July 20, 2008
First Congregational Church in Thetford, Vermont, UCC
Wisdom of Solomon 12:13, 16-19; Romans 8:12-25
The hope of this lesson
The challenge with submitting a sermon title by mid-week so that it can be printed
in the bulletin, is that I don’t know what the sermon is ultimately going to say until the
writing is complete. It is very much a process, one that often starts from a scripture
passage, but the destination is unknown prior to arrival. Today’s title, The Hope of
Things Unseen, captures this process as well as referring to the Lectionary passage from
Paul’s letter to the church in Rome. For in taking up the task, I have to trust, I have to
have faith that God is in this process. I have to hope that the sermon will be finished by
Sunday morning, and that its message will be meaningful to the congregation, relevant to
your situation and useful to support your ongoing journey into unseen territory.
As the week progressed I found myself reflecting more and more on the film
some of us viewed last Sunday night, Uncovering Racism in Vermont, a project of the
Uprooting Racism Task Force, and the conversation that followed it. We all know that a
large reason I was invited to be with you this summer was to bring a perspective to your
worship experience that is different from what is typical for this congregation. But I
don’t want to stand in this pulpit every Sunday and lecture you about racism, I really
don’t. However, African Americans living in this country are reminded of racism on a
daily basis. This is one point that was articulated clearly in last week’s film. A member of
the dominant culture can go without ever having to think about racism. But those of us
who are racial minorities don’t have that luxury.
Every person interviewed in the film had an equally important insight to offer.
And I wish that more of you had been able to join us in viewing it last week. Yes, this is
a shameless attempt to coerce you to attend tonight’s film, because this is a conversation
that needs to continue, and needs to include as many people as possible. One interviewee
on the DVD commented that Vermont hasn’t really had its civil rights movement yet.
This possibility rings true because a state with such a small minority population was
probably able to watch the civil rights movement of the mid twentieth century without
having to directly experience it. But the demographic of the Vermont is shifting. And
our nation is entering into a presidential election season that could get a whole lot uglier
than it has already been. So you’d pretty much have to bury your head in the sand not to
witness and acknowledge that racism is a reality in this country, even here in Vermont.
But why have this conversation in church? We go to church in part to find
sanctuary from some of the ugliness of the larger world. I agree that church should
provide some respite and renewal and refreshment so that we are able to reenter the larger
world and function without being swallowed by that ugliness. But the truth is that, as an
institution, the church suffers from some of the same patterns engrained in that outside
world. This aspect of our lives together needs to be addressed within these walls as well.
We come to church to find sanctuary. Sanctuary implies safety, and it is in such a safe
space that these kinds of conversations belong. The UCC’s call to engage in this “sacred
conversation” about race sets the tone for how to have this difficult talk in relationship
with each other and in relationship with God. The unseen hope of setting our
conversation in this context is in God’s presence and power to guide our thoughts and our
speech and our interactions within the safe container of loving relationship.
Invisible power
A minute ago I invited and encouraged all of you to attend tonight’s film, Living
on the Fault Line, and the conversation that follows it. What I’ve decided to do this
morning is reflect on some of the insights and questions that came up in response to last
week’s viewing and conversation. Let’s begin with a working definition of racism.
Webster’s Dictionary defines prejudice as a “Preconceived judgment or opinion; an
adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge; .
. . an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their
supposed characteristics.” (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam-
Webster, 1983.) It is power that distinguishes racism from simple prejudice.
Racism is racial prejudice plus power. Racism is the intentional or unintentional use
of power to isolate, separate and exploit others. This use of power is based on a
belief in superior racial origin, identity or supposed racial characteristics. Racism
confers certain privileges on and defends the dominant group, which in turn sustains
and perpetuates racism. Both consciously and unconsciously, racism is enforced
and maintained by the legal, cultural, religious, educational, economic, political and
military institutions of societies. Racism is more than just a personal attitude. It is
the institutionalized form of that attitude (National Council of Churches, Policy
Statement on Racial Justice, New York: National Council of the Churches of Christ
in the U.S.A., 1984)
In the opening segment of the Uncovering Racism DVD we watched last week, a
woman of color who lives in Brattleboro described an incident in which she and her
companion were stopped by police on I-91 for a broken tail light on their vehicle. Though
she was driving, and they had already been ticketed for the tail light a few miles earlier,
her companion was detained and interrogated because, as an African American male, the
authorities assumed that his business in Vermont involved drug trafficking. It takes
power to profile people, to authorize unmerited action based solely on prejudice. The
National Council of Churches’ definition of racism (above) goes on to distinguish two
related forms of racism: individual and institutional.
The first consists of overt acts by individuals, which cause death, injury or the
violent destruction of property. This type can be reached by television cameras; it
can frequently be observed in the process of commission. The second type is less
overt, far more subtle, less identifiable in terms of specific individuals committing the
acts. But it is no less destructive of human life. The second type originates in the
operation of established and respected forms in the society, and thus receives far
less public condemnation than the first type (NCC, Policy…).
Institutional Racism is one of the ways organizations and structures serve to
preserve prejudice. Intended or not, the mechanisms and functions of these entities
create a pattern of racial injustice (NCC, Policy…).
Invisible communities
Two more definitions will help us distinguish between the terms multiracial and
multicultural, these from a glossary of terms compiled by the UCC Office of Racial
Justice in Cleveland, in an effort to develop a common language for discussion.
Multicultural:
? This term is used in a variety of ways and is less often defined by its users than
terms such as multiculturalism or multicultural education.
? One common use of the term refers to the raw fact of cultural diversity:
“multicultural education ... responds to a multicultural population.”
? Another use of the term refers to an ideological awareness of diversity:
“[multicultural theorists] have a clear recognition of a pluralistic society.”
? Still others go beyond this and understand multicultural as reflecting a specific
ideology of inclusion and openness toward “others.”
? Perhaps the most common use of this term in the literature is in reference
simultaneously to a context of cultural pluralism and an ideology of inclusion or
“mutual exchange of and respect for diverse cultures.”
? When the term is used to refer to a group of persons (or an organization or
institution), it most often refers to the presence of and mutual interaction among
diverse persons (in terms of race, class, gender, and so forth) of significant
representation in the group. In other words, a few African Americans in a
predominantly European American congregation would not make the
congregation “multicultural.”
? Some, however, do use the term to refer to the mere presence of some non-majority
persons somewhere in the designated institution (or group or society), even if
there is neither significant interaction nor substantial numerical representation.
Multiracial:
? Designating a context or ideology of racial pluralism: “Black, White, Asian,
Latino/a, Native American persons.” Multicultural generally intends wider
diversity, implying recognition also of gender, economic, and political differences.
? “Multiracial education” is preferred over multicultural education by some since it
conceptually addresses the issue of institutionalized racism more directly.
Multiracial refers to racial pluralism; while multicultural speaks to a wider spectrum of
diversity. These are distinct, yet intertwined concepts, both of which point toward
intentional practices of fuller inclusion. In its 1993 proposal for action on Becoming a
Multiracial and Multicultural Church, the United Church of Christ offered the following
definition of that goal
A multiracial and multicultural church is defined as a church that confesses and
acts out its faith in the one sovereign God who through Jesus Christ binds in
covenant faithful people of all races, ethnicities, and cultures. A multiracial and
multicultural church embodies these diversities as gifts to the human family and
rejoices in the variety of God’s grace (UCC M&M pronouncement).
The phrase, “rejoices in the variety of God’s grace,” is key here. As the definition
of multicultural above reveals, merely having the presence of non-majority persons in the
institution is not enough. One of the interviewees in the Uncovering Racism DVD made
a distinction between being “welcomed” into a church community, as a person of color,
and feeling “affirmed” by that community. She spoke about the importance of being able
to see/find herself, her culture, reflected in the worship service; to experience worship that
didn’t leave her asking herself, “why am I so invisible?” in the service. She spoke about
the importance of being able to participate in the group in ways that would be outside of
the preconceived, media inspired and supported boxes that she might be pigeon holed
into. She noted that African Americans are seen as entertainers, so she might be expected
to sing in the choir. But her involvement in other aspects of church life might be less
acceptable to some church members. She said that it is important for minorities to be able
to “share in a way that they are encouraged to be themselves,” and not be expected to
conform to the dominant culture’s format.
UCC multiracial/multicultural resources identify the question most commonly
asked about being a multiracial and multicultural church as, “How can we become
multiracial and multicultural if we and our community are primarily of one racial or ethnic
group?” The document suggests a self-reflection question. As a starting point
congregations could ask themselves, “What kinds of diversity are already present within
our congregation?” Multicultural, remember has a broad definition. Many cultures
already exist within every church. It could be helpful for congregations to cultivate an
attitude of curiosity and self-exploration. Another question churches could ask
themselves is, “What cultures are visible in the community but absent from the church?”
Where are the single young adults, for instance, and what would need to happen in
church (at least once in a while) for them to see themselves reflected in the worship
service? Have any of you heard of a U2charist service? It is a communion service set to
the music of the band U2, music that many younger people find more meaningful than
what is typically featured in church. What would church look like if various cultures
within the congregation planned and led worship from time to time, in a way that was
authentic for them? What would worship look like if it was led by and celebrated
women? What if the visual artists in the congregation planned and led worship? Or the
athletes and sports fans? Or people with particular disabilities? Wouldn’t everyone be
enriched by the variety of experiences?
One important challenge raised in the discussion last Sunday was about how to
celebrate difference in a way that doesn’t isolate those who reflect that difference,
particularly in the case of the children of the congregation. I loved watching Sesame
Street with my girls when they were little. But there was one game that bothered me.
Viewers were shown four objects and asked to identify which one was different, not a
part of the set. The song said, “One of these things is not like the others. One of these
things just isn’t the same. One of these things doesn’t belong here…” We have to be
sure that we are communicating that difference does belong here. Tonight’s film, Living
on the Fault Line, deals with the subject of transracial families created by adoption, and I
hope that we may gain some insight into the experience of children who are different in
this way, and also gain some sensitivity about how to minister to them in our church
settings in a way that celebrates who they are and helps prepare them to be in a world that
might not be as intentionally sensitive as the sanctuary of a church community.
Invisible connections
In response to the challenge of being multiracial and multicultural in a
homogenous setting, the UCC resource reminds us
Being committed to being a multiracial and multicultural church is a journey of
ongoing witness and faith. We don’t invent being diverse; we are already diverse,
global, beautiful and manifold. We expand our minds, hearts, and experiences by
seeking to be in solidarity with all God’s people (Shine)
In our conversation Sunday night somebody suggested that maybe we need to not
only be considering how to attract people of diverse cultures into our space, but also
exploring how we might connect with them in their space. The resource quoted above
mentioned being in “solidarity with all God’s people.” Solidarity doesn’t necessarily
mean being in physical proximity. But I believe that direct contact is the best way to
establish relationships and to break down presumptions that can become prejudice, and
with power, racism. When we interact with people we perceive as “different,” we come
to know them as individuals, not by the characteristics we might assign to their particular
cultural group. Once we know them, we can celebrate with them, appreciate the gifts
they bring to our world, even if they are not regularly found sitting in our pews.
Becoming multiracial and multicultural is an invitation to see a bigger picture. If
I’d only known the UCC from my experience at my home church in Greensboro, I
would’ve had a very narrow view of the denomination. Because I have seen the
intentional diversity cultivated across the whole denomination, I’m proud and honored to
be a part of living into God’s vision of community through the vehicle of the United
Church of Christ.
Becoming multiracial and multicultural is an invitation to build relationships in
mutuality and solidarity with our sisters and brothers of different cultures. The first
assumption underlying a sacred conversation on race is that “humans exist in and for
relationship. Our ‘calling’ as humans is to be in proper relationship with each other and
with all of creation. This involves mutual accountability toward each other’s well-being”
(Perkins and Otto, Principles and Assumptions Underlying a Conversation on Race).
Sacred relationships amongst humans are not hierarchical, paternalistic, condescending or
disrespectful. This morning’s scripture passages highlight our relationships because that is
where the power of invisible hope – the hope of things unseen – lies; in relationship to
each other and to God.
Invisible power, remix
I began this reflection with some basic definitions, one of which explained how
power is needed to sustain institutional racism. The dominant group maintains its
privilege by wielding this power. Some members of the dominant group benefit from
power and privilege unknowingly. While they individually are not racist, they benefit
from the structure of racism that operates almost invisibly. One interviewee on the
Uncovering Racism DVD noted that, as progressive as our state is, there is institutional
racism in Vermont, as there is in the rest of the US. He said that as a person of color, this
fact is known to him, but that it is possibly unknown by much of the dominant culture.
He said that members of the dominant group can choose to think about racism or not to
think about it. He said that he didn’t have that choice. That statement is one of the best
examples of privilege I’ve heard. Minority populations have to know how to adapt to the
dominant culture as a survival mechanism. Their lives depend on knowing how the
dominant culture works. In contrast, those in the dominant culture can live their whole
lives without having to learn anything about the minority cultures.
Becoming multiracial and multicultural would mean making the effort to learn
what life is like for those outside the mainstream group. But it is much more than
knowing about and tolerating diversity. One of the interviewees on the DVD said that it
is crucial for dominant group members to advocate for non-dominant individuals.
Members of the dominant group need to not only recognize their power, they need to
claim it and use it to benefit those outside this main group.
I’ve done a diversity training exercise that uses a drawing of a flower as a tool.
Around the center of the daisy-like blossom are two rings of petals, a ring of large petals,
and a ring of smaller ones drawn on top of the larger ones. Participants are asked to label
the large petals with several categories, including gender, race, education level, economic
status, sexual orientation, religion, first language, able bodiedness, and age. Then on the
smaller petals, participants are asked to identify the dominant group in American culture
for each of those categories. For example, the gender with power in the US is male. And
Christianity is still the dominant religion (i.e. – if you practice a different faith tradition,
you’re not likely to get your holy days off from work or school as a nationally recognized
holiday). Participants are then asked to count how many petal sets identify them in a
power group. It is easy to think of ourselves as powerless. I’m an African American
woman, which makes me a double minority. I’m also introverted in an extrovert world,
vegetarian in a carnivorous world, and I use a Macintosh computer in a PC world. I
could dwell on my out-group characteristics and feel downtrodden. But I am also an
educated, able-bodied, heterosexual, English speaking, Christian who lives above the
poverty level. And I’m old enough to be taken seriously, but not so old that my mental
capacities are automatically questioned. I sit inside more power groups than I am outside
of. That’s true for all of us in this room. So the real question is, “How are you going to
use your power?” It’s not a sin to be privileged. The sin is in not using the power of that
privilege for the highest possible good. The sin is in denying our relationship, our
responsibility and accountability to one another.
When we gather in this sanctuary on Sunday mornings, the power of God’s Holy
Spirit trumps the power of all the flower petals. At least for this hour, we have a chance
to live in the hope of things unseen. We practice living in the invisible reality that we call
God’s kingdom in our prayers even as we ask that it come to Earth as it is in heaven.
Choosing to become a multiracial and multicultural congregation is an attempt to live as if
God’s kingdom has already come to Earth. It is a step towards reconciling our
relationships with each other, which ultimately will lead to reconciliation of all of us with
God.
It is work, to be sure. But our faith teaches us that the victory is already won.
The gift of the resurrection is the hope of things unseen.
So let the powerful people of God say, “Amen.”
Sermon 07/20/2008