tend to think you will find predominantly white churches to be more diverse than predominantly minority churches. My church is probably 80% white, but we do have Blacks and Latino's in our church. However, whenever I drive by a Black church I've never seen even one white person leaving a Sunday service. I'm not sure what to make of this phenomena -- but obviously we would probably benefit from more outreach and interfaith services to celebrate diversity -- but these events do happen so I find great hope for the future.

[M.Talkingsworth]

Our church is somewhat unique. Started by a few mainly white people going into a mostly A-A inner city area, ministering, etc. The church, now 11 yrs. later, is in a more suburban area but is still very multi-cultural. We have over 40 different nations and all classes represented as well. A couple of reasons I think this has happened:

1. Kind of our DNA--it was normal, from the beginning, for people of different races, classes to worship together. It was not some new program of "reaching out"....it's how we started.

2. We have been intentional. By that I mean "diversity" is one of our core beliefs....we put thought to it, money to it, manpower to it, etc. Our goal of "diversity" is not the same as some government program. It's simply that any person walking in the door could feel welcome...see other people that look like them, worship with many different types of people, etc. Most churches would say that they are "open" to people of another race coming in...and they mean it.....but they might not be "intentional". That distinction includes things like asking "what type of music might that group like to hear?"......"do they see anyone that looks like them in leadership positions?"......"is my group 'tolerated' or truly accepted?". Politically, I'm not one for quotas, mandates, etc. But I have watched how much it has meant to my A-A and hispanic brothers and sisters as they have seen the church with pastors, elders, teachers, etc. who look like them. It has been powerful.

Our church is not perfect... but I have been blown away at how God has used this to draw ALL types of people to Himself. I believe it is a huge reason we have seen many salvations, baptisms, etc.


I am interested in hearing some specific things your church does which seem to promote diversity.

Thank you,

Matt

[M.Talkingsworth]

being a white Anglo I probably don't have a great perspective on this -- but it seems to me that minority groups tend to find greater comfort worshiping among their own people. For example, Black churches have a long and deeply rooted tradition in this country (given their own history of discrimination in this country). Latino churches tend to be churches geared toward Latino's (e.g. they have Spanish services, which obviously will not attract non-Spanish speaking peoples). I tend to think you will find predominantly white churches to be more diverse than predominantly minority churches. My church is probably 80% white, but we do have Blacks and Latino's in our church. However, whenever I drive by a Black church I've never seen even one white person leaving a Sunday service. I'm not sure what to make of this phenomena -- but obviously we would probably benefit from more outreach and interfaith services to celebrate diversity -- but these events do happen so I find great hope for the future.

Arminius,

I have noticed similar events and I hope that all races see the importance of integration and reach out to each other.

Cheers,

Matt

[Pilgrim]

I pastor a church in a predominantly minority area. Our congregation is mostly white but there are several families of Hispanic, African-American, and Phillipino backgrounds. I like that. I like seeing a diversity in worship.

In my own denomination, the PC(USA), a sort o 70's liberalism has set in. That being the idea that diversity means supporting what we call Racial and Ethnic Congregations and Fellowships. The idea being that diversity is giving them their own place. And, like AW pointed out above, that seems to be what the Racial/Ethnic churches want: their own place.

I've been called a racist for not supporting that line of thought. You see, my hope is not for a denomination that is diverse but for congregations that are. Like MLK said, "The most segregated time in America is one hour every Sunday morning." It shouldn't be that way.

On the other hand, part of that reality has nothing to do with racism but rather with cultural and stylistic preferences. People want to be in a church that has a message, style and feel they jibe with. That tends to happen more often when you attend services with people who are already more like you. Let's face it, in a typical Presbyterian worship service most of the African Americans in my town are not going to be there because we're not grooving enough. It's not a racial thing, they just want a more "gospel" and a more "charasmatic" feel to thing.

[M.Talkingsworth]

On the other hand, part of that reality has nothing to do with racism but rather with cultural and stylistic preferences. People want to be in a church that has a message, style and feel they jibe with. That tends to happen more often when you attend services with people who are already more like you. Let's face it, in a typical Presbyterian worship service most of the African Americans in my town are not going to be there because we're not grooving enough. It's not a racial thing, they just want a more "gospel" and a more "charasmatic" feel to thing.


I agree that this is probably part of the reason for segregation. I would propose that perhaps integration is more important than the comfort provided by this. I think that it is possible for everyone to enjoy a diversity of music in a worship service and that each culture can be expressed.

I am not saying that it is bad to be comfortable with a certain worship style, but that eradicating segregation is possibly a good so great that we should sacrifice this facet of our comfort.

What do you think?


Also, does your church do anything specific to make an atmosphere which promotes integration?

cheers,

Matt

[darby]

I am interested in hearing some specific things your church does which seem to promote diversity.

The main thing, to reiterate, is that we are INTENTIONAL--not just saying "anyone is welcome...they just need to join in to how we are doing things"....but rather "what types of things would make Hispanics, A-A, other cultures actually feel like this is THEIR church...not just that they are guests of a white church. Examples:

1. The worship leader (white) has sought out and brought on to the worship team hispanics, A-A, other cultures. We sing songs they may sing in an all black church, some hymns, new stuff you would hear in a suburban church, etc. People get to see others who look like them leading worship, and get to hear songs and styles they are used to.

2. We actually teach a course in diversity. Not surprisingly, the discussions can get pretty hairy at times. We discuss things like why A-A churches might seem to focus on the social gospel at times, why white churches might focus on righteousness and seem ambivalent to social causes, etc. I learned from some of my A-A brothers and sisters that many feel like they are subject to "the man" through the week, and are hesitant for that reason to join a church with a white pastor. Again, this weekend really exposes some raw nerves, but we don't run from it...we try to figure things out, basing our answers in scripture and having love for one another and trying to understand one another.

3. Our leadership resembles (for the most part) the body. We have an A-A pastor, a hispanic pastor, several A-A and hispanic elders, etc. They are not just token positions--they oversee, rule, teach, etc.

I want to make sure I acknowledge that it is at times a big challenge. It calls for laying down preferences in worship style, developing friendships across races, etc. It takes huge effort. But even though it might be easier not to do it...we are comitted to it. It was interesting to watch as our A-A pastor preaches....since we are in the south, it is often the first time many whites have sat under an A-A preacher. Probably sounds ridiculous in some areas, but in the deep South, it is encouraging to see God continue to use His church--not the govt.--to break down walls of racism and classism.

[M.Talkingsworth]

The main thing, to reiterate, is that we are INTENTIONAL--not just saying "anyone is welcome...they just need to join in to how we are doing things"....but rather "what types of things would make Hispanics, A-A, other cultures actually feel like this is THEIR church...not just that they are guests of a white church. Examples:

1. The worship leader (white) has sought out and brought on to the worship team hispanics, A-A, other cultures. We sing songs they may sing in an all black church, some hymns, new stuff you would hear in a suburban church, etc. People get to see others who look like them leading worship, and get to hear songs and styles they are used to.

2. We actually teach a course in diversity. Not surprisingly, the discussions can get pretty hairy at times. We discuss things like why A-A churches might seem to focus on the social gospel at times, why white churches might focus on righteousness and seem ambivalent to social causes, etc. I learned from some of my A-A brothers and sisters that many feel like they are subject to "the man" through the week, and are hesitant for that reason to join a church with a white pastor. Again, this weekend really exposes some raw nerves, but we don't run from it...we try to figure things out, basing our answers in scripture and having love for one another and trying to understand one another.

3. Our leadership resembles (for the most part) the body. We have an A-A pastor, a hispanic pastor, several A-A and hispanic elders, etc. They are not just token positions--they oversee, rule, teach, etc.

I want to make sure I acknowledge that it is at times a big challenge. It calls for laying down preferences in worship style, developing friendships across races, etc. It takes huge effort. But even though it might be easier not to do it...we are comitted to it. It was interesting to watch as our A-A pastor preaches....since we are in the south, it is often the first time many whites have sat under an A-A preacher. Probably sounds ridiculous in some areas, but in the deep South, it is encouraging to see God continue to use His church--not the govt.--to break down walls of racism and classism.


Very helpful. Thank you Darby.

Cheers,

Matt