[W]hite evangelicals view the race problems as (1) prejudiced individuals, resulting in poor relationships and sin, (2) others trying to make it a group or systemic issue when it is not, or (3) a fabrication of the self-interested.
Given that issues of inequality, systemic injustice, and group conflict are not part of their assessment, we did not expect to hear these addressed as part of the solution. And we rarely did. What we did hear from many was what others have called the "miracle motif." The miracle motif is the theologically rooted idea that as more individuals become Christians, social and personal problems will be solved automatically. What is the solution to violent crime? Convert people to Christianity, because Christians do not commit violent crimes. What is the solution to divorce? Covert people to Christianity, because Christians are less likely to get divorced? What is the solution to hate problems of race? ..."If everybody was a Christian, there wouldn't be a race problem. We'd all be the same."1
I'm not pointing the finger because I recognize my own tendency to want to believe the miracle motif. But I have some questions:
Are the people who expressed these opinions on the receiving end of the problem? Are they victims of violent crime? Have they been abused by their spouses or had adultery committed against them? Have they or any family members been discriminated against, not just individually but collectively? Or have they been insulated and detached?
This argument of Christianity changing societal problems was used by those who minimized the issue of slavery in that the "obvious abuses of the system would dissipate with the conversion of masters and slaves."2 Would it have been better to wait on that issue? But how long is long enough? Isn't it easier to take the long view when you are in the position of privilege?
What about abortion? I am pro-life all the way, and I applaud brothers and sisters who evangelize outside of abortion clinics. But that is not the only tactic of the pro-life movement. There are many organizations that lobby to overturn Roe v. Wade and change laws that promote abortion. Then isn't it inconsistent to say that we do not need to pursue social justice in other areas? Shouldn't we be pro for all life?
Do we have an evangelical version of the prosperity gospel? Not the crass "God will give me a Learjet" version but a "Come to Jesus, and we will all be middle-class and live happily ever after." Is our eschatology over-realized when we deny the very broken state of the world? The gospel isn't a magic wand that waves our problems away, but do we treat it that way?
I don't have all the answers, but it's easy to overlook preconceived ideas until we starting thinking about why we think the way we do.
1. Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America, Michael Emerson and Christian Smith, Oxford University Press, 2001, pg. 117.
2. Ibid.30.
Nice post-- thought provoking. I might suggest that the miracle motif is correct--but we can't wait around for it. In fact, we should a feedback loop that leads to amplification. We should address these problems of inequality, which will make our faith look more genuine--which will attract more and increase diversity--which will help.... The miracle motif may not be achieved by a bootstrapping approach (clearly it needs supernatural intervention)--but sure seems like the best approach.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the problem is that we think action and "miracle motif" are mutually exclusive when they are not. James 2:14-16 comes to mind. Action doesn't mean there isn't a need for the gospel to change hearts.
ReplyDelete