UUs
and the Quest for Racial Justice
First
delivered at UUCB on February 11, 2007
“I am a
racist.”
Until recently I wasn’t aware of the semantic problems with that sentence, but
according to one perspective it makes no sense. As an individual I can
discriminate against someone based on race. I can be a bigot, but I am not
racist. Why? Institutions are racist. They can influence and perpetuate
discrimination and bigotry. Sadly, they can do so even when the members of the
institution are not even aware of the racism inherent within the system.
This may seem like splitting hairs, but how we understand the way we use our
language is often critical to making sense of complicated issues. Despite the
prevalence of current thinking urging us to view life in simplistic terms, all
issues are complicated. We are enmeshed in a system. Our relationships are
interconnected in ways we don’t even realize. When one of us moves, we all
move even if the movement is virtually imperceptible. So I ask you this morning
to think of discrimination as an individual choice and racism as an aspect of an
institution.
So as far as my opening sentence goes, I am not a racist and hopefully, if I pay
attention to the choices I make I also do not discriminate against anyone based
on his or her race. However, when the terms are distinguished this way, I have
to ask another question. Am I in an institution that is racist?
I look at our County Commissioners and Melbourne City Council and have to wonder
where black power operates in our community. Having listened to arguments for
and against the renaming of Airport Rd. to Martin Luther King Blvd., watching
the proposal defeated and the subsequent loss of the alternative proposal to
rename the Melbourne Auditorium after Dr. Martin Luther King, I cannot interpret
the results as anything but institutional racism.
That’s a more obvious example, but what about something a little more obscure.
Many of us may have worked for, or currently work for, companies with a
seniority policy when it comes to layoffs. You may wonder what that has to do
with racism. I mean it’s only
fair those who have worked for the company longest keep their jobs when times
get tight, right? Besides making poor business sense—I won’t get into why
you keep the most productive rather than the longest employed—in a given point
in time it could indeed be racist. Consider a company that recently began hiring
minorities, but then hits a rough spot in the business cycle. What happens? The
minorities are the first to go, never to rise to positions of leadership and
once again you have a white dominated business. When we’re inside the system
it is very hard to evaluate it from objective perspectives.
If our government, and possibly our businesses, function in a racist
manner—whether intentionally or habitually—what about our denomination? I
thought I knew the answer to that until I read Unitarian Universalism and the
Quest for Racial Justice. (UUA 1993) Would it surprise you to learn the
Unitarian Universalist Association is a racist institution?
At least it
was, I’m not entirely sure how far we’ve come but I suspect we have more
work to do. The UUA commission on Appraisal released a study in 1983 of the
Black Empowerment Controversy within the denomination occurring from
approximately 1967-1970. This study mentions a racism audit of the UUA—not
individual UUs, affiliated organizations or congregations—the UUA conducted in
1980. The Rev. Victor H. Carpenter’s, 1983 Minns lectures were about the
controversy and help clarify the Commission on Appraisal’s rather dry report.
However, twenty-four years have elapsed since then and I’m not entirely sure
we’ve progressed terribly much.
It’s true Dr.
Sinkford, the UUA president, is an African American, but does that give us a
good indication of the systemic environment of our institution or is his
leadership an anomaly? What power do black UUs have in Unitarian Universalist
congregations and the UUA? I’m afraid I don’t have an answer for that. I
sent an inquiry to the Chair of the UUA Anti-Racism Assessment and Monitoring
Team requesting information on our current status, but did not receive a
response. I sincerely hope that is not indicative of a lack of interest and
activity on the part of this committee.
You’ll notice
the question I asked referenced power rather than presence. What power do black
UUs have in our congregations and the UUA? I gather we can all look around and
within a few quick seconds recognize the white middle-class demographics that
dominate this congregation. Many of us have expressed desire to have a more
diversified congregation, but clearly we aren’t taking any action on it. If we
were truly committed to a mission field of minority inclusion we would be doing
something about it—certainly taking
the steps to learn how to do it. I have to agree that we are very much in the
mold of Unitarian Universalist before and around us. We love to talk, speculate
and dream…but action comes to us slowly.
That may seem
like an odd way to talk about a denomination known for it’s social activism.
Or are we? I’m going to suggest we’re known for our social activists, not
for institutional social activism. In fact, the racism audit noted the same
thing. Individual UUs were abolitionists and civil rights activists, but
congregations and denominations were an entirely different matter. I think
presently this may be related to our reluctance to proselytize. You have to
admit we could be a lot better at calling attention to ourselves.
No, integration
into a congregation is not what the Empowerment Controversy was about. As the
very word suggests, it was about power. What degree of power and independent
decision-making were black UUs to have in the UUA? Some of you present today may
remember the strain this conflict placed on our denomination. At one point,
there was real concern the denomination would split like so many of our
congregations are want to do. Lawsuits resulted. Emotions ran high and a decade
later the anti-racism audit at the UUA was still able to measure fallout.
The controversy began at an emergency response meeting in October 1967. The
meeting was convened to determine what the denominational response to the summer
riots and the black power movement would be. This was a promising move because
it positioned UUs as the first denomination to make this consideration. At the
meeting, however, the black UUs excused themselves to another room and formed a
black Caucus. They returned with organizational and funding demands that rankled
the other participants. The black caucus insisted their demands be forwarded to
the Board with no amendment.
We don’t have
the time to go through the maneuverings of the subsequent three years, but I do
think it important to try to understand the perspectives of some of the
participants in the controversy. We have the UUA, the Black Unitarian
Universalist Caucus and their group the Black Affairs Council with their white
supporters known as FULLBAC, Black and White Action/BAWA. Far be it from me to
speak for these groups, but I’ll do my best to give a very high level view of
the situation.
The Caucus/BAC
and FULLBAC insisted on the empowerment of black members in our congregation
through means of not only committee appointments, but also primarily
decision-making and the exclusive authority to utilize funds designated
specifically for their programs. BAWA felt the black-only approach violated our
stated policies of not supporting groups that were organized strictly on racial
lines. It was undemocratic. The Rev. Victor H. Carpenter makes an excellent
point however, when he says, “What occurred within our Unitarian Universalist
ranks was not a rejection of democratic method but a revolutionary demand that
it be put into practice.” (UUA 1995, 57)
The UUA’s position could be seen as a rock in a hard place, but they had their
own power issues at play. Who dictated funding decisions? The Board or the
General Assembly. BAWA asked for funding, but BAC said they would refuse funding
if BAWA received anything. The General Assembly of 1968 voted overwhelmingly to
fund BAC. But the UUA’s administration of the budget and their decisions
resulted in a spontaneous walkout at General Assembly a year later.
By 1970, the
black caucus resigned as an associate organization of the UUA and the
institution, with its inherent racism in place, continued as before. As I
mentioned before, I was unable to obtain a more recent racism audit or
assessment. But I think some observations can be made.
The UU ministry
has certainly improved with respect to percentage of black ministers serving
congregations and the denomination. At the time of the 1983 study, the record of
black ministers in our ministry was dismal. I’m not sure to what degree the
black ministry is empowered today, but numerically there has been an
improvement.
We remain a
denomination of predominantly white middle class suburban congregations. Our
concern with civil rights for African Americans and racial justice appears to
have waned with women’s rights and now homosexual/transgender rights gaining
priority.
On the other
hand, individual discriminatory action indicating pervasive racism within our
society alerted the UUA to the continuing problem. I refer to the situation at
General Assembly in Dallas in 2005 where white UUs assumed black UU youths to be
valets and bellhops. This insult was taken very seriously by the UUA. I can
easily imagine surprise on both sides. I do not consider myself overtly
discriminatory, but I do function in a racist society. Therefore it is certainly
possible I could find myself in a similar situation.
Ostensibly, we
UUs are on a quest for racial justice. And in order to move in that direction we
must acknowledge where we have been and determine where we are now. We must do
so honestly and realistically regardless of the discomfort it may bring us.
Just recently I
saw a blurb in the newspaper regarding comments made by a Virginia state
legislator. The state legislature was debating the proposal for a formal apology
to African Americans for the centuries of slavery. This politician not only
vehemently opposed the measure he flat out stated Jews should apologize for the
murder of Jesus Christ. A grown man, ostensibly educated, makes such bold
pronouncements in 2007!
I’ve heard
many of my contemporaries scoff at the notion of apologies to the black
community for their period of bondage. In my opinion, it’s the very least the
white power structure can do. The very least! The obvious argument, and
admittedly a logical one, is that none of the African Americans alive today were
subject to enforced servitude. Clearly not, but their ancestors’ status as
objects rather than subjects is very much a reality in the current psyche.
Anthony Pinn,
in his book Terror and Triumph: The Nature of Black Religion poignantly
and disturbingly recounts the affect of the Middle Passage, the Auction Block
and subsequent post-slavery lynching. “Through this ritualized manipulation of
African bodies, new social arrangements complete with existential and
ontological ground rules are put in place. It is at this point, through this
ritual of reference, (the auction block) that the African is finally made fully
aware of his or her new relationship to the world. This ritual meant
objectification for slaves; it symbolized domination and subjectivity for whites
who participated in it both directly and indirectly.” (Pinn 2003, 49)
Human beings
ritually transformed into objects—just another farm tool or household
appliance. Our society is sometimes willing to grant mitigating circumstances to
a criminal defendant based on an abusive and neglectful upbringing. All of us
recognize that truly abusive parenting can result in serious emotional and
psychological. So why are we so reluctant to recognize the damage centuries of
slavery can affect on generations of their descendants? And that’s exclusive
of the discrimination, marginalization and violence perpetrated after
emancipation. I think its important to note emancipation resulted in negative
freedom rather than positive freedom. Slaves were liberated from bondage.
They were not freed to achieve or exercise power. Emancipation granted
freedom from, not freedom to—a most critical distinction.
Slaves were
emancipated in 1865 with the ratification of the 13th amendment to
the U.S. Constitution. My grandmother was born in 1910. The difference between
her birth and the emancipation of the slaves is the same gap to us today as
something that occurred in 1962. That doesn’t sound all that long ago, does
it? Is it any wonder African Americans were still objects to her? My
mother-in-law was born just 69 years after slavery ended. The life span of my
mother-in-law and those of some ex-slaves may well have overlapped. That time
gap would be to us today as something that occurred in 1938. I’m willing to
bet we have some people in this room who were alive in 1938.
Now here is
another case in which language can be very telling. When my grandmother referred
to African Americans they were “blacks,” or “coloreds.” When we were in
Key West a few weeks ago, the chickens fascinated my children. At one point they
spotted a black rooster causing much delight given its unusual coloring. A few
minutes later we passed by a black man sitting beside the road. Our three year
old looked at me and said, “Mom, a black person!” Now this wasn’t said in
the tone of voice conveying the impression he’d never seen one before, just an
observation much like the attention he gave the rooster. My first instinct was
of course to cringe, but then I thought about the difference between my
grandmother and my son. He would have been “a black” to her but he was a
“black person” to my son. You may find this trivial, but I think there is an
important point to be made here.
I don’t think
the objectification of minorities has ended nor is it likely to without
courageous and prophetic voices inspiring us to action. Objectifying people is
what enables us to engage in warfare, ignore cries of hunger and pleas for
justice. Racism is a most insidious form of objectification because it is
inherent in the very fabric of our society and therefore accepted as normative.
Our government’s foreign policy is riddled with racism. True the people of
Darfur possess no oil reserves, which would make them more likely candidates to
receive our help, but I have every reason to believe that were they blond,
blue-eyed and pale-skinned U.S. armed forces would be on the ground by the
middle of last week.
Power. White America has it and we don’t want to give it away. We don’t want
to give it away because we have been conditioned to perceive power as a zero sum
game. Larry Kent Graham, a pastoral counselor, is sensitive to power structures
and the needs of the oppressed. He says, “Persons seeking care (and I’ll
argue all oppressed groups are ultimately in the position of seeking care) are
enmeshed in destructive power arrangements and seek to gain power to maintain
their integrity and to creatively change their contextual situation.” (Graham
1992, 64) We have a destructive power arrangement that takes the form of
control, exploitation and oppression. We need to transition to a bi-polar power
arrangement that takes combines agency and receptivity. Where influence is
exchanged and creativity can flourish. Again quoting Graham, “All entities
must have the power of agency, or the ability to endure and to shape their
environment and their own becoming, if they and the world are to be enriched.
Agential power is the energy by which creativity reaches its goals, and which
complements the capacity of organized structures to be receptive.” (Graham
1992, 63)
Guess what? That may very well take a rebellion to achieve. I learned something
important about myself when reading Unitarian Universalism and the Quest for
Racial Justice. At first I mentally positioned myself within the BAWA camp
that argued for interracial cooperation, but by the time I completed the book I
was firmly on the side of the Black Caucus/FULLBAC. I will always be curious
about my reality had I been operative in the Empowerment Controversy.
I learned that integration is not racial justice when it is assimilation. I
better understand why a friend of mine in high school so thoroughly detested The
Cosby Show. She insisted the show was not about a black middle class family, but
a show about a white middle class family that had very deep tans. I don’t know
if that is entirely fair to Bill Cosby, but I see her point.
I learned that I am indeed inclined to a patronizing position with respect to
African Americans deciding what is best for their own communities. I’m a
typical liberal I suppose. We always know what’s best for everyone else. I
should pay more attention to Felix Adler who said, “Act so as to encourage the
best in others, and by so doing you will develop the best in yourself.” (Ericson
1988, 10) His statement can easily refer to power arrangements as well as
transcending the Golden Rule for ethical behavior.
As the Rev. Carpenter said in 1983, “Rather than abandoning our democratic
methodology, black Unitarian Universalists pointed out that we have never acted
upon its precepts, since we had heretofore seen fit to exclude them from
meaningful leadership roles.” (UUA 1995, 56) Likewise, the great democratic
experience we call the United States has yet to fully engage our founding
precepts. There is no doubt we have come quite a long way from the days of
trading human beings like horse flesh because of the color of their skin. But we
still have quite a way to travel before we become, not color blind, but color
appreciative.
Racial justice is a thoroughly religious matter because it demands soul work. We
are diminished as spiritual beings when we perpetuate a system that fails to
affirm the worth and dignity of every person. Our religious impetus is to
increase love, promote justice and preserve ecological harmony.
Because of the systemic nature of existence, I firmly believe Unitarian
Universalism to be a religion that can change the world for the better. We can
set an example in our daily lives, lobby our decision-makers and actively work
for the empowerment of all oppressed peoples. We can create a society that
promotes and affirms the collective human experience in all its glorious
diversity. Fear and hatred, which are all to often followed closely be violence,
lose their hold over us when “other” is celebrated as different but
experienced as “same.”
Peace be
with you.
Copyright
© 2007
Ann
Fuller, February
2007
WORKS
CITED
Ericson,
Edward L. 1988. The Humanist Way: An Introduction to Ethical Humanist Religion. New
York: The Continuum Publishing Company.
Graham,
Larry Kent. 1992. Care of Persons, Care of World: A Psychosystems Approach to Pastoral
Care and Counseling. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.
Pinn,
Anthony B. 2003. Terror and Triumph: The Nature of Black Religion. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press.
UUA
Commission on Appraisal & The Rev. Victor H. Carpenter. 1993. Unitarian
Universalism and the Quest for Racial Justice. Boston: UUA.
Up
What Now?
Easter as a UU
Quest for Racial Justice
The Gift of Belonging
Earth Day Vacation
Non-Theist Ministry
The Religious Right
The Worst Sermon
When Paradigms Clash
Transcendentalism for Dummies
Native American Spirituality
Humanist Elements in UUism
What Is Patriotism?
Mature Spirituality
What Remains of the Goddess
|