Rev. Gay Clark Jennings, president of the Episcopal Church’s House of Deputies, blogged about mainline white Protestant reactions to recent events, noting that the past few weeks had been particularly bad for mainline churches. Jennings states that white Protestants seem caught in the grip of nostalgia, viewing the past as better than the future, and ignoring the many ways in which people who are neither white nor Protestant have been oppressed and punished both historically and today.
From the post:
If we white Protestants are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that the seismic demographic changes underway in American life are rocking our world and many of us are reeling instead of responding. White Protestants, once a dominant majority in the United States, now make up less than half the population, and the numbers continue to fall. Too many of us believe that if we could bring back the good old days when everyone went to church and aspired to be like us, things would be better. And we believe this even though history, reason, and common sense all tell us that the good old days were terrible for many, many people.
…
…neither our fears nor our privilege are justified in the face of our scriptures, which command us to welcome the stranger as we would welcome Jesus.
Jennings says that people are reeling instead of responding; do you see other examples of this type of reactionary behavior? Have the views and fears of white Protestants posed challenges for you, at church, in your community, or elsewhere? Or, do you see yourself in her comment–do you feel like you sometimes succumb to the idea that the past was the golden age, and the future is bleak?
Related: Welcoming the stranger… as long as they look and sound like me – Episcopal Café
All Content © 2017 Episcopal Café
If you want to know where an Episcopalian really stands on the end of the evils of white privilege, ask how s/he feels about GAFCON.
Audibly just chortled.
Mr. Streever,
If you take the time to look through my comments I think you will find it is a stretch, to say the least, to condemn any of my words as disrespectful, coarse/obscene language or an attack on one's person.
Jos:
I apologize for being so unclear! Thank you for sharing your feelings with me.
My message to you was focused on the 'respectful conversation' aspect because that is the issue at hand. I pasted the entire policy, but am specifically calling your attention to 'respectful conversation'. Please avoid snark when commenting here & remain focused on the goal of having respectful conversation.
Your previous response to the other commentator was inappropriate; it's snarky and not within the bounds of 'respectful conversation'. There isn't much more to parse here; I'm just advising you that we're going to have to moderate your comments more heavily if they continue in this vein.
Thanks--
I'm sorry a tad bit of levity (or even, gasp! theological conservatism) is present here on the Internet, John.
Jos:
Welcome to our site. You've become a prolific commentator quite quickly. Please do familiarize yourself with the comment policy; "Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted." As you may be able to infer, snark is generally frowned upon; we're looking for respectful dialogue & communication with heart & intention behind it. Making snide jokes, references, etc, are not a way to have a meaningful communication or dialogue, especially not on the internet, especially not in comments sections.
Thank you for your comments & interest in the site, and your help in keeping communication civil and respectful is appreciated.
Thanks for that thoughtful, loving comment. The trolls have triumphed; gone from the Cafe.
I'd rather endure Fox News than read this cynical, snarky crap. Peace to all, especially Mr. Laughon.
Maybe it seems disingenuous to wonder what exactly "white" has to do with "Protestantism" or "Christianity," but I'll wonder about that anyhow. The simple fact that people can think in terms of "White Protestantism," or the "Black church," or "Hispanic Catholics" says, in my opinion, more about bigotry and racist thinking by individuals, than it does about any Christian denomination.
A sidebar thought - as a gay male of mostly European ancestry, I have experienced the privilege of rejection by "Christians" of all races for both my skin color and for my sexuality, so singling out "White Protestants" for a repentance sermon on racism is perhaps not entirely fair.
Roger:
In America, experts define racism not simply by a matter of dislike, but by the very real systemic oppression of an individual solely based on race. While a person of color may not like a white person, it does not constitute racism, because the white person is not systemically oppressed by laws, salaries, employment, etc, etc.
It's like sexism; there is no such thing as sexism against men because men are not systemically oppressed. If a woman hates all men, she's not contributing to a wage gap for men, for instance. Whereas if a male employer sees all women as inferior to all men, it's definitely feeding into the systemic wage gap where women are paid less than men.
Being white--having white privilege--is incredibly important, especially when we're looking at the specific factors that Jennings is looking at (a majority of white people don't see police killings of black people as significant; they see it as isolated 'accidents'. The majority of black people do see it as a problem. That's significant, and it breaks down right across race lines.)
Your other point (that thinking about these things is the real racism) is confusing. If we can look at data and see, for a fact, that people of color experience discrimination & oppression, then ignoring that information and not talking about it is a guaranteed way to make matters worse & to increase racism. We absolutely do have to talk about things that are real, especially things that negatively impact the lives of people based on their skin color. Labeling that as racist seems counter-productive: racism is, after all, the systemic oppression of people on the basis of race alone, including the view that people are inferior because of their skin color. If we can't acknowledge that racism exists, and that people are divided on the matter of race, then we literally can't talk about racism.
I am not so sure why it would be unreasonable or even unnatural for a community of any shade or creed to be disappointed or feel negative feelings to see that community largely collapse.
Jos:
No one said it would be unreasonable. Jennings is making the point that people who didn't experience lynchings/racism/etc are incorrect when they say that the past was a 'golden age'; she isn't saying they are wrong to prefer a better life, but that they are incorrect if they think the past was better for *everyone*. (Which is precisely what the polls measured.)
The overall tone of the article and the blogpost seems overwhelmingly negative; "reactionary," "dominance" etc....
Would you expect a cheerful, sunny, hippy-dippy post about an earthquake? A murder?
White people having a hard time losing unearned privilege over people of color isn't really a wonderful thing; your question ('is it unreasonable to miss things') is misleading. It sidesteps the very real impact that we've had on the world around us, and ignores the reality of systemic ills, placing everything on the same 'neutral' territory of individual actions and emotions. The reality is that the things people feel nostalgia for go hand-in-hand with social, cultural, and economic dominance; the life style missed is one that came at the expense of others. That's tragic, and it may be hard to hear it or confront it, but it's absolutely something that we are called to do.
Lessee ... Anxious; nostalgic; untrusting; pessimistic; fearful; essentially and incurably racist ... Does that about describe your garden-variety white Protestant, especially one of an Episcopal cant?
What's such a miserable creature to do?
I know. It all sounds so awful to think of white Protestantism collapsing....
Begins to sound like the less Christian we become, the more Christian we are. The corollary, those who scream most about being Christian may be the least Christian of all. Could this be the reversal of fortune about which Jesus has been speaking in some recent readings?