A New Kind Of (White Male) Christian
When I came across the hilarious post at Purgatirio entitled "You Might Be Emerging If...", I had to chuckle. I didn't score as high as many would, but perhaps it needs to be moderately adjusted for those of us north of the 49th.
However, something kept nagging at me after I had finished reading. In fact, for several days, something wasn't sitting right with me. Eventually I realized that the opening criteria- being a white male- was what was really bothering me. It took me some time to understand what it was that was troubling me, but then it become clear- It was true.
Don't get me wrong. I know the emerging church journey includes far more than white males, though we do represent the majority at this stage. Additionally, I affirm the deep need to embrace the diversity that is inherent in the humanity God created in His own image (as expressed by several important sources such as my own series on Diversity- Parts 1, Part 2, Part 3 & Part 4; Anthony's essential blog; Wendy Cooper's recent post on sexism; and much more). However, I think there is an important reason why this conversation/movement is primarily one being engaged by white males.
Because we need it the most.
It does not take a lot of research (or common sense) to see how complicit white males have been in some of the most blatant abuses, prejudices and exploitations in the last several centuries. Sadly, some of the worst expressions of patriarchy, socio-economic exploitation and genocide have been done by "Christian nations", often with the blessing (and participation) of the Church- predominately led by white males.
Like alcoholics participating in a 12-Step community, not only is the process healing, but when truly successful, it can transform the person in ways beyond just overcoming the addiction. Yet unlike alcoholism, the sins of the white male has forced the larger culture (and through colonialism, the world) to "join" us in those failings.
Understanding this, we need to see that much of the emerging faith journey is one of restoration. Like it or not, the white male nows holds most of the cards, and fixing it isn't as easy as handing them out. It has to be more than about being physically inclusive, though it is desperately important, but about acknowledging the reality we have contributed to creating and working to undone what can be undone. What cannot be undone needs to be transformed.
While this needs to happen throughout the church, with everyone involved, as white males I believe a great deal of responsibility falls to us. However, by acknowledging this, it must transform the tone of the conversation to one of humility and grace. Sure, we can be passionate, excited and forceful, but we must become "tempered radicals" (to borrow an excellent term from Debra Meyerson)- uncompromisingly committed to our ideals and callings, but tempering our passions with an awareness of our own failures- past, present and future.
This does NOT mean, however, that we embrace a demeaning self-understanding of our race and gender. I refuse to buy into a worldview that teaches white men that our identity is intrinsically evil, that we are nothing more than Quinn-ian "Takers" (sorry DanD). In fact, while our ultimate motivation needs to be a sincere desire to see those we've most hurt restored, it is our own identity that is in the greatest need of redemption.
In my concluding post on diversity, I quoted Australian Aboriginal artist Lilla Watson in, what I consider, one of the most poignant messages to the Church today, especially us white males:
"If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.
emerging church
I would like to add, though, as well; white males (especially in the US- and, I believe, Canada) are still the most vocal group in public circles. Hopefully in the coming years, this will continue to shift and allow the voices of others to be heard as much as our own, but a simple look at our celebrities, TV personalities, and those holding office shows that our voices are still (mostly) white males.
Good post! (Comment this)
I agree, which is systemic of centuries of this problem. The danger would be to think that it will be healed fully any time soon, as well as to think that, with all our good intentions, that we won''t stuff it up a lot on the way.
I think it is also a mistake that many people in the conversation are seeing the issues of inequality as important, but side issues. I truly believe these are at the very core of the problems we face.
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your great thoughts.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
I appreciate and really like the direction of your recent posts (and earlier ones, too). I, too, believe that the issues about which you have written the last week or so are essentially central to the discussion.
I would, however, like to press your point further, and you implicitly suggest this I think: the whole construction of white privilege. In my estimation, this is that which must be addressed first since the evils of sexism, discrimination, exploitation, etc. (in this context) spew forth from the assumption of white privilege.
While blatant white privilege is, of course, visible, it is the subtle assumptions that must be addressed as well.
And you''re right, addressing these things will take quite some time, and patience, listening, silence, prayer, etc.
Phil Sinitiere (Comment this)
Great thoughts. In our current Western culture, I would say that white privilege is a central problem, though gender injustice is and has been largely a universal constant, so I believe is perhaps more foundational.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Excellent post. I agree that there are aspects of the emerging-missional tradition that specifically challenge the ecclesial ''whiteness'' of most of Western Christendom. I believe this conversation can create spaces where the the trinitarian nature of God can challenge us to have more just relations on the ''racial'' plane.
Of course I believe that there are aspects of emerging ecclesiology and theology that can challenge non-white ecclesialness as well. From where I sit I see most of the theology, in black churches (most black Christians are Evangelical in their theology) that needs to be challenged as well. Lest we forget most black Christians (again speaking from my context) are influenced by theologies that come from the places we are trying to speak prophetically to.
Western white Christianity has not been hermetically sealed off. It influences much of black Christian theologizing...if not the whole of it. That''s why I get excited when I hear my white brothers and sisters begin to take serious theological and ecclesiological voices that have historically been ignored.
Great post! (Comment this)
Love
J. (Comment this)
and now I see that the "strikethrough" html tag isn''t supported by your blogging software...
Just remove the word "could" from my previous comment, or (if you''re a visual artist) just imagine that the "could" has a line struck through it, thereby denoting the preferable meaning of "should". (Comment this)
You know how much I respect your voice in this conversation, so I really appreciate your thoughts here. I think your blog is a must read in this conversation.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
I have emailed you, though I suspect it is a combo of poor information/understanding AND just ol'' disagreement. I look forward to hearing from you.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
We need the "humility and grace" you speak of to recognise that we are actually in an increasingly small minority, and to look outside our own discussion, and listen to the voices from elsewhere about the shape of the church for the 21st century.
Thanks for this. I appreciate your thoughts and your grace.
Blessings (Comment this)
I think the loudness of our voice goes far deeper than our wealth and access to technology. We have forcefully defined much of the worlds view of things. I travelled the world over and I am saddened to say that many (though not all) churches in Africa, Asia, etc. are mimicing Western theology, ecclesiology, economy, policy, etc.
Being a minority in numbers does not balance the scales, I''m afraid. Nor would we want it to, as we would end up with a reverse imbalance. While we need to broaden the conversation (and learn to listen), we have a lot of undoing to do.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Oh crap. Now I''m doing emergent ''churchspeak''. (Comment this)
LOL! Excellent point, regardless of the emergent "churchspeak".
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
you live north of Alaska? IS that possible...I call bullshit...am I emergetn because I "cuss liberally" - shit, i''m not emergent but I can swear with the best of them (Comment this)
the emergent church is the most non-diverse church in the world...it''s un original and it''s boring...you don''t even have old people in the emerging church...that is not church (Comment this)
Actually, the 49th parallel is the approx. border of Canada and the US. Yes, Alaska is north of that, but it is just an expression, after all.
As for your comments about the emerging church, I am afraid you have a very narrow and inaccurate view. If you are truly interested in getting some real info, feel free to let me know.
If you would like to continue commenting here, I would ask that you show a certain amount of respect. I do not like to restrict comments, but neither do I want this site to be an unpleasant place to dialogue. Many critics have found this a safe place to site fair critiques, so I am not trying to censor.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Did you catch my little note to you in the post? We still need to connect (in the New Year) about Ishmael. I am considering buying the sequel, but the first has frustrated enough that I am not sure I want to spend the money.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
BTW don''t bother with the sequal. Rather disappointing, and not nearly as groundbreaking. I would like to read "The story of Adam" or whatever it''s called, another book by him. He''s got some interesting ideas, even if I don''t agree with everything he says. (Comment this)
Can''t the "white" males do anything anymore? I hear about "black" males all the time. Why the difference?
Just some random thoughts that came to mind while reading your post and the comments. (Comment this)
I appreciate your thoughts. However, I don''t think this is entirely a good perspective. I have also lived in several multicultural communities and the differences are to be celebrated, not ignored. If we don''t see the "colours"/differences, this is problematic, not good.
As for the question, "Can''t white males do anything anymore?", I give a resounding YES. I think it is a mistake for people to think that white males need to completely withdraw, so your point is well made. There does need to be a laying down of some power and dominance, but not a complete withdrawal.
Thanks for you stopping by.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Part of the problem is that because of sensitivities, we often cannot address cultural differences or we are racist or sexist or just -ist. "Emergent-cy" has thus declared that cultural values don''t matter, or whatever. How can you reach across barriers if we can''t honestly discuss cultural values on both sides. I''m a little tired of white male bashing anyway. As for priviledge, there are not set-asides, quotas or preferences protected for white males. Am I guilty because I exist?
It is also a fallacy to say that Christianity has been a white male religion. It has through history been mostly an eastern religion with large numbers in northen Africa. (Comment this)
I am a tad confused. You say you agree with much of what this post says, but the majority of your conclusion are directly contrary to my post.
The emergent movement is by no means "largely burned out, bored white evangelicals". There is a large portion of white males (as I stated in my blog), but the other characterization is unfair and inaccurate.
Certainly there can be the danger of over reacting because of "sensitivities", but it is a SMALL burden to bear compared to the burden other races have had to bear, most often at our (white male) demands.
The emerging movement is, by far, one of the BEST places where the values of culture and diversity are being explored. It has been at the forefront of the Evangelical discussion of diversity.
To deny white privelege is to deny fact. Of course it is never absolute, but generally, over all, it is a very real and sick dynamic that has a deep history and a great deal of power. I am not advocating "male bashing", but nor am I going to quibble about the obvious. No one is at all suggesting that white males are guilty for exsisting, but rather that we have inherited a legacy of abuse.
Your statement that "It is also a fallacy to say that Christianity has been a white male religion" clearly misses the point. Christianity has BECOME a very white male religion, but has not always been (though patriarchy has been around since the beginning). Also, as my post points out, it is not about numbers, as white male Christians are NOT the majority demograph in the Church. However, having seen the church in many countries on many continents (not to mention a study of history, culture, etc.), I am convinced that the dominant expressions of Christianity are most often formulations of Euro-Western (white) patriarchal (male) models.
That being said, how is it that you see yourself agreeing with the post? I do not intend to be harsh, but I am very confused.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
I agree with your analysis. I''m just like to hear how you think the emerging church is doing things differently. (Comment this)
Excellent question. I think the emerging church is doing better in acknowledging the problem(s) and discussing the solutions. They/we have a long way to go, so time will tell.
However, I do want to reiterate that I think it is far more about white males giving up power. I hope to do another post on this in the New Year.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
in my experience, the tradition i come from is far better than the emerging church at cultural and gender inclusivity... in many ways becoming part of the emerging church has felt like a retrograde step in this area. I''ve encountered attitudes and behaviour for the first time. For all i love the emerging church, I sometimes wonder whether i''m colluding by staying part of it. i guess it depends which tradition has been your primary experience.
ella (Comment this)
If you are part of a more inclusive tradition, then you are in a minority- a happy one at that. I would question leaving it too, if I were in your place. What tradition is it?
The reality is, however, that most people in the emerging church are emerging out of for more exclusive traditions. Therefore, I would say that it is not colluding to be involved, as their direction is right, even if they are not as far as some.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
i''m from a liberal protestant church in australia. I love that you quoted Lilla Watson - she''s a hero of mine. our big issue is the inclusion of indigenous people - understanding that we can''t just say to indigenous people ''you''re welcome here at the table'', but that we will have to create a new table together. It''s not easy... but maybe that''s a similar journey to what the emerging church needs to take.
i don''t want to criticise the emerging church, and i appreciate that my comments above could be taken as criticism. i know blogs are very very bad ways to have these conversations - they don''t pick up nuances at all. i hesitate every time before commenting, especially about topics like this.
for me it would be a beginning even just to see some feminist (or even just female!) theologians on the ''books i''m reading'' columns of emerging church blogs... that kind of thing... one of the things i really appreciated about my tradition is that i wouldn''t have been allowed to leave seminary without reading feminist or liberation theologians. i learnt a whole new perspective on scripture and mission and community and inclusion from doing that.
it''s a journey. we''ll get there.
peace to you too (Comment this)
Excellent input, I''ve really appreciated your input. Any suggestions on good feminist/female theologians? I quite enjoy Karen Armstrong.
Peace,
Jamie (Comment this)
Great post. Since moving back to Melbourne I started going to one of these emmergent churches that meets in a coffee church. I''m still very new to it, but I found myself fitting into the "stereotype" on a few too many levels... I''ve even got an IPOD now! I had a good laugh.
But I liked the way you explored this furthur and took it beyond the humour to explore some very important issues and a good challenge to us. (Comment this)
i''m so sorry... i got caught up in new year things. These are quite old books, but they''re a really good introduction to feminist theology.
Rosemary Radford Reuther writes great stuff... "Sexism and Godtalk: Towards a Feminist Theology" is excellent
Sallie McFague''s "Models of God" was my introduction to feminist theology, and it changed my world.
Chung Hyun Kyung''s "Struggle to be the sun again: Introducing Asian Women''s Theology" gives an alternative perspective to the whole white feminist theology movement. It''s a remarkable book.
i''m glad you''re interested... hope there might be space for you to read some in the midst of all else you have to do!
ella (Comment this)