Why has evangelicalism perpetuated rather than dismantled a racialized society?  White evangelicals are less likely than any other religious or demographic group in the United States today to believe that Blacks experience structural racial discrimination.  But is this blind spot a result of our theology or merely our cultural heritage or some other factor?  Sociologist, Michael Emmerson, has unearthed three cultural lenses of evangelicalism that help explain why, and Michelle Sanchez, in her book Color-Courageous Discipleship, has made that research easier to digest.

​

“Individualism – individualism understands the individual rather than the collective to be paramount.  When a plural you appears in the Bible, we often misread it as a singular you.  We rarely, if ever, think about what responsibility the larger church has to collectively dismantle racism.  Individualistic cultures, like ours, tend to miss the collective nature of sin.  Disciples in individualistic cultures often seek to address the problem of racism in a system, for example, by identifying and uprooting individuals – the bad apples – rather than identifying and addressing collective dysfunction.

​

Relationalism – the lens of Western evangelical relationalism attaches central importance to interpersonal relationships.  This derives in part from our evangelical emphasis on having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ – Which may be one of evangelicalism’s greatest strengths.  On the flip side, relationalism morphs into a weakness when it causes disciples to view most social problems as rooted in poor relationships.  Evangelicals tend to see most societal problems as a failure to love others as we love ourselves, which is no doubt partially true.  But absent from this is the idea that poor relationships might be shaped by social structures, such as laws, the ways institutions operate, or forms of segregation.

​

Disciples in relational cultures prefer conversations about racial reconciliation rather than justice, and they like to take countermeasures like getting people together, pursuing unity, or developing cross-racial friendships.  But these gestures are often regarded as shallow offerings by those on the receiving end.

 

Antistructuralism – white evangelicals often find structural explanations irrelevant or even wrongheaded.  Although much in Christian scripture and tradition points to the influence of social structures on individuals, the stress on individualism has been so complete for such a long time in white American evangelical culture that such tools are nearly unavailable.  (Zacchaeus’ response of repentance and the Apostles response in Acts 6 both show a structural response to inequity.)”

​

It is important that we understand that we all read scripture through a cultural lens.  It is therefore important that we come to understand our own cultural lens and how it shapes our understanding of scripture.  We can counteract the effect our lens has by constantly asking what the cultural context of the passage is and what did the original hearers feel when they heard the text, instead of asking ourselves what we feel when we hear the text.  A powerful example of how these practices can give us a more accurate understanding of scripture is the The Parable of the Good Samaritan.

​

And finally, we need to study scripture with people of a different skin color, who have different life experiences than our own.  And we need to become deliberate in seeking out Christian writers from a different racial tribe than our own.