With Morbid Silence: Christian Denial in an Age of Economic Disparity

Racial Justice

Whether it is in our passionate recitation from the one line of the one Martin Luther King speech we’ve actually read or the long clap that followed our now President’s suggestion that “There’s not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America,” there is something about us that seems to cling to notions of colorblind equality. We assert our equality even in the face of the latest social science research, which suggests our social situations are currently anything but equal in everything from income and wealth to health and infant mortality rates.

Research has quantified this love by finding that white, evangelical, Christians, are some of the best at denying the existence of racial inequality and some of most likely to attribute any recognized inequality to lack of motivation on the part of minorities.

In this context, it is no surprise that many of us hide behind verses like “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free” as justification for not talking about race and the still existing division in our country. (It, is however, more curious how we use this verse and this logic to deny the use of racial categories, but fail to carry that logic through to the other words in Paul’s verse that there is “neither male nor female” – with few of us ever suggesting we rid the world of gender classification.)

But who can blame us when we have been taught the Civil Rights movement as if a bunch of brown and black folks descended on the capital, marched on a few streets and suddenly the once racially divided world was healed forevermore?

Even more than 50 years since the Civil Rights movement first began many of us fail to recognize that the average net worth (assets minus debts) of white Americans ($113,000) is 20 times the average net worth of blacks (about $5,600) and 18 times the average net worth of Hispanics ($$6,325).

Somehow we missed the lessons about what contributed to these disparities. We fail to acknowledge that the FHA gave home loans to whites only for the first 30 years of its existence, thereby helping to create the white middle class today. We missed the lesson about the government selling 270 million acres of land for next to nothing to whites-only under the Homestead Act and how 40 million of us whites are descendants of those who acquired the land. Some of us are still living on that land, many of us are inheriting the inter-generational advantages of it. We missed the lessons about how, even as my own mother was being born, people of color were being denied access to equal education and were barred from university education altogether. And we have particularly missed the reality that, though those inequalities may have pre-existed us and may not be our personal fault, they have left many of us with an overwhelming advantage.

People like me have been given extra points on college applications for being “legacy students” – an impossible classification for most students of color whose parent’s could not have attended college in most of the generations that preceded me. Whites like me have benefited from the inter-generational accumulation of wealth that is largely impossible for people of color whose ancestors were denied adequate wages, education and jobs. Many of us have also benefited from living in counties and towns with higher property taxes, better schools, less pollution, more hospitals and a police force who rarely profiles people of our complexion (even though, when stopped, we are more likely to have drugs on us than a person of color).

But we are often afraid to admit these and the other thousands of small but cumulative advantages we have received. Instead, some of us deride the “extra advantages” given to students of color “on the basis of race” all the while misunderstanding the reality of the statistics on affirmative action and while personally profiting from the whites-only policies of the past.

But even the uncomfortable feeling of admitting our advantage in the social system we inherited is not enough. A 2004 study found that when applicants applied to the same job with identical credentials, applicants with the white sounding names received 50% more callbacks than applicants with black sounding names. Stopping merely at recognizing our inherited advantage denies the reality that the people in the most impoverished African American neighborhoods have to travel longer distances to reach the nearest supermarket than people in the most impoverished white neighborhoods – thereby limiting their access to nutritious foods like fresh fruits and vegetables. It denies the reality that many of the worst environmental hazards are located in impoverished black and brown neighborhoods – resulting in higher rates of illnesses like asthma and lead poisoning among African American children. And it ignores the fact that college educated black mothers have higher rates of infant mortality for their children than do white mothers who dropped out of high school. Even when black women have received consistent prenatal care, they still have infant mortality rates almost double white mothers who received absolutely no prenatal care. These studies, and similar studies on the effects of discrimination on other health outcomes like heart disease, have consistently controlled for other factors such an urbanicity and family history and have concluded over and over again that weathering (continued exposure to instances of racism or discrimination over time) is a threat to the health of black and brown bodies.

Failing to recognize these inequalities and discuss them openly, denies the reality that this discrimination is literally killing us. It denies the pervasiveness of institutional racism and the continuation of discrimination. It accepts the advantages given to us as whites with a morbid silence that stands with the status quo and a system of oppression that, as Christians, we have a responsibility to stand against. It is a responsibility we have, not because we are all personally responsible for the creation of that system, but because Christ has called us to work toward redemptive justice in a world that is far too often opposed to it.

—-
Erin Echols is an Atlanta native and graduate student in Sociology with special interest in racial inequality. You can find her online or on Twitter.

Print Friendly

About the Author

Erin EcholsErin is an Atlanta native and graduate student in Sociology with special interest in racial inequality. You can find her online or on Twitter.View all posts by Erin Echols →

  • Pingback: With Morbid Silence: Christian Denial in an Age of Economic Disparity | Erin V Echols

  • Bsyd

    I am a white 37 year old male who has been unemployed for two years and is living in my parents basement. So I’m not interested in your idea of ‘racial inequality’. My job is two-fold: 1) to bring people to Christ; 2) take care of and provide for my family. Beating down white people and trying to make them feel guilty for things they can’t control, is simply a different form of racism. I appreciate your sentiment, but I don’t agree with your target. Sorry – no one’s helping me out of my situation because I’m a white american. If you grew up privileged, congratulations, but my parents nor myself could afford to send me to college. Perhaps the guilt is yours, not mine. Paul was telling us to GET BEYOND the flesh, not dwell in it. Seems contrary somehow to your blog.

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      Bsyd,

      I in no way mean to trivialize what you are going through. Unemployment is currently a problem for many people regardless of race. I also am not attempting to make you feel guilty for the advantages you or I have been given as whites. This is not an issue of guilt. It is an issue of responsibility. I think this short video clip explains guilt vs responsibility more eloquently than I ever could, so I will leave it to Tim to explain. http://www.timwise.org/2010/11/the-difference-between-guilt-and-responsibility-video-clip-10610/ 

      For the sake of others who are reading this, I feel like I should direct them to this infographic on the jobless statistics by race so we can be intellectually honest about how joblessness differs by race even when education, for example is equal. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/11/06/business/economy/unemployment-lines.html

      But, I don’t think that is personally helpful to you. Yes, it could be worse. But, that sort of trivializes your situation and implies you don’t have reason to be upset, frustrated or so on. I am going to post my e-mail here in hopes that you will e-mail me and we can discuss this more in depth than comments on the internet allow for. 

      But before, I do that I also want to note that failure to engage in discussions about white privilege (which, to be fair, I think the article addressed other areas in which even the most impoverished whites have advantages) is actually not merely a issue of “love thy neighbor”, it is also necessary that we engage in it on a purely selfish level. For example, research has shown that the housing crisis was caused largely because banks gave subprime loans to people of color who couldn’t afford it and exploited them on the intrest payments. When they saw that the government was not going to regulate this frankly unethical behavior, the banks then began these practices on white homebuyers. Many have then defaulted on those loans resulting foreclosures and eventually the situation we find ourselves in today. If, in the begining, we had acknowledged that this was happening unfairly to people of color and pushed for the banks to stop then, it wouldn’t have continued to happen and spiral out of control. As much as I hate having to argue the “what’s in it for me” aspect to discussing racism, I understand, for some people, it is the only way to get them to discuss race at all.

      In reference toy your Paul comment, not talking about race is not how we “get past skin color.” If tomorrow the census stopped tracking people by race, all research on race stopped and people stopped mentioning racial categories, we would not know that the wealth of whites is 20 times the wealth of blacks, that unemployment is higher for blacks, that infant mortality rates, pollution, discrimination, etc. is all higher for people of color. And if we don’t know the problems, it is impossible to find the solutions. Racial inequality, as I think my article showed (though it barely scratched the surface of the research), is a real issue that we as a country have to deal with. Pretending it isn’t a problem is not how we fix it. 

      I hope you will e-mail me at erinvechols@gmail.com so we can talk a bit more about your concerns in depth. I appriciate your comment.

      • Bsyd

        The housing crisis is always blamed on the lenders. Every person that ever walked into those offices had the right to say, “No, I’m not accepting this debt because I may not be able to cover it in the future. This is not a prudent choice.” Making decisions is a part of life, and no one forced anyone of any color to take out unreasonable and unrealistic loans.  Those lenders suggested to half of those people that they lie about their annual income to get more money, and they did it. Personal responsibility is a massive part of the pie. The American “dream” is as much to blame as anything else for that crisis. It is a rule of american society that you take on more debt than you can afford.  That’s why credit card debt and bankruptcies are so out of control. We’re a nation of grasshoppers, not ants.  If there’s no takers, eventually the sellers will go away.  The people who took on debts they felt they may not be able to cover in the future, only have themselves to blame. Are the men and women who offered those loans corrupt? Absolutely. Will God hold them accountable? Absolutely. Are they the only ones to blame? Absolutely not. “Be ye wise as serpents, yet gentle as doves.” 

        I’ve studied the housing market model extensively because several years ago I was asked to write a script on it. ACORN was proved to have stacked that deck years later and went down for their corruption, after extorting many companies for “unfair lending practices”. The wicked prey on the weak. And “weak” is colorblind. God is no respecter of persons. God does not favor anyone for their color, or lack thereof. We are to operate in His image – to mimic Him as best we can.  If we focus on the flesh, we’re rolling in the mud like swine. The flesh is never the issue, and fixing any one thing in flesh will do nothing to fix the overall alienation we have from God. We have to stop dealing in periphery, and start dealing from the Center. We must deal with the root, not the branches. This is a branch. And even if you cut it out from the tree, the root and the trunk will remain.I’m not interested in having a lengthy discussion about something that is wholly based in flesh. It’s not my conviction. My point is, there is unfairness and nepotism everywhere and there always has been.  Teaching people to focus on race statistics (no more or less than teaching them to focus on other fleshly statistics), to me, detracts focus from God and His purpose. The ultimate goal of the “spirit man” is to get past the flesh – to crucify it – to leave it behind and pay it no matter. Because if we can get people into the mind of Christ, flesh and color will mean exactly what they should mean – nothing.

        • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

          We can agree on one thing: “God does not favor anyone for their color…We are to operate in His image – to mimic Him as best we can.” 

          We have been operating for most of human history on the assumption that whites are more favored than people of color and that legacy has gotten us where we are – one of the worst of the industrialized nations in terms of GINI inequality scores and an unbelievable wealth gap, unemployment gap, etc. by race. Continuing to not talk about that legacy is what maintains the system as it is – it accepts the advantages and corroborates with a system that isn’t going to magically change itself. As people who are “to operate in His image” and “mimic Him as best we can,” we can’t be passive observers of inequality. Doing so denies the very redemptive and transformative message of the cross. 

          • Anonymous

            Really?  For most of human history we’ve been dividing people into two groups labeled “white” and “people of color”?  No, I’m pretty sure this is a fairly new concept…probably a construct of those activists from cultural studies.

          • Erinvechols

            The concept of race was invented, but it wasn’t recent or by those in cultural studies. There is a breadth of work in Sociology and Anthropology about the invention of race, its purposes (to divide the lower class in order to prevent revolt, to justify the taking of resources in nations that were conjured or “discovered” by Europeans, etc.) throughout history.

            The fact that it is not “real” (genetically) does not take away from the fact that is has become “real” socially. 

          • Anonymous

            there is a breadth of work for many things in sociology and anthropology that don’t fit nicely with popular notions of Critical Race Theory…it is a theory, it is also not proven to be fact.  so if we’re going to go ahead with activism and political action based upon this thing seen as only socially real then how does one sign up to become a creator?  Do I need to speak to Marshal Kirk or Hunter Madsen perhaps regarding the appropriate nonviolent techniques?  

            i guess it takes faith… faith in what?

          • Anonymous

            also my initial comment was regarding the particular phrase “people of color”…i think it is convenient how it begins to merge  previously separate groups of racial identity into one identity….i wonder what this type of mobilization is intended for ultimately? 

      • http://bytheirstrangefruit.com StrngeFruit

        Brava

  • http://www.fivedills.com Greg Dill

    I have always been reluctant to believe that racism and inequalities still exist in America today. This is due in part to two things: First, I haven’t witnessed or observed any racial injustices occurring during my lifetime. Especially when I served in the US military where many people of color were given the same opportunities for rank advancement and promotions as anyone else. I also worked in corporate America for a number of years and saw people of color advancing well into management positions. Secondly, I was raised by interracial parents (my step-father is dark southeast Asian and my mother is Caucasian) and never witnessed or observed any racial discrimination or inequalities with my step-father. In fact, he was highly valued by his company and is still highly sought after even in his retirement years. From a white American’s perspective this is why I believe many of us are in denial with good reason and intentions.

    Let me be clear, I am not saying racial discrimination doesn’t exist. I know it still exists especially in other countries for certain. But, I believe America (England too) serves as great models to show the rest of the world how to overcome racial discrimination and inequalities. Sure, there may be more work needed in America. And, I think the huge disparity in income isn’t a result of present day discrimination, but a carry over from the era of racial discrimination and inequality from which African-American communities are still trying to recover from. But, I think we should be careful and not cry wolf when in fact there is no wolf. Let’s work on helping those who are unable to help themselves while at the same time not create problems that may not exist.

    If I am wrong or ignorant, please forgive me. It’s not intentional. These are just my humble observations.

  • Tim

    In the Church, where we almost idolize the 2 parent nuclear family, it’s easy to look at black society’s prevalence of single parent families and blame economic disparities on that factor alone.  Then we lump in other destructive choices that blacks seem to take in higher numbers – dropping out of high school, choosing not to breastfeed, glorifying misogyny and violence in music – and conclude that poor decisions are driving the statistics rather than institutionalized racism.  What do you think? 

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      In the book/research “Divided by Faith” Emerson and Smith (two sociologists) found that white, evangelical women in particular are quick to blame relational issues (single parent households, for example) for the racial inequality we see.  

      But, of course, that explanation won’t do since we know, contrary to popular belief, single-parenthood is not something that effects only the black community (and that not all black parents are single parents). We also know that black single mothers generally fair worse than white single mothers. And there is a breadth of research on how and why this happens – and the negative ways in which black single mothers get stereotyped that white single mothers do not. 

      As far as “destructive choices” go, I think that may be how people see people of color sometimes. But it is, frankly, an all together inaccurate view of the world. We know well that the propensity to make “destructive choices” is not something that discriminates by race. There are white kids doing drugs and being violent and so on all over the world. (Though, their black male counterparts are __ more likely to get searched for drugs even though white males are 4 times more likely to have drugs when they get searched.) Laziness, likewise, is also a trait that doesn’t know color – it can be found in people of any and every color. The difference is in the outcomes of those choices due to economic, structural, institutional, profiling, etc. issues. 

      And when we talk about “destructive choices” I suggest we be a bit more careful. Because, even when people of any color seem to be making a conscious choice we need to consider their structural constraints or opportunities. William Julius Wilson has some interesting (though controversial) things to say about this if you are interested. 

      And the notion that black, impoverished women in particular chose not to breast feed is a bit frustrating to me as a woman, because it fails to consider what healthcare will and will not cover as far as breast feeding goes, how that effects mothers without a lot of resources and how a working mother is expected breastfeed a child without equitment while working a full-time job at a job miles from their daycare facility. 

      Also frustrated by the notion of “black music” supporting violence. I listen to a more than my fair share of “white music” and I assure you that those twangy and pop songs have quite a bit of violence in them. I think Dylan, Cash and Toby Keith will agree with me. 

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      I will try to respond more fully later. There are a lot of assumptions built into this that I would like to address.

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      I don’t have the space or time to do all of these justice,
      but there are a few things I want to comment on about your post.

       

      The nuclear family issue – Emerson and Smith did find in
      their research (see their book Divided by Faith) that white, evangelical women
      in particular do use relational issues (such as single-parenting) as one of the
      major reasons why there is racial inequality. However, this explanation of
      course won’t do since we know that single-parenthood is not only “a black
      issue.” We also know that black single parents have a net worth (assets minus
      debts) of $0 while white single parents have a net worth of around $6,000.  So while being a single mother in particular
      is very difficult (an issue of gender inequality), there are still differential
      impacts based on race. (Black single mothers also are more likely to be
      stereotyped in ways that white mothers rarely get stereotyped.)

       

      In terms of “black music being violent”. I think we need to
      be quite a bit more careful and intellectually honest there. By “black music”
      most people mean “rap.” They don’t mean gospel, blues (which was the foundation
      of rock-n-roll), pop, R&B or country (Cowboy Troy, for example). But even
      rap gets assumptions placed on it. There are (white and black) rappers who fill
      their songs with violence and sexism just like there are country artist and
      punk-rock artist who fill their music with violence and sexism. The difference
      is that we tend to assume violence in “white music” is not a threat (that Toby
      Keith won’t really “put a boot in you’re [butt]”, that Miranda Lambert won’t
      really burn your house down and that Marilyn Manson won’t really do whatever it
      is he claims to want do.

       

      In reference of “destructive choices” we need to recognize
      how structure affects the choices me make. People with lots of alternatives are
      less likely to take up a “criminal lifestyle.” An impoverished person living in
      an area with high unemployment, with inferior education, lack of social
      connections and resources who needs to provide for their family or themselves
      is operating under a social structure that limits their decisions. College is
      not an option. A job is not an option because no one can find one in his or her
      neighborhood. Moving is not an option because they don’t have the resources, etc.
      Selling drugs, in that context, is a easier to understand. William Julius
      Wilson has some interesting (though controversial) things to say about this as
      well as about how structural constraints contribute to single parenting, if you
      are interested.

      And let’s not forget that “destructive choices” happen on all sides of the
      color line. Black and Latino males are 2 to 3 times more likely to get stopped
      and searched for drugs even though white males, when stopped, are 4 times more
      likely to have drugs on them. And there is a plethora of research documenting
      how policemen and the justice system (subconsciously or consciously) dole out
      punishments differently based on race and class.

      Lastly, in regard to breastfeeding particular among low income women (which disproportionately
      affects women of color), I think we need to consider what insurance will and
      will not pay for in term of breastfeeding equipment. How are women who lack the
      resources to buy pumps, for example, on their own and who work full time jobs
      to support their families supposed to breastfeed a child whose day care
      facility (or the family member who I watching them) is miles away from their
      place of work? It is an impossibility for many low-income mothers. Here we see
      how both race and gender interact and compound to make things harder for black
      mothers in this case. Not that there are not things we can do about this. There
      certainly are! And, since breastfeeding increases the health and mental ability
      of children (who will later form the workforce and need more of less medical
      care depending on their health as a child), breastfeeding is an issue that
      effects society at large as well as each of these mothers and children
      individually. 

      • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

        Sorry for all the errors in there. Hopefully you can still understand what I meant. 

      • Tim

        All good points Erin!  I fear this discussion is just a variation on the fundamental attribution error – we want to believe that others’ misfortunes are due to their own stupid choices while our own misfortunes are the result of situational forces we couldn’t avoid.  Unfortunately that’s a fallacy that won’t die any time soon.  :(

        • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

          Agreed. We are all at once inheritors of a social system we didn’t create and individuals with the agency to act within that system. It is not a case of only structure or only agency. It is a mix of the two, and grace in understanding each others situations is generally the best policy. (I know I can always use some improvement in the grace department.)

  • Anonymous

    A good litmus test of whether we have accepted our atonement in Christ is whether we get defensive when our racial and socioeconomic privilege is called into question. People who know that they’re sinners redeemed only by Christ’s blood will be grateful for the opportunity to receive greater sanctification through wrestling with their privilege (and if the shoe doesn’t fit, they won’t put it on but they won’t need to scream about it either). People who have been using their Christian “identity” as a wedge of self-justification to put themselves above other people are the ones who are going to start foaming at the mouth and ranting and raving about liberal this and communist that.

  • Wende Ballew

    It is interesting how quickly one person tried to turn this conversation from the structural problems that exist to “it’s not my fault, no one is helping me” whining. I used to have those sentiments because I was a poor white kid with dysfunctional parents, the reaction was based on fear and ignorance. I was afraid that my intellect would not be enough to get me out of the cycle of poverty that I grew up in and I was ignorant of the structural problems as well as the assumptions and expectations that contributed to my situation as well as the situation of other poor people – despite color. The greatest accomplishments of the powers that be in the United States has been to prevent class solidarity by dividing the poor along color lines and convincing everyone to stand up for the current system that favors the wealthy because we believe we may all be rich some day. 

    The most evident instances of this today is the rage against individual immigrants instead of rage towards the corporations that actively imported poor laborers for decades in order to secure low wages. And the backlash towards financial reform and regulation of markets in spite of clear evidence of abuse by the Wall Street barons. The truth is that no progressive change will come without solidarity and the knee jerk response of blaming your neighbor for having more than you, i.e. blaming Wisconsin teachers and police officers for having a retirement plan when you have none instead of demanding universal healthcare, equal education, and a good retirement plan from employers. 

    The reaction of “no one helped me” is counter productive and against Jesus’s message of ”When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.” So instead of complaining about how ones parents could not afford to send one to college and using that as an excuse for not going to college and then blaming others for not being accountable for their own actions we are required to help each other with no expectation of reward.    

    Racial as well as class disparities do still exist in this country and ignoring them and pretending that the poor remain poor solely based on personal choices is a huge hindrance to progress and his contrary to what I believe Jesus’s message was. We must lift everyone up and stop stepping on people on our way to the top not only because it is the right thing to do but because it is what Jesus told us to do and recognizing that racial and class inequity still exist in the world is a very important aspect of lifting everyone up.

    • Tim

      All good points – I wonder how you would respond when someone switches to a global perspective.  After all, America’s poor live in opulence compared to billions of global citizens.  Is there justification to “lift up” a person with a car, a tv and a refrigerator, when half way around the world people are on a death march to escape famine?

      • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

        I’m confused why the question is oriented toward the american poor who are not the ones holding the vast amount of the wealth. It seems the question should be directed toward those with the most wealth – asking if that is ethical or justifiable when people are starving, not towards the people who happen to have refrigerators and computers in a society where things like computer access is generally considered necessary in order to do basic things like find job openings, apply to jobs, receive communication from potential jobs, write an assignment for high school english class, etc.

        • Tim

          It’s not confusing – it’s an attempt to minimize the plight of those less fortunate than you.  American heritage (no I don’t support them) has tons of material about how awesome it is to be poor in the U.S.:  http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty

          • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

            What I am saying is that if you want to talk about “how awesome” it is for someone, why would you talk about the poor in America? Yes, they are better off than someone in the slums of some third world nations. But you realize that the definition of poverty in the US is having about $20,000 for a family of four, right? A family of FOUR! I, for one, cannot imagine living on that household salary. If we want to talk about inequality, and I think we should, looking at “how awesome it is to be poor in America” is not the best way deal with inequality since they hold some 2% of the wealth in this nation. Even if we said it was dumb to raise up their standard of living so long as they have refrigerators, or we demand that people who are poor only be people without refrigerators, then the money from all their refrigerators would hardly feed one third world country for a week. Just because people in other nations suffer doesn’t mean our first line of attack is to turn against the poor in America who need computers to maintain their jobs and education. The top 10% holds 80% of the wealth. And they didn’t get it solely by working hard. I know many a poor man and woman who have worked hard. 

  • Drew

    Let me start off by saying that I find it demoralizing that Greg Dill’s recent post about calling people to do Christian mission work received two comments, while these posts about secular hot-button issues that barely even mention Christ are receiving dozens of comments.  Again, this is the danger of the Red Letter Christian movement, that ultimately it will be co-opted by secular forces and issues.

    Although the post is completely one-sided and appears to challenge white evangelicals as being incompetent on issues of race and tries to bring out white guilt, most of the points are accurate.  However, it is telling that she offers no solutions.  That is the hardest and most controversial portion of race inequality in America.  Seriously, what do we do moving forward?  That is what I would like to see Erin address.

    • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

      I was actually hoping to address ideas for helping to alleviate inequality in a future post since cramming it in here would make the piece too long. 

      Secondly, just because an issue “barely mentions Christ” does not make it a secular issue or un-Christian. I don’t think fighting against inequality needs a plethora of theological justification because it appeals to the very heart of what Jesus was about. Concocting a long theological justification for fighting for inequality suggests that Christians are too stupid to realize on their own that unfair treatment, discrimination, greed and selfishness are evil. 
      My goal is not to paint evangelicals as ignorant. I am an evangelical and don’t think I am ignorant nor are most of the evangelicals I know. When I referenced evangelical denial of racial issues I am referencing a specific sociological study that you can read in “Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America.” (At the end they also suggest some “where do we go from here” ideas that you might be interested in.) 

      So when I say that the stats show that evangelicals are more likely (than mainliners, secularists, etc) to deny racial inequality or blame lack of motivation on the part of blacks as the cause, I am quoting their analysis of the General Social Survey data and 200 plus interviews they conducted with white evangelicals across the country. But, to be honest, one of the main issues facing white, evangelical Christians is denial that this inequality exists. So presenting the social stats or the stories that help to remind us that we are not a post-racial world, is one small part of activism. You can’t provide solutions for a problem people don’t realize exists. So this is the first step. The others will follow in future posts.

      • Drew

        Erin,

        Secularism views equality as an end, while Christianity views equality as a means to the end.  This should always be apparent, and I’m not sure if it is in your post.

        We both agree that most people feel that something isn’t right.  As I said before, and as I’m sure I will say again, I am interested to see what the solutions are.  If there were easy solutions, they would already be in place.

        • http://twitter.com/erinvechols Erin Echols

          Don’t think there are any easy solutions, but there are a slew of researched backed solutions to a slew of issues relating to race, discrimination, etc. The problem is that they ask for sacrifice (giving up of some form of privilege, for example) from people who are often unwilling to sacrifice. 

          I think you might enjoy Chris’ post today if you haven’t seen it already.

  • Anonymous

    Point Blank – You might being going to Hell if you use a  Bible verse as a punch line to promote any agenda not of God-To all who claim to be Christians think about these two statements Love your neighbor as yourself!  Then he (Jesus) will say to those on his left, “Depart form me, you are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.  Why would he say this to all who don’t use there God given gifts wisely.  Maybe Jesus was Kidding?  I believe he was serious and we all need to proceed with Love, with respect, and on our knees thanking Jesus for his Blood sacrfice and read his Word — all of It. I used two verses and hope all read everything before and after those verses, the Bible states that it is our responsibility as Christians to arm ourselves with the Word Of GOD.

  • Pingback: Debt and Gospel: Elizabeth Warren and the CFPB, 3. | Valued Exchanges

  • http://bytheirstrangefruit.com StrngeFruit

    Erin-

    Thoroughly enjoying the dialogue that is happening here. You navigate it all with grace, style, and insight. Brava!

    I love that you bring up the FHA history and the impossibility of academic legacy in admissions. This is a subject near and dear to my heart. I would love to continue dialog with you. Perhaps have you guest post at By Their Strange Fruit (a blog I run that is dedicated to issues of racism and Christianity).

    • Erinvechols

      Hey. I am just now seeing this. I stopped getting comment updates after a while. My email is erinvechols@gmail.com if you want to chat. 

  • http://www.singleparentcenter.net/single-parenting/single-parent-grants.html grants for single mothers

    Thanks for such a beautiful share. I really appreciate the information that you have shared but I also enjoy the way you have written the post. I loved every bit of it specially the information you have regarding the single mothers that really touched my soul i just enjoyed reading it and bookmarked your site for further posts of your blog.

  • Pingback: Blinds

  • Marc Kivel

    For what it is worth: I’m not sure why some pink tinged folk (unless you’re albino white is hardly descriptive) get upset when it’s pointed out that in many societies – not just in the USA – there’s a preference given to folks with lighter rather than darker skin tones. Having noted that, I suppose the question needs to be, “So did Jesus and the early Church bring salvation and support only to the Jews or to any who believed in Him?” And from a Believer’s perspective, isn’t that the same question we face today?

    How we go about supporting others varies with our time, talent and treasure we’ve been given by God at these ongoing moments. What does not vary is our Lord’s teaching that as we do for the least of our fellows we do for Him. And in this sense perhaps we would do better to act as if color blind – to work outward from family to neighbors to our communities in ever larger arcs and to encourage our brothers and sisters to continue this onward and outwardly.

    I cannot change the past but I can choose not to stand by the blood and suffering of a neighbor…I can choose to work with them as for Our Lord….thoughts?

×

TRENDING: The Biblical Definition of Marriage and its Relevance to Marriage Equality>>