FOR SEVERAL YEARS, I've reflected on how my social location and background affect my faith. How does being a white, twentysomething, female, middle-class, physically able, English-speaking, American affect how I interpret the Bible, whom I relate to within the church, or how I view my call? I now do ministry out of the truth that difference and diversity profoundly affect faith and church witness; acknowledging this truth is not an excuse to lump people into stereotypes, or a reason to mistakenly claim that the eternal truth of the gospel is somehow roped in by social factors. It is, however, a way to understand that faith is connected to the communities we are part of; hermeneutics are shaped by experience; prejudice is influenced by race, gender, age, and class. Brokenness and divisions based on these social categories in our present world have always pushed against the proclaimed shalom of the coming kingdom of God that will be made up of "every nation, tribe, people and language." Why then should the Christian church, the Evangelical Covenant Church, desire diversity? And what can I add to the sometimes difficult conversation about the challenges of racial/cultural divides, from the perspective of a white person? The church's call is no less than to represent Christ on earth, to be ambassadors or "little Christs" that embody the coming kingdom by being a community that - in contrast to the rest of society - is united across differences. Desiring diversity is truly hungering for the relational righteousness the kingdom points to; it is not a politically-correct value of post-modernity, or code for encouraging assimilation or loss of distinctiveness, or a way to advocate token representation of various ethnic groups, ages, classes, or gender. True kingdom community stems from the biblical witness, is influenced by our history, and results in specific choices for the white community within the church of today. The biblical narrative continually points us toward a kingdom community based on intentional diversity that repairs societal divisions. We're told that Jesus came to abolish racial, gender, and power relationships that were accepted as normal in his day: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female..."(Gal. 3:28). Paul describes members within the larger church as diverse parts of a body in which each need to play their own distinct, multi-faceted role: "The hand cannot say to the foot, I do not need you." Class divisions were struck down throughout the prophetic witness and in Jesus' call to "proclaim good news to the poor . . . recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free" (Luke 4:18, 19). We know the stories of how widows from different ethnic groups were to receive equal access to charitable food distribution (Acts 6), how Paul adapted to various cultures to present Christ in a way that diverse audiences could understand, and that Jesus' illustration of the great commandment to love our neighbor involved a hero from a despised ethnic group (a Samaritan) who showed costly compassion toward someone of another social group. Jesus broke social divisions by associating with "unclean" or socially separate people like tax collectors and prostitutes. And the early church, which spread quickly through diverse populations in the Mediterranean world, was to be known for its love for one another (John 13:35). Theologian Miroslav Volf explains that the vertical power of the cross (from Jesus to God) makes the horizontal action of reconciling people to each other possible, even through our differences.ii God's kingdom is described as a place of wholeness, where every nation and tribe will be gathered together in worship of the Lamb (Rev.7:9). We know what we should look like in the church; we have a picture of what we might be, someday. Why is it so hard for the church to resemble that reality today? Why do white people often feel attacked or misunderstood, guilty or stuck as being the bad guys? Why do people of color often feel like they have to explain how race matters to them on a daily basis, why they don't represent an entire racial group, how they have to work twice as hard to get half as far, and why they often live in fear or anger at the overwhelming structures that limit so much of their lives? Into this grand vision of a future kingdom community based on Jesus' message, we must insert our present reality of a divided, broken world. Sadly, the church is not exempt from this racism, prejudice, power struggle, and brokenness; in fact, the church often promotes the divisions. Emerson and Smith point out in Divided by Faith that historically, white evangelicals in the U.S. have helped preserve racially separate congregations/communities by not choosing to be countercultural, and because they often did not see African-American slaves, First Nation peoples (Native Americans), or immigrant groups as fully human.iii The authors submit that due to white evangelicals' social conditions throughout U.S. history (i.e., having power, influence, options, voice, and resources), they failed to notice sinful structures that often benefited them. White churches in South Africa were fundamental as the architects of the racist politics of apartheid, frequently quoting Scripture to support their rampant violence and oppression of the other 97% of the population for centuries. Even though overt racism is usually not tolerated in today's churches, the divisions continue in more subtle ways. Sunday mornings in the U.S. are still very segregated based on race and class (Wettersten’s article
noted materialism as a growing division).
After overtly racist practices were abandoned,
church growth strategies like the “homogenous
unit principle” still gained popularity
– the concept that people naturally attracted
others similar to them in race, class, and
culture, so churches should be built where
many similar people could be attracted to
an enculturated message of the gospel. This
usually resulted in mostly white churches in
suburban contexts. While there can be value
in this method that has effectively increased
church membership numbers, is it always
faithful? What message of desiring similarity
or sameness did Jesus model for us? What
would the church look like if it attracted the
Samaritans, the prostitutes, and the outcasts
of our society?
Covenant membership is currently growing
fastest among communities of color,
through church plants and adoptions. Our
denomination is often known as a church
family who is welcoming and open to racial
diversity. Many local congregations of color
have taken the hard but faithful road of
choosing to connect with a denomination that
is predominantly white; many white people
have also worked on building relationships
of trust, honesty, and shared power in our
churches – praise God for these steps forward!
But there are also many places where
our quest toward kingdom community needs
to be strengthened as a denomination.
Some white churches complain that
there are no people of color in their community
to build relationships with; I humbly
submit that we all must become better at
seeing “invisible,” overlooked people. When
I visited members of a small-town church
in California, the idea of inviting the local
Mexican fruit pickers to the “Anglo” service
seemed foreign, as did singing songs in Spanish
to welcome another culture group. Some white churches say that they are always open
to diversity, assuming that people of color
should come to “their” churches; yet shared
ownership/leadership is a must for any multicultural
congregation. It is likely a big step
for a person of color to try attending a white
church and be the minority in the service, so
it is important to start slow, and first listen
and learn from diverse constituencies.
Perhaps the most important thing that I
have learned about how my whiteness affects
my faith and ministry is that being white
means the luxury of having choices. Part of
the cost of white ethnic identity in the U.S. is
that we may be unaware of how profoundly
race affects the personal and structural
dimensions of life for many people every
day – whether it means being careful to not
drive through certain parts of town, not being
able to find products or food that are from
their culture, or being unsure if their racial
background is keeping them from getting a
job or good service at a restaurant. Whiteness
means being able to exist in a world where
“normal” often means us. Our choice as
white Christians really is a privilege – do we
want to do our part to work toward kingdom
community? This choice can admittedly be
overwhelming or intimidating; we need to be
honest and generous with each other as we
learn and open ourselves to what God is asking
of us around issues of diversity.
White Christians also choose whether
to intentionally engage in breaking down
the divisions that race and sinfulness have
erected in the church and in the world.
This might mean gathering more information,
experiencing different cultural styles of
worship, and building authentic, long-term,
reciprocal relationships with people of color.
It means learning our own sense of ethnic
identity, overcoming feelings of guilt or
anger, and learning about white advocates of
kingdom community during the abolitionist
movement, the Civil Rights, and todayiv.

It means accepting the structural reality of
racism so that we can understand valid anger
from communities of color without feeling
personally attacked or minimizing our own
role. It may mean accepting that at times,
white people have to prove that they are allies,
yokefellows, and trusted fellow marchers
for justice to some people of color who
have experienced centuries of brokenness
and oppression, even at the hands of fellow
believers.
Ultimately, this choice is about being
faithful to what God is already doing and
responding with our small part. Why do we
desire diversity? Because God asks us to.
Because it is tremendously fulfilling when we
live it out. Because in it we get to see glimpses
of the kingdom of God. Because Jesus lived
and died so that we could.

ENDNOES
i. Paul Kivel, Uprooting Racism: How White
People Can Work for Racial Justice (New Society
Publishers, 2002), xii.

ii. For many people of color, using the term
“reconciliation” to describe the work of
repairing racial divides can be controversial,
as it conveys that at some point in history
there was racial harmony, a point to
“reconcile back to,” when that was never
the case. I maintain that using the term in
its biblical sense as the restorative work
Christ did through the cross, to bring a new
opportunity for righteous relationships both
vertically and horizontally, is still helpful.
This understanding of terms is part of why
the Covenant’s “Invitation to Racial Righteousness”
congregational experience does not use
the terminology of “Racial Reconciliation.”

iii. Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith,
Divided by Faith (Oxford University Press,
2001), 22.

iv. Kivel, 97.