Kinfolk
Kinfolk
Episode 7: "Where Do We Go From Here?" with Dr. Michael Emerson
In today’s episode we talk with Dr. Michael Emerson, Department Head and Professor of Sociology at the University of Illinois, Chicago. He is the author of the classic: "Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America."
The killing of George Floyd hit home for Dr. Emerson, a native of Minneapolis. In this episode, Dr. Emerson talks to us about how his faith has shaped an incredible, long-standing body of work focused on religion, race, and the different ideological perspectives on justice, equity, and the moral right, in black and white communities of faith.
Dr. Emerson’s research contextualizes the division that we are witnessing in Christian communities today. When asked, “Where do we go from here?” he points to the need for truth and reconciliation commissions that include historical testimony and create plans for restitution. Emerson says this type of reconciliation is not only needed, it is the gospel work we have been called to do.
The real Christian faith, they would understand justices absolutely core. I mean, you, if you did any study of the Bible, that word comes up. So often that God's saying I am a lover of justice, the prophets constantly railing because of the injustice and so on and so forth. So if they see justice and Jesus, as in conflict, then they haven't known,
Speaker 2:Hey, kinfolk folk. I am here with dr. Michael Emerson. He is the professor and head in the department of sociology at the university of Illinois, Chicago published widely in the areas of race, religion, and urban sociology. He's the author of tons of books or seminal books that I've read and loved divided by faith. I've got him here with me today. Dr. Please introduce yourself.
Speaker 1:Hey, uh, so yeah, I'm dr. Michael Emerson and I've been looking forward to this. We're going to have some fun in this conversation and thank you all for listening. Well,
Speaker 2:Uh, let's get to it. So, um, I want to talk about man, your journey to sociology in general. What is sociology and why are you interested in it?
Speaker 1:Hmm. You know, I went to college and I did, I think what a lot of people do, uh, is I thought, well, I want to help people. So how do you do that? I started in psychology. I thought maybe I'll be a counselor or something. I stumbled into taking a class in sociology and it just rocked my world because when I was in psychology, I kept asking the professors, okay. The act like that way. And they kept saying, well, it's influenced by what goes on around you, you know, by your family, by society. Like, okay, well then we should talk about that. And so sociology is the discipline that lets us talk about that all the time, how our society, how our groups, how our friends and family influence us, influence each other.
Speaker 2:Uh, what, what, uh, propelled you to say, I'm gonna move past doing a bachelor's and I'm going to be a subject matter, matter expert as sociology.
Speaker 1:So I, I love learning and, but I felt like I was just getting started. And, uh, I was also looking for a profession that would allow me to, uh, spend time with my children flexibly. Like if they had a ball game or something, I wanted to make sure I could go. And so I thought, wow, if I love learning, why don't I become a professor? So onto the masters, onto the PhD,
Speaker 2:You grew up in Minneapolis?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Minneapolis area. That's right.
Speaker 2:Can you describe your, your childhood? What would you say? Uh, when, when someone says, how was childhood? What was it like?
Speaker 1:Uh, well, I'll say very white, um, Norwegian father, Italian mother. And, uh, we started out in Minneapolis. We eventually went into a suburb and then even my parents bought a little roller rink out in a small town. So starting at fifth grade until I graduated, I was in a small Minnesota town and, uh, pretty middle class. My father worked commuted to Minneapolis. My mother was usually home, sometimes running the roller rink. So just kind of a basic white life. I think our town was, uh, 100% white. Wow.
Speaker 2:So which brings up an interesting question that I wanted to ask your work seems to focus on race. Well, not all your work, you've got tons of work, but a lot of your work seems to function, to focus on race as a sociological sociological category in the American experience. Why is that
Speaker 1:Two things? So it started with, I mentioned my mother being Italian. And if you're familiar with Minnesota, you know, land of the Scandinavians and which my father fit into, but my mother never did. And I would watch how people found her bizarre. And then my grandfather lived with us and he was actually from Italy. So I was intrigued by that. And this town that we lived in, even though it was all Scandinavians, except for my mother and two others, uh, was completely divided in a, in a way that nobody would understand unless you were there. And it was Norwegians and Swedes on one side and Finnish folks on another, they went to separate churches. They use the spaces like the couple of restaurants in town separately. We never injure married after being age five. You weren't allowed to be friends and spend time together. So that really intrigued me. I was actually born in Chicago. So of college. I returned to Chicago and I was struck by the physical nature of Chicago that I could, where I went to school. I would get off the train and it was all African American. I'd walk, a couple blocks, all white. And of course the areas looked very different and that's really what, like, why is this, how can this happen? Yeah. So it's those things combined. Wow. Um, you also do work, uh,
Speaker 2:With religion and sociology. How'd you get there?
Speaker 1:We, I, yeah, like in grad school, I didn't study religion at all, but we had gotten a grant to study American evangelicals. Um, and I was just added to the grant. That wasn't one that I had applied for and they added me because like, well, we need someone to interview. African-Americans it tells you a little bit about the makeup of the group, but yeah. Uh, so then I started learning, you know, as a Christian, I was interested, but I hadn't formally studied it, but that was the impetus.
Speaker 2:And so it seems like a lot of things that were happening in your life personally, um, infused the type of scholarly work that you endeavored on. Um, speak to me specifically about man, how you came to faith as a Christian.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So I grew up in a home that was at best nominally. Uh, was it actually Catholic? And then we moved to, when we moved to this small Minnesota town, there was no Catholic church in the town or any of the towns around. So we started, uh, occasionally going to a Lutheran church. But these back then there was a group called, um, campus crusade, campus life. It was called and they would allow people to come onto our campus they're in school. So, uh, the particular leader would often sit with us at the lunch table. And one time he asked me to go out to have a dinner and he asked me those two famous questions. Right. Uh, if you were to die tonight, would you go to heaven and why? And I gave the standard answer. I hope so. Cause I try to be a good person. And, uh, that's when he shared the gospel with me, prayed to accept Christ there. And then a teacher that I had actually two that married. Um, they lived across the street from me and they really, they were strong. Christians really took me under their wing, mentored me as did this person that led me to Christ. And so that was the journey.
Speaker 2:And so as your journey through and trying to finish, uh, your master's and your PhD, were there any roadblocks? You know, cause I think probably, you know, during the time you would get in your doing your work, there was conflicts that there were, I like to say made up conflicts between, uh, this is faith. This is science. How did you reconcile that in the world that you came up in?
Speaker 1:Yeah, the way I reconcile is the way I teach my Christian students today, which is when you're studying a discipline, it's teaching you a method to know a method to know about God's creation. You are allowed to have your faith influence, what questions you ask and what motivations that you might have as long as you use that method that is designed as specified as the scientific method. So that's how I combine them and try to teach others to do.
Speaker 2:Hmm. Uh, so you're not afraid to say I come with a certain set of assumptions to everything that I, I do. I come with a certain Jesus is Lord. The resurrection is real, but I bring that to, uh, I, I, you're not, it seems like you're not afraid to say I bring that to every scientific endeavor. I, I have bar
Speaker 1:That's right out of the room, totally out of the blue actually, when I was, um, just starting on in college, a Christian fellow student who I barely knew, came up to me and he said, I have a word for you. God will anger you by that, which is not a nation by that, which is divides us. And he just walked away and I had no idea what he was talking about, but I never forgot it. And uh, yeah, that's the guiding principle of my work. Like why would I be interested in race by that? Which divides us it, there it is. Yeah. And religion. Yeah.
Speaker 2:Um, you, you authored a book over 20 years ago. It seems to be the seminal book, uh, in this particular category called divided by faith. And I've got a three part question. I know people should,
Speaker 1:I'm not smart enough to hold that all in my head.
Speaker 2:Well, you know, we'll we'll journey through this. Um, why did you write the book originally? What is the central premise of the book? And do you still think it holds true today?
Speaker 1:Alright, those are good questions. All right. So I wrote the book is going back. As I mentioned, we were doing this project and I was of the nine people on the research project. That was the only one interviewing African-American the way it was originally designed is that we would each take divide the country up into nine segments. And we need you to take a segment, but because no one else felt comfortable interviewing nonwhite. It was interesting. They signed. Yeah. Why did they pick you? Because I had studied race. So, and all of them felt like, I don't know anything. Like they literally were living in white worlds. Right. So they felt like, how can I didn't even know, how would I start? How would I find people to interview? So I was flying around the country, spending w my method was, I would like show up in Birmingham, Alabama, and not know anybody, but meet one person eventually. And then that one person would help me connect and find people to interview in different churches. And it started snowballing until, you know, after I've been there a month, I would have several dozen interviews done. Then go on to the next. What that afforded me was that I, as I'm interviewing black and white and in this project, that's we really only interviewed black and white. Uh, I was in two different worlds that I just couldn't. I mean, everybody we were in was Christian, serious Christians, but they were talking about their face. So fundamentally using their faith in such different ways that it was that tension that I just had to wrestle with what's going on. And that's what the book divided by faith was my way of trying to figure out what's going on.
Speaker 2:Uh, do you think your central premise of the book, do you think it holds true today and what is that central principle for you? So, yeah, it's, uh,
Speaker 1:Focuses mostly on, uh, white evangelicals in the book, uh, and, but always comparing to black Christians and finding fundamental differences. So it wasn't just that I'm experiencing this in interviews. Then we went in and looked at national data. We had collected and sure enough, this dramatic differences in racial views in the ways that we think Christianity should affect change and how we understand, uh, the role of government. And it goes on and on. So the argument in the book is that there's a white evangelicals have created a cultural toolkit that they use. So if you think about a toolbox, you've got some tools in there that the tools they have are different than the tools African-American Christians have. So, and I'll just briefly say what those are. We can go,
Speaker 2:Let's get into it. I think people, people need to understand that there's a, that there's two different worlds because anytime we talk about unity and we'll get here, it's always the conversations let's just unify, but I don't know if people know what they're unifying into or what they're made of to be able to say, we're going to integrate like this, but I want to hear this as fascinating. Sorry.
Speaker 1:No, that's great. I appreciate that. So the first one has, is it seems like a fancy term, but we'll break it down. Freewill accountable, individualism that's tool, number one. So what is that? So for white Christians, uh, individualism is the fundamental principle. How do I become a Christian? I individually decide to accept, right? Don't do it as a group. I do it individually. That's what I'm taught. I just described my own faith journey. That's what I was taught. Okay. So individualism becomes very central, but it has these two conditions on it. Freewill accountable individual. I freely can choose. I can choose Christ or not. That's my free will. It's accountable. I will be held accountable for my decision. Alright, what I'm going to argue by the way, is that these three tools that I'll mention, which are fundamental to the faith, become fundamental in how people understand the world. So they, they generalized them. They use them for understanding everything, their relationship and so on. And that is the next tool, which is relational ism. If I think about individuals as the core of what reality is, if my faith is about a relationship with Christ, then I understand the world that way. So I think about individual relationships with others. It's not uncommon to hear the phrase, changing the world one heart at a time, that's taking those two tools and it becomes obvious if those are your tools, that's what makes sense to you. That's how you change the world. You don't change the world by, uh, having a television station in influencing people or changing a law. You change people's hearts. So the third one then is the counter to those, which is anti structuralism. And if I believe you change the world one heart at a time, then things like, uh, structures, laws, all those kinds of things. They don't really exist. What I heard over and over again, when I interviewed white Christians, not black Christians was that when people talk about structures, laws, those are facades. Those are things put in to confuse us. They are the wrong answer. They will never lead to heart change and heart changes. The only thing that matters. So therefore we need to resist those kinds of things. So if we talk, you know, as we probably get into systemic racism, uh, yeah. All those kinds of systematic things. Well, not only do I may not believe they're there, I actually have to actively resist them. Otherwise I'm violating my faith understanding.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Which, which can explain some of the backlash against it, which whether you're proponent or not really doesn't matter is just the fascination of the backlash against what people have turned critical race theory, but we've got all these other things that we kind of hold onto, uh, nationalism, patriotism, all these big categories. But in the case of something like this, when it's mentioned, there's outward resistance, you know, you don't want Marxism, but we're fine with another category capitalism, you know, it's just, this is, it's fascinating to see the conversation just kind of evolve.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And can I add on that? So the reason that you would support capitalism and not Marxism within this understanding of these cultural tools is capitalism is viewed as rewarding. Those individuals who are willing to work hard and sacrifice. And so there it goes. Right.
Speaker 2:Okay. Uh, and so you named these, these three things, it, why Christians in particular, hold on to, in your study, what were some of the tenants that black Christians held onto?
Speaker 1:So some, some that we like almost never heard of when white Christians talked about their faith, one is a, um, much more flexibility of like theological doctrine. So God is a much more active God in the world, uh, than we saw for most white Christians. So theology matters, but what matters more is seeing God work in the world. And one of the things that God works in the world for is just, or right. Relationships for fairness. So God is actively doing that. Our part is to be supporting that, connecting with God in that. Uh, yeah. So that's, that is one fundamental difference.
Speaker 2:It's interesting that you say that because I guess the country's history fundamentally, uh, our, for our forefathers were deist. And so, you know, we do, we do every God helps those who help themselves. Uh, God is generally not active. He's placed us here to do the work. And so it seems like even throughout the years, that, that the ism has kind of seeped into, uh, popular white evangelical evangelicalism.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. And it's so interesting because these are people of the book, but it's such a high percent when you ask does, is it in the Bible that says, God helps those who help themselves say, yeah, it's in the Bible. Of course it's not, but,
Speaker 2:Oh. Um, so do you think that those categories and that understanding of Christianity from, uh, the white perspective, black perspective, do you still think 20 plus years later that that holds true today?
Speaker 1:Oh, it totally holds true today. So what we've been engaged in last couple of years here, uh, continuing right til now is redoing that study to see if things have changed. And here's what I'll conclude. Two things. Uh, one almost on every measure, things have stayed exactly the same, or if there's changed, the divide is now larger than it was 20 years ago. We see zero evidence of anything coming closer together. The other thing I would add is this, uh, and, and I'll think, uh, some African American scholars who have asked, why do you think these cultural tools are the white evangelical cultural tools? Is it just by chance or might it serve a larger interest of, you know, maintaining the advantages they have? So I would say that the cultural tools, uh, are specifically emphasized because they do allow, uh, whites to maintain their advantages. They're very conducive to that.
Speaker 2:When you say whites, uh, maintain their cultural advantage, are you talking about whites as individuals or whites as well?
Speaker 1:Yeah. See, I'm talking about white as group, but when you, when you make the cultural tool argument that there is only individuals, then you cannot make the change necessary. Right? The racial advantages that whites have the have them, because they've been codified into law, into our policies since we began. But if you deny that exists, that's very advantageous to making sure it never changed. Oh yeah.
Speaker 2:True. So there are a few quotes in the book that I kind of want to get to. Uh, and, uh, one is of Tocqueville. It says when I bought it, I do not imagine that the white and black race, wherever live in any country upon equal footing, but I believe the difficulty to be steel greater in the United States than elsewhere. An isolated individual may surmount the prejudices of religion of his country or of his race. And if this individual is a King, he may affect surprising changes in society, but a whole people can not rise as it were above itself, a desk spot who should subject the Americans and their former slaves to the same yoke might perhaps succeed in commingling they're racist. But as long as the American democracy remains at the head of affairs, no one will undertake so difficult a task. And it may be foreseen that the free of the white population of the United States becomes the more isolated will it remain. Why did you include that quote? And do you think it's still true today?
Speaker 1:So that's Tocqueville is if those who don't know as a French intellectual from way back in the early mid 18 hundreds, and he came to the United States because we were doing something so odd that the world had never heard of democracy where the people supposedly rule and he wanted to see what was this country like? How does it actually operate and wrote an incredible book on it? Any think about it. He wrote that in, I think it was 1840s. Yeah. Would that not be true today? It's totally true today. Isn't it? Where's the we're, we're in the midst of such struggle, uh, over those very issues. And I think he really pinpoints one of the weaknesses of democracy. If you have a majority group, uh, why are they going to vote against their own interests? They're not. Yeah.
Speaker 2:Oh man. So what struck me about this quote was the last part of it, which is white isolation. I I'm just being introduced to the term. I, I'm not a white person, so I wouldn't know, but it just struck me. What does that mean? And then, I mean, is that still something that is relevant to today?
Speaker 1:Yeah. So one of the things that I studied a lot and there's a whole big literature on is segregation like housing segregation and all the consequences from that, but it was always skewed. It was black folk or Hispanic folk or segregated from white folk. Well that's because it was mostly white people doing the analysis. And so on. It turns out that the most segregated people by far in this country today, as it has always been, are white people. They are the least likely to have contact with others, their children, I bar far the most likely to grow up isolated from other racial groups, usually in suburban or rural areas. And so we're in a constant thing that kids go to college and they're suddenly being introduced to diversity and Oh, why didn't I ever learn this? And then they graduate get a nice job. And they do the same thing and they move to a principally white suburb and raised their children. And then we go again, the next generation that isolation. Yeah. It hasn't dissipated at all.
Speaker 2:And as you're describing it, it seems to describe both politically conservative people, leaning people and politically liberal leaning people as well. They do the same thing.
Speaker 1:They do the exact same. They talk differently. They say they believe differently, but in their actions, there is no difference.
Speaker 2:Um, man, let's not run away from this in your trying to help people to understand this particularly, uh, by people to understand this, what have been some of the reactions from conservatives polo? Let me, let me, cause there's religious, conservative, religious liberal, I'm talking specifically politically, politically conservative, politically liberal people. What are their differences in their reaction to hearing this? Or is it basically the same,
Speaker 1:Uh, to the message of isolation or which message.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Oh, sorry. Specifically the message of isolation. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Yes. Okay. So this is, and I'll give an illustration. So we published a piece, uh, calling and I, what we did was we said, what happens as people become more educated? White people become much more progressively liberal. So there's a very strong correlation there. Okay. So we looked at where do the highly educated compared to the less educated whites send their children to school. This is a national study. And we found a very, very clear pattern. As whites become more educated, their children are in less diverse schools. And we were able to see that there's a clear pattern of why as the schools are children are in become more diverse. They take their children out of the schools and put them elsewhere into wider schools. We had to submit that thing and got it rejected nine different times over a five year period because who's reviewing this educated whites. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So if people aren't familiar, when you're trying to publish something in a journal, you send it blind review by three other scholars, and then they decide if it can be published or not. So they kept saying things like this, can't be true. Go back to your data. That's not how we understand it. We become more educated. We're more progressive. We wouldn't do that. Then it was well, once we were able to establish, it really is true. Then, well, black educated would do the same thing. So we went and got data on black and we found this exact opposite effect. So as black men come more educated, their children are more diverse. All right, we finally could not get it published in the United States. We sent it over to England for a journal. They have a journal on race and ethnicity in England. They accepted it immediately because they now, they weren't being assaulted. Cause it wasn't, uh, the same context. Right? Yeah. So that, that is, uh, that illustrates, um, I actually find more resistance from white liberals. Uh, at least when we talk about actions.
Speaker 2:Wow. That, that, I think that, that summarizes some of the feeling of frustration that some of us who try to work with, uh, the white politically liberal establishment face cause on its face, it's, there's the words that are said and the things that are said, they see that the rhetoric is always peer and good, but the actions seem to be the same if not worse. Um, but let's move on. So the second quote I wanted to talk to you about from the book was a quote. The framework we hear use racial is race racialization reflects that adaption. It understands that racial practices that produce racial division in the contemporary United States are one increasingly covert two are embedded in normal operations of institutions. Three avoid direct racial terminal terminology, and four are invisible to most whites. You use this as a rubric to describe what you, your term racialization, what some people may now call systematic racism. I just want your reaction 20 years later, do you still hold to those four tenets or have they evolved as, as, as time progress?
Speaker 1:Yeah, so I think they're evolving in that it's becoming less covert. Uh, it's certainly as deeply embedded as it's always been in our institutions, uh, unless invisible white, uh, partly because of the changes in what we can see on TV and social media, uh, I think we're becoming more aware we are divided, uh, but also more sophisticated to explain a way why that's okay. When you say
Speaker 2:More sophisticated in our ability to
Speaker 1:Explain in a way, what do you mean by that? So a, a big function of, of racism, which we can get into the definition, but its function is to justify our racialization or racial inequality or racial division. Right? So if, if we can present data and evidence or if we can clearly see we are racially divided and I then say, I explain it away. Well it's because what's really happening is it's class or it's uh, because some groups are getting married more and marriage matters and I'm trying to find ways to not address the issue just to account and explain the issue and say why we don't have to deal with it. Yeah. So getting into this, uh, what is
Speaker 2:The definition of racism
Speaker 1:And
Speaker 2:You use racialization in your explanation, help me understand what racialization is and how it relates,
Speaker 1:What people describe as racism. Yeah. So racialization is, uh, and there's only a couple of countries in the world that are, that certainly South Africa and that you can find a few others, but it means that most of life is structured by race, that you you're born into it. You are structured into it without even knowing it it's the air we breathe. So racialization means it influences, uh, our life opportunities, our life chances, our social relationships, you know, that's certainly not random who we ended up marrying. We almost always are marrying within our own race. Uh, there are exceptions and there are nations for why there's exceptions. So racialization means that's embedded into laws. And then ultimately it means that it forms a ranking of groups by rates. So yes, there's variation within racial groups, but there's never been variation in our country. When you rank the groups themselves, whites are always at the top Asians, Hispanics, African Americans, and then a group who doesn't even get ranked. Of course, native Americans often just forgotten. So racism here. So we talk about systematic racism and we talk about individual racism. Let me, let me make it clear. So I think individuals can be racially prejudice and individuals are racially discriminatory. They do things. And they think things based on rates. But when I talk about racism and when sociologists talk about it, we define it as this, the collective misuse of power, the collective, it's not something an individual does. Individuals can do prejudice and they can do discrimination the collective and do racism. And it's the misuse of power by one racial group that harms other groups. And the reason that they're doing it is because it benefits their group and they have the power to do it. That's why it's the misuse of our, um,
Speaker 2:Collective use of racism. Someone who may be listening may say, how is it that people collect? How do the, how does the collective use their power when I'm sitting here in Houston, Texas, and I've just voted every four years, how has it been? My collective is using my power.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So we are in a democracy. So voting is the ultimate way that we use our power. So if we collectively vote for people to put into court, to codify laws, that advantage one group over another, then that is how we do it. We can do that by you think about red lining, where we made it acceptable, that certain neighborhoods, and it turned out by the federal government. If you even had one black family in a neighborhood, it got red line, meaning you can't get loans there.
Speaker 2:This happened in your hometown or Chicago.
Speaker 1:Oh my gosh. It happens all the time. Yes. Um, with,
Speaker 2:I wanna, I wanna move to the last quote that I have from your, um, but Oh, before we get there, uh, do you think things have changed for the better over the last 20 years? And if it has it, then can you elaborate as to why not
Speaker 1:As a Christian? I want to say, cause I'm always hopeful. I think, you know, we are, we know what happens in the end. God wins. The kingdom is ushered in, in the last 20 years by all data we've been studying. No, it hasn't gotten better. And again, by many accounts, it's gotten worse. Why that is, uh, as I can do this in two different ways, but we have have, uh, we have a constant history of racial division that gets expressed in different ways, whether that was slavery. That was Jim Crow. What we're in now has been identified in that wonderful book called the new Jim Crow, uh, is that we moved to the law and order society and use incarceration. We find ways consistently to make African Americans second class citizens, when you incarcerated course, and we incarcerate more than any nation in the world by far, then once you get out, you, if you get out, you remain a second class citizen in terms of voting and so on. So the form changes, the result is the same and that's where we're at.
Speaker 2:Yeah. So I forgot to ask you this race. As most of us understand race, those are who are not initiated to sociology. We understand race as a skin color, but from what I've been reading and from what I've been hearing, can you explain what it means for race to be a social category, how it evolves historically over time?
Speaker 1:Yeah. I mean, a race really only comes into existence around the 15 hundreds, uh, for specific reasons to explain to account for this inequality and mistreatment of human beings, we created a category of race. And then we think about the writings and these were the scientific writings, how the white races at the top and the most blessed with best brains and on and on at the founding of our country, we put it into the constitution. And because we were doing this grand experiment called democracy, our founding fathers said, we have to have educated people who are under control to vote. I mean, can't just be haphazardly voting. They got to know what they're doing. So they made it into a racial issue by saying this white folks are people who are ruled by their minds. Everybody else is ruled by their passions so they can be citizens who can vote. So they were not allowed to be citizens. And that's why, so you start creating this, these categories that you might think are just like some color differences in, you totally view them with all of this deep meaning that, you know, in the end they're stereotypes. That aren't true, but there they are.
Speaker 2:You write about Italians and Irish moving from one racial category to another. Can you elaborate on what you meant by that?
Speaker 1:So the brilliancy of whiteness is that it's flexible. I've been reading since I started graduate school that by the year 2040 or the year varies, but somewhere 20, 40 to 25th, whites will be the minority. And then everything will change while here to say, no, they will. Not that that's a wrong understanding of whiteness. Whiteness keeps expanding to always maintain it a door. So when my grandfather came from Italy and my grandmother in the 1920s, uh, they came through Ellis Island and I have the document, uh, from their entry and they had to write their race and they both wrote white. And the clerk that worked there crossed off on both of theirs, white and wrote what was the racial category then called swarthy, which was something in between black and white, not to be trusted often given to Southern Europeans. Um, so my grandparents, when they came here were swarthy by the time they got into the 1960s or so they were white. That's what I mean by the flexibility of whiteness and an expanding. Um, and we, one of the things we are tracking closely now is, is that happening with some Asian groups? Are they going to be defined as white right now? They're all honorary white and often held up as representing good whites.
Speaker 2:This is, this is amazing. So, uh, with the research that you're doing with Asians, what have you found well, is it done? And what are some of the conclusions that you guys have come to?
Speaker 1:So when we're looking at, and this is from the study in these last two years, white and black Christians are so fundamentally far apart, and this is partly why the original book was called divided by faith because white and blacks in this country are quite divided, but white and black Christians are more divided on every measure we look at. And that's why we had to find, well, what is it about the faith themselves? That's driving them further apart for Asians. What we're finding now is that they so closely mirror, white, Christian, white, Asian, Christians, closely mirror, white Christians on almost all these things. It makes sense when we talk, what I just talked about about this kind of becoming honorary white, maybe being flexed into the white group when needed, they are acting in thinking very much like white Hispanics are much closer to African American.
Speaker 2:Yeah, man. Um, and this, this face out, I just wanted to make sure we, I got the quote. So evangelicals usually fail to challenge the system, not just out of concern for evangelism, but also because they support the American system and enjoy its fruits. They share the Protestant work ethic, support, laissez, Faire, economics, and sometimes fail to evaluate whether the social system is consistent with their Christianity. Uh, do you still agree with that today and why?
Speaker 1:Yeah. I don't think that has changed either. Um, so that when you think about it, that, and I had mentioned this a little bit earlier that you have these cultural tools and understanding of faith that are both deeply held and have the consequence of preserving and celebrating the country, which were in the book I'm working on now is called the grand betrayal. And it is making this argument that white Christianity, white Christians have continuously and endlessly betrayed their black and Hispanic brothers and sisters in the faith. And they've done it because of the roots by which they receive in terms of material, reward, respect. And so on. In fact, I'm going to make the argument that white Christianity, and this will be the controversial part at least to some isn't Christianity, that we did a series of experiments where you could choose between whiteness or, or the biblical Christianity and whites overwhelmingly would choose whiteness when given the opportunity, these are white Christians. So I'm going to make the argument though, what white Christianity is, is the worship of the group itself, the white tribe. So well, so let's get into it. What opera
Speaker 2:Questions are you asking
Speaker 1:To come to these conclusions? Cause[inaudible],
Speaker 2:You know, those of us who, who retort size for a living, but do no data with it. We would, we would agree with that conclusion and shout it to the heavens, but like you're actually doing the work that goes behind the conclusion. What are you operationally doing to come to these conclusions?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Thanks for asking. So I'll give you two examples. Um, one is that we are, we gave people a chance to express emotion. So part of, uh, understanding race is not just, you know, what do you think on the issue, but how do you feel about these? So we had a series of questions. We did a national survey of about 3000 Americans after them, Christian half, not racially diverse on purpose, so we could compare and we would ask things like, and this is the examples of the feeling questions. Uh, what do you feel when you hear the word black power? What do you feel when you hear the word reparation? And then we let people respond? Why here's what we found white Christians get angry. In fact, that was the number one word angry. And usually they'd write these things in all caps. So they were doing this online so we can see how they're and with exclamation points. And this is ridiculous. And it really, you can see the intensity of the feeling. The second example is this. We asked a series back, it was four questions about the Bible. Uh, so let me set this up for people listening. We first asked people, do you believe the Bible should be used to determine right and wrong? And if they said, yes, I believe it should be used to determine right and wrong. Then we asked them the next four questions. These questions were designed. So that three of them are asking you about other groups. And one of them is asking about a personal morality issue. So that one about personal morality is the Bible says not to use it in wholesome words, therefore it's wrong to use cuss words. So what we would do is we would give a Bible verse. We'd actually say where it's from. And then we would repeat it just as I did. The Bible says not to use unwholesome words, therefore it's wrong to use unwholesome words. Do you agree or disagree? The other three were about, as I said, other groups, one is about welcoming the foreigner and the stranger. So about immigration. Another was about, um, the, the first, uh, ethnic conflict that we see in acts, right? Where the, uh, what was it? The, the Greeks were saying our widows are not getting the same amount of food and you remember the brilliant solution then, okay. Then let's put, reach and power to make sure you get enough food. So then we said, that's what we should do. Right. Just repeat it. Okay. The findings here's, here's, what's interesting on the one about, uh, using unwholesome words, the majority of Christians, no matter what racial group, they agree, that's what the Bible says. But on the other three questions that had to do with other groups, the majority of black and Hispanic Christians agreed. That's what the Bible says, but for white and usually for Asian, never more than a third agreed. That's what the Bible said. So we followed up like, okay, well, if you don't think that's what the Bible says, we're just repeating what the Bible says, why? And then there, you see the defense mechanisms coming. Well, you'd have to look at the context. And, um, the one on immigration was really interesting cause they said, well, the Bible is referring to legal immigration. Then I will not ever support illegal immigration, which is what really is happening here. And we have to fight that. And so, yeah,
Speaker 2:Man, this is fascinating. Oh man, we, we gotta talk when that book comes out. I like to talk about it. Um, this is interesting that you say this because getting ready for this interview, I was thinking where I would land as a black person who happens to evangelize. Uh, we, I think we think that evangelism and fulfilling the great commission is a thing we ought to do and we're involved in it, but I almost, but everything outside of that, that might sometimes keep us from engaging injustice has to deal, not so much with, you know, being an American per se, but in, during suffering. Well, so where I find more kinship, not with, uh, white American Christians, I find more kinship with Christians who are suffering all around the world, whatever the color of their skin. So that I'm, I feel like I'm in a, I'm a nation within a nation. And so our discussions are always, should we engage with that other nation and quote unquote waste time when we could be, you know, um, uh, helping each other and growing with one another, or should we be a part of the struggle that we see everyone else go through? And it's so fascinating how, you know, the, the culture completes white evangelical Christianity and we see it almost as the world that the thing that's opposing us. Hmm. Very interesting. Um, I read your article, goodbye Christ. I've got justice duty. I agree with a lot of results. I read anecdotes. What challenged me was this man, are we sure that the people that, that these people were introduced to Orthodox Christian faith, that the gospel was preached, they heard it, they believed it. I mean, what, what do you, what did he say to that? Because that's the first thing that I thought about the people who are, and I guess I should have set it up. People are leaving these churches, uh, white evangelical churches. Uh, and I guess you even made the argument that black people might be also leaving their churches, which is true. Um, and that justice, wow. A noble endeavor and should, and an endeavor that should be part of the Christian understanding and faith to seek justice, that we should never put it over Jesus. And so I say that to ask this question, do we think these people left Christianity or did they live like leave Christiandom?
Speaker 1:Great question. So, yeah, just again, this was a, just a little, uh, basically opinion piece that was in Christianity today recently. And it's my observation of watching people that are in Christian churches coming to realize we live in an injust unjust world and they start getting involved in justice work and slowly but surely, and sometimes more fast, they, they drift away from churches. They drift away from Christian faith and they're just done with it. In fact, they often can become anti-Christian. So your question is, well, are we sure that they were actually introduced to the real Christian faith? And I would have to say they were not the real Christian faith. They would understand justices absolutely core. I mean, you, if you did any study of the Bible, that word comes up. So often that God's saying I am a lover of justice profits, constantly railing because of the injustice and the so on and so forth. So if they see justice and Jesus, as in conflict, then they haven't known true Christianity.
Speaker 2:Do you think articles like this? Cause I, I saw, uh, an assessor ed Stetser react to this. Do you think when white Kristin dumb, I don't want to say Kristen's Kristen dumb reads an article like this. Their reaction is, ah, guys, just come on home. We'll figure it out. This, that the article may perpetuate a feeling of, Hey, maybe not that we white Christian dumb a vindicated, but that is safe for you guys to come home. And the reason why I ask that is that the person who is thinking about coming home is probably asking the question back. Well, what are we going to do when I come home? I mean, are we just gonna continue to do what we're doing? Or are we going to forge a new path? Yeah.
Speaker 1:And I say a little bit in there, the answer isn't to leave Christendom, you may find that you have to leave white Christianity, but the answer then is to find healthy black churches, multi-racial churches, immigrant churches, and find true Christianity, right. Christianity that actually says justice matters.
Speaker 2:Where were you when you heard about what happened to George Floyd and what were your feelings?
Speaker 1:It was like probably so many people, right? Cause of the pandemic I was in my home and I was upstairs, uh, having a snack. Uh, and uh, one of my children came up and said, did you hear what happened? I said, no, what happened? They said it happened. We have most of our family lives in the twin cities area. So it was like, something happened big at home, came down into our basement where we have our television saw just a glimpse of the video We were being. I couldn't, I could not keep watching it. I did not watch it all. And I remember thinking, Oh my gosh, we're going to explode. I've been saying for the last five years or so, our country has become so unequal in terms of wealth. When you look at, while it just keep the gap, just keep getting bigger and bigger. And I said, there is no evidence anywhere of country having this much racial wealth gap that doesn't explode.
Speaker 2:So this was,
Speaker 1:This was going to be it because the power of the visual is much larger than any words could be.
Speaker 2:So let me ask this, I mean, let's go, we come back to this. When you say racial wealth gap, what do you mean by that? And how are you coming to that conclusion that there is a widening racial wealth gap.
Speaker 1:Yeah, because we've been tracking it for many decades and that's just everything you own and then subtract everything you owe. What do you got left? That's your wealth. So when we were first doing this in the most detail, starting in the 1980s, the gap was huge. It was whites had 10 times the wealth as black Americans, nine times, as well as Hispanic American, that gap is more than doubled today. Every time we look at it, it gets bigger. And it's because the more money you have, the more money you can make, right? You can invest it. You keep. And I do. Uh, I study a lot as do my graduate students about what happens in the way that we build wealth as middle class Americans, it's through home ownership and white neighborhoods make way more money. In fact, a study just came out from my grad students. They're not professors, but like a week ago. And what they did is since 1980, what's happened to the appraised values of homes in white neighborhoods and black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods have increased$200,000 more in black neighborhoods. That means they just added$200,000 of their, what their wealth that African Americans did not get.
Speaker 2:Yeah. And so you think some of this is behind the explosion that we're seeing in light of what happened to George Florida? Absolutely. Um, so in seeing this, what do you think should be the response of our nation to these events
Speaker 1:We need to do what other countries have done that have made some progress. And that is form a truth and reconciliation commission have testimony both historically and contemporary of what has happened, how people have suffered, how people have gained and then figure out how to make retribution for that reparations, whatever it takes. We cannot keep pretending and saying, well, we just need to move on. Let's let's be friends. Let's move on, is not going to work. It hasn't worked. I mean, how can we think if it hasn't worked to this date, that more, the same is going to get us anywhere.
Speaker 2:Uh, when you say truth and reconciliation, they did this in South Africa. Yeah. Some would say some would argue, well, will it work here? If the result, I mean, there's still a gap in, in wealth in South Africa, somewhat argue, would it work here? What would your response be?
Speaker 1:I would say, look at any country, that's done it and learn from them. What worked and what didn't work. What's improved the process, but we need to have that process. We have to have a space where people can speak, where people can see the results of what we've done. What we get now, right. Is George Floyd, blips, and then counter movements in resistance to it. We're not dialoguing, we're not cataloging and putting down or official record what has happened. We have to,
Speaker 2:For those church men out there is truth and reconciliation, just the structure of it. And, and the practice of it is that something Christians is that Christian or is that, you know, some type of critical race theory
Speaker 1:Is Christian, right? The truth shall set you free. We are not free. We are not, we are tied up with the devil and his lies. And until we will willing to tell the truth to each other, we don't have reconciliation where we are. We are called a reconciliation and ultimately we are called to be one. So this is truly gospel work. We can't be resisting this. We've got to do it.
Speaker 2:Um, you know, it's, it's interesting that you came to the conclusion of us having a truth and reconciliation. I think in my own just journey. I think that seems like everyone's talking around it, but I think you've been the first to say, we need, I hear reparations. We need this, we need that. But like the core of that, which leads to all that is a truth and reconciliation committee. But in saying that, what is the church's role in that response? First of all, you know that you do the sociological work here, you see the divide. I mean, how do we get there if we've got no unity within, within ourselves.
Speaker 1:That's why I think we, like I say, if we don't start with enabled to just listen to each other, often people ask, okay, so what can we do about this? Right. My first thing is we have to actually just trust each other. So if, if you say to me, I'm experiencing racism, my first reaction can not be, no, you're not. It can't be defensive. Like why are you call me a racist? It needs to be, tell me more about that. My fellow brother in Christ, I need to know more what's happening. I have to start from that basis of trust. I live for a year in Denmark. Denmark has the highest level of social trust in the world. And it is unbelievable what you can do in a society. When you trust each other, how much money you save insecurity and all these things you have to do, how much you save in efficiency and having that not have so much time spent in drawing up contracts that specify every possibility of how you could cheat and how you can actually talk to each other. If you come from the starting point of trust, that the person across from me or the group across from me once a good life, just like I want a good life. And they're saying they're experiencing difficulty. Then let's work together. Why is that so hard? It's because the devil has tricked us. We have bought into the lie that I am an opposition to a fellow group. Even when they are fellow believers. That's what blows my mind. We, how can we do that? But we do it constantly. It's gotta stop operationally when you,
Speaker 2:I hear often the black church and a white church must come together. I believe that in a sense,
Speaker 1:But from a sociologist perspective,
Speaker 2:Is that practical. And if it is, how do we, how do we actually do it?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Well, it, in what it means, two different things. Again, in our divided world for white set means let's let's, I will confess and you accept my apology and we move on. And for African Americans that often means are, hold on a minute, I always use this example. If I came, installed your TV, and then I feel guilty about after a while or something. And I say, Hey, I'm really sorry about that. Can we, would you forgive me? And could we move on? And you know, let's come together. Well, of course, you're going to say, um, if you give me that TV back first, maybe we can have that discussion. Uh, so that's what I'm saying until we have that discussion, we have to stop saying, Oh, it wasn't me. It was people in the past that are no longer here. It doesn't matter if it was people in the past. They're no longer here we are benefiting or suffering from it a day. It will continue. We, I gave you one example, which is the wealth gap, which just keeps getting bigger. So that's real. That's happening right now. If we don't stop it, we don't have any chance at unity and reconciliation. Well, we've got a,
Speaker 2:Which leads me to another question we've got in the middle of black and white. We've got Asians, we've got Hispanics, we've got a multiplicity of people who live in this America.
Speaker 1:I mean, why would this be
Speaker 2:Important for them to be a part of? I mean, it just seems like they're caught
Speaker 1:The middle. Yeah. Like imagine if, you know, if you're an immigrant from say Peru and you've been here for six years, like this is saying, what does got to do with me? I'm just trying to make a living, but anybody that's living in the society and wants to stay here, you have to care because it does affect us all it shapes. I mean, you see that what's happening in our country right now. Are any of us not impacted by what's happening in our streets? Not we are all impacted. We have to care. Um, last question.
Speaker 2:What would your action plan be for black pastor in the foot for someone like me trying to be a help to the body of Christ and his country, would there be something educationally? I mean, what, what would you, what would you suggest?
Speaker 1:Okay. A couple things. And one of the things I've come to write is, um, this sounds funny, but I think in many ways, all people who want to see progress and change, we're sort of stabbing in the dark. Like I can remember, you know, in the late sixties and such the answer was, well, if we could elect black mayors and, uh, you know, Windera thought if we could have a black president, but we've had those continue to have black mayors and it doesn't make the problems go away. I mean, in Chicago, we have a black mayor and a black chief of police, and they're being accused of being racist and creating a system that is unfair. Right? So I say that to say, we keep trying things. Someone gave me the illustration. Once of we have a onion and we peel away a layer and we think that's a solution. But to only define that there's yet another layer and another layer. So we have to keep crying until we find the African American church has always excelled in bringing hope to African American parishioners, to bringing a sense of worth in a, in a society that basically tells you every day that you are not of equal worth. I can't think of anything more fundamental and in the Christian message than that, a place of organizing for justice and getting people to exercise their voice. So that's one, I think another one huge. And I think you are particularly gifted at this, is that there to have any kind of discussion at all to begin white pastors, white leaders need, they're looking for willing partners African-Americans that would be willing to speak to them. Uh, and yeah, I think as I've seen you, uh, you have that gift. You have a particular gift of putting people at ease that they can get to a point of trusting and then hearing the messages that you have to bring. That's where we have to get to. So we need people like you to do that. Mmm.
Speaker 2:Last question. And it's a pushback, first of all, thank you. Um, I, I thank you for the compliment. There are some people who would say we've been having conversations every time a hashtag happens. We have a conversation and nothing seems to get, uh, worked out. What would you say to that? Is it we're not having the right type of conversations. Cause that's what it seems like. I hear you saying, we, we kind of have the confession, Hey accept. And we move on, but we're not having the right type of conversations that actually bring healing.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Well, we're having the wrong one cause it has no teeth in it. So what I'm, that's why I'm saying, when you have a formal truth and reconciliation, it's formed with the specific goal that it's going to bring change. And we're going to specify through discussion through people, witnessing their own experience. What has to change
Speaker 2:You and I are familiar with truth and reconciliation for those who this may be the first time they heard this concept, how does that actually play out in, you know, operationally? I mean paint the picture.
Speaker 1:Hmm. Uh, and so I may be butchering how it's done like in South Africa, but you, uh, you have officials who actually have power to make changes and they sit there and they listen to people who come up and tell their stories, tell how their family has been harmed by racism, how their own experiences and all of that is documented. Those folks can ask for what would they need to get over their hurt? What would they need to get over the wealth that's been taken from them and their families? And the idea is supposed to be one, it's a healing process because we are, we have people being able to share their hurt. We have people that are listening to it, but it only matters if you then take the next steps. And as you pointed out, like in South Africa, they have yet to take all the steps they need. So they've got a long ways to go, but it has to be the next steps. Be those next steps have to be. And this is where get controversial, right? Those who have gained are going to have to give up some so that those who have suffered have some more, if one is standing on a table, one standing on the ground, we're both going to have to move so we can stand on a chair. We're going to have to meet in the middle. It's there's not enough resources to say all that I have. I hope everybody else can have it too. It's going to have to actually be some sharing. Yeah.
Speaker 2:You asked power sharing, wealth sharing. This is, this is the crux of it. It is. Hmm. Well, dr. Emerson, I thank you for your time. We are going to do this again, and I hope it's around the discussion of your new book. Uh, this has been enlightening.
Speaker 3:I've got other questions. Maybe we'll do it again just to do it again, but uh, thank you for your time.
Speaker 1:Spend time with you. Appreciate[inaudible].