“Can we all just get along?” These famous words by Rodney King ring out as an indictment against the kind of hatred that fomented the 1992 Los Angeles riots and cost King a serious beating at the hands of L.A. police. The call for “getting along” that King spoke of is more than simple tolerance of race. It is the deep commitment to intentionally become inclusive of race and culture as the family of God. We have come a long way as a nation and even in the Church, but as long as we have institutionalized queries with race identification as part of government and private surveys, forms, and legislation, we cannot say race is no longer an issue. It is just one of many instances where racial divide is categorized and institutionalized.
How do we even identify race? Is it about color and facial structure? Is it about culture? We hear arguments for and against such things as affirmative action or white privilege. Should we make a point of race when it becomes politically or socially advantageous to manipulate existing prejudice? It is certainly not an exact science and quite frankly is becoming more difficult as families are becoming more multinational, multiethnic, multicultural, and multiracial.
Just as an example of complication, sorting out Hispanic identification is not so easy. When did Hispanic lose its meaning as language orientation and become a race? If we decide that people from Central America, South America and Spanish-speaking Caribbean Islands are Hispanic (meaning Spanish-speaking regions), we eliminate Brazil and Haiti. Brazil is the largest South American nation where Portuguese is spoken and French is spoken in Haiti. Both are Latin-based languages, as is Spanish, Italian, and even Romanian. Perhaps Latino (Latin based) is a better description than Hispanic, but that can be problematic because as a male oriented word, it is gender biased, particularly from a non-Latin perspective. Furthermore, countries south of the U.S. are as diverse in population as those north of the border. Every shade of human skin is well represented in the Latin Western Hemisphere because of the mix of African, Asian, European, and indigenous peoples in differing proportions over the past four centuries.
Furthermore, cultures among the varying nations in Latin America have distinct differences. Culture includes food, music, and traditional costume, but it is much more. It expresses itself in how people view such things as beauty, family relationships, how they respond to authority, concepts of time and space, and much more.
One can easily see that race identification is not so simple, and needs rethinking for purposes of classifying demographics if those purposes still have a need to exist. Language is significant in attempting to categorize people groups. For example, references to Hispanics often imply non-white terms and evoke a non-white image, yet millions of Hispanics are white. Other Hispanics have Asian features (particularly in Peru, Chile, and Cuba) in varying combinations of shape and shade. Certain Caribbean nations also have large communities of people having ancestry from India. How do we account for such variety?
Even the term “people of color” referring to people who are not white can be seen as a biased term because “white” is also a color. And then, who is white? Only people of European ancestry? How do we categorize Middle Eastern peoples of varying skin shades? Calling white people Caucasian is problematic since most do not hail from the region of the Caucuses. Sensitivity to reject pejorative terms toward various groups is laudable, but I have often heard the words “lily white” (also a pejorative term) in reference to whites, usually in a negative context, used by the very people who speak against prejudice. When asked to identify oneself, perhaps the best response for everyone should be “other.” Either we need to stop classifying people by inadequate classifications of race or create a new language that is inclusive, equitable, and respectful to all.
We have seen church leaders call for reconciliation of past offenses toward various racial groups to be a top priority among churches, which is a righteous agenda. Reconciliation, however, needs to be more than a handshake and public photo shoot. Whereas past sins cannot really be adequately atoned, we can certainly be agents to change wrongs of the present. It does require us to see and do.
It’s fair to say that most churches are still fairly homogenous in terms of race and cultural construct with the excuse that people tend to be more comfortable with others of the “same face.” While there may be some truth to feelings of comfort, without intentional integration, inclusivity, and reconciliatory agendas, change does not happen. My hope is that our churches reflect an “all nations” look in a country that offers more diversity of people groups than most. It can only happen when leaders become intentional about integration in every program, every outreach, and every mission.
Race is a peculiarity that we think we can identify, but it really is indescribably elusive. Maybe the point is that we need to have new eyes in how we see humanity and better ethics in how we treat one another. My personal family may be peculiar in that we have representation from every continent except Antarctica, but I don’t think the penguins mind. We are many and we are one all at the same time. Isn’t that what heaven looks like?
Copyright 2016 by Eva Benevento
All rights reserved.