White Christian Nationalism, History, and Identity: An Approach to Healthy Spiritual Reconstruction

I once received this note from a student:

“Reading the Brown Church poem reminded me about my experience growing up in a Protestant church. As a Latino growing up as the son of an undocumented pastor in the Midwest, my experience was much different from those who surrounded me. I felt that I could not identify with my peers and I always felt out of place. My white peers accepted me in the way that I stood in right by being [part of the same denomination] but I was not accepted because of my skin color, my race, or my father’s undocumented status. I wanted to believe in what my family and church taught me as truth but I slowly drifted away from my beliefs as a result of the testimony I received from the Anglo church and their members. I would ask myself, ‘how I can identify with such ignorant people.’ This was a question I would ask myself regularly. There was more hate and resentment that grew in my heart internally. Even to this day those same Protestants refer to us as ‘wetbacks, beaners, and spics.’ The message the [Brown Church] poem has to offer is one that resonates with me. I find myself conflicted with my identity. I feel at times that one does not go with the other. My parents have helped me develop my faith and a strong relationship with the Lord.”

As this student honestly shares, faced with White Christian Nationalism, many of us struggle with being our culturally authentic Latina/o selves and Christian at the same time. “How can we identify with such ignorant people,” is something we often ask ourselves. Sadly, just the name “Evangelical” now evokes such feelings of revulsion. Whereas thirty years ago the term Evangelical was based upon a quadrilateral set of theological convictions which we support (the centrality of the Cross; personal forgiveness, healing and transformation in Christ; the sacredness and authority of Scripture; and loving our neighbors as ourselves through social engagement), now, the term Evangelical is now simply a far-right wing political identity which justifies racism and has no specific theological meaning behind it. Today, someone can claim the label Evangelical, believe in QAnon, and the next day go to a neo-Nazi rally.

No wonder we struggle.

For people like myself and my student, we are left with: We love Jesus with all of our hearts, but where do we go from here? How do we reconstruct a healthy Christian identity?

I think that one of the most important starting points for healthy reconstruction is recognizing and sifting toxic racist theologies. Like the parable of the wheat and the weeds, in the United States, the seeds of racist theology have grown up together with the seeds of wheat of the Kingdom of Heaven for four hundred years. The Doctrine of Discovery, slavery, Manifest Destiny, Jim Crow segregation, anti-immigrant laws, policies, and sentiment—and now MAGA Christianity--are all essentially the same poisonous weed of racism that “an enemy” has planted:

24 He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to someone who sowed good seed in his field, 25 but while everybody was asleep an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and then went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared as well. Matthew 13: 24-26

The weeds have always been here in the US—just ask the Black Church, the Brown Church, and the Native American Church. Over the centuries, we have written many books, preached many sermons, and shed many tears. Often to deaf ears. But now, the weeds have grown so out of control that finally many are beginning to notice.

What now breaks our hearts is that, though many more have begun to notice, very few have had the courage to speak out. The pulpits are silent. I thank God for those few prophetic pastors out there who are saving the witness of the American church through their courage of speaking up. Thank you. I pray for you.

-------

In addition to prophetic voices, healthy theological and spiritual reconstruction is also necessary.

For this complicated task, history is of vital importance.

“If you join at eleven o’clock a conversation which began at eight you will often not see the real bearing of what is said.” CS Lewis

As this wise Christian professor states in this insightful passage, in order to understand where we are now as the church in the US, we need to understand history.

To start, we need to understand the historical roots of racism in the American church. Friends like Juan Martinez, Elizabeth Conde-Frazier, Jemar Tisby, Soong-Chan Rah, Mark Charles, and others, have done an excellent job with this important task. But in order to understand where we now find ourselves, we can’t stop in 1492. This I learned from Justo Gonzalez, Kwame Bediako, and Andrew Walls.

Christianity existed for fifteen hundred centuries before the arrival of European colonialism on the world scene. For the first 1,000 years of Church history, the geographic center of Christianity was Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. The emperor of China even first contemplated the truths of Christianity at the same as the English King of Northumbria! Europe did not become a geographic center of Christianity until roughly 1,000 AD. And today, Christianity is no longer the “white man’s religion” because most of its adherents reside in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and among the Black Church and immigrants in North America.

In my observation, I have found that most conversation around theological and spiritual “deconstruction” focus upon 1492-present. If the Resurrection of Jesus was 8:00 am, then 1492-present is like 4:00 pm-5:00 pm in the grand scope of Christian history. And yet, so many, including myself, have analyzed the problem of Christian nationalism as if the past 500 years comprise the sum total of Christian history. I submit this is why so many of us get stuck in trying to detangle ourselves from the racism of the US church. We’re joining a conversation at 5:00 pm that began at 8:00 am, and our lack of context keeps us from being able to see clearly enough to propose healthy solutions for renewal and reconstruction.

From the conservative side of Protestant theology in the US, many with good intentions, act as if Christian theological tradition and reflection began in 1517. Apart from a few readings from the early church fathers and Augustine (who often get white-washed even though they hailed from Africa and the continent of Asia), Protestant seminary education is largely structured as if the Reformers figured it all out about every topic, including race and immigration. If they didn’t talk about it, then it must not be important. And so the theological and ecclesial imagination of many from conservative Christian circles in the US is circumscribed by Northern European and Anglo American reflection over the past five centuries--as if that represented the sum total of the incredible theological wisdom of the communion of saints from throughout the world over the past 2,000 years.

On the flip side, I find that some, understandably reacting against the dangers of fundamentalism, are also circumscribed by North European and Anglo theological reflection, just of a different liberal type. I am not using the term liberal, pejoratively. This approach draws upon strains of theological reflection from Germany, England, and the United States since the Enlightenment, and in a similar way acts as if this body of theological reflection represents the sum total of the theological wisdom of the church. These warring sides represent the theological and ecclesiological descendants of the Fundamentalist-Modernist debates of a century ago, and they do not possess within themselves the spiritual or theological resources to save themselves or the US Church. Just look at the numbers. In turn, millions of young adult Christians are saying to themselves, “If Christianity is real, it has got to mean more than a Sunday morning political talk show, whether of the Fox News or MSNBC variety. If Christianity is just about Trump vs Rachel Maddow, then I’d rather just sleep in, go for a Sunday brunch, and explore other spiritual paths.”

Thank God, however, that there is much, much more to the faith of Jesus Christ than our current political and cultural wars. As the Body of Christ, we are part of a rich history of faith which has survived continuously for nearly 2,000 years continuously in Africa and Asia in the face of empires and political despots innumerable. We can also celebrate the many positive ways in which Christianity healed and transformed the diverse nations of Europe for more than 500 years before the evils of European colonialism. And, while sifting the various sins of racism in its various forms which have haunted the Americas since 1492, and which now seem to be making a final stand, we can also be thankful for the fact that God has also raised up prophets over the past 500 years, and out of the rubble of so much injustice, still wrought redemption and expressions of life and renewal—because no empire can succeed in stopping God and God’s movement of salvation in Jesus Christ. Not Caesar, not Manifest Destiny, no US president or congress, no dictator, no orange man.

-----------

During the colonial period, Latin American prophets warned of the same dangers of Christian nationalism which we are now witnessing.

Since the 1960’s, moreover, Latin American and US Latina/o theologians have developed Brown Theology as a corrective. They have explored the historical roots of Christian nationalism and created theological frameworks to heal the Church. Their theology, and its antecedents in the earliest church in Africa, Asia, and the Mediterranean, will be the focus of this blog series…

Immigration, White Christian Nationalism, and (Some) Latino Pastors: A Lament

Mateo grew up in El Monte. He was always a strong student, but instead of going straight to a 4-year university he enrolled at Pasadena Community College so that he could also work and help support the family. For the next five years he earned his associate’s degree in English while working full-time at Amazon and Staples, and even selling flowers on the weekends. And then his biggest dream came true: he was accepted as a transfer student to UCLA! He was so thankful to God, and his parents were so proud because he was the first in his family to go to college. He knew that the next two years would go by quickly, so he tried to make the most of it and joined several student clubs like UNICA (Unión Centroamericana de Estudiantes), Hermanos Unidos, and the Latinx Pre-Law Association. The cultural adjustment to UCLA was a little hard—he had never seen so many white people in his life and most people came from richer backgrounds—but, overall it was fine, and he met a lot of nice people of different cultural backgrounds in the residence halls.

As part of the Central American Studies minor, he took one class that changed his life. It was called Barrio Service Learning, and it paired students up with non-profit organizations who helped the community through educational mentorship, immigration services and advocacy, healthcare, and affordable housing. Mateo worked for CARECEN, the Central American Resource Center. At CARECEN, he learned how to become an immigration law paralegal, and helped community members with the renewal of their DACA applications, TPS, and even citizenship applications. He loved it, and through this internship found his life calling to become an immigration attorney.

One day during election season, however, he had a deeply troubling experience when he went back to visit his home church in Pico Union. At lunch after the service, he overheard a group of church members complain about recent immigrants from Venezuela and Honduras: “These illegals are coming here and bringing crime and violence, and bringing the economy down. Thank God for Trump. He’s going to deport all those violent criminals.” What’s crazy, Mateo thought to himself, is that these same church members came as asylum seekers to the US in the 1980’s from Central America. And if it weren’t for the Sanctuary Movement, they would have been deported.

The next Sunday, Mateo came back to church. The pastor’s sermon was about compassion for immigrants. “Just like God commanded the Israelites to show compassion to immigrants, so should we show compassion to immigrants today. In Matthew 25, Jesus also said that when we welcome the foreigner, we are also welcoming Him.” Mateo was so relieved to hear his pastor say this. But then his pastor said something quite confusing: “It’s not my job to tell you how you should vote. You should consider all the issues of society in a holistic way, don’t just vote based on one issue. As for me, I haven’t made up my mind yet. I might vote for Trump.”

The pastor’s words sunk deep into his heart. Mateo was flooded with pain and confusion. He stopped going to church.

***********

Sisters and brothers, these are the times we live in.

In this moment of spiritual and social confusion, I find myself resonating deeply with the disciples in Luke 8:23-24:

“A windstorm swept down on the lake, and the boat was filling with water, and they were in danger. 24 They went to him and woke him up, shouting, “Master, Master, we are perishing!”

Like the disciples in this passage, I feel the spiritual windstorm of our present moment, and my boat is sinking because it is filling rapidly with water. I find myself shouting out, gritando:

“Master, Master, we are perishing!”

“Don’t you see the millions of Latino immigrants filled with fear and terror—children missing weeks of school because they are afraid that their parents won’t be there when they return home, and clinging to their mother and father every time they hear a police or ambulance siren; don’t you see the college students who have not gone to class for the past month because they are the only documented person in their family, their parents are afraid to leave the house, and so they have inherited all of their family’s economic obligations; what about the cries of the battered wife who will not report domestic violence and no longer attends the church which previously was her only safe haven?

Lord, how is it possible that the theological formation of so many Latino Christians has become distorted to the point that they have been lulled into self-hatred and are unable to biblically discern the very ethical issues that threaten the safety of their own families and congregations?”

Jesus, I love You with all of my heart. The winds and waves have raged around me many times before, and You have never let me down. But my boat is sinking again. Thank You for your unending and perfect love which welcomes my honest lament. I look to You for rescue. We look to you for hope:

“And waking up, he rebuked the wind and the raging waves; they ceased, and there was a calm. 25 Then he said to them, “Where is your faith?” They were terrified and amazed and said to one another, “Who then is this, that he commands even the winds and the water and they obey him?”

P.S.,

*****

The story of Mateo is a critical race counterstory, a modern day parable drawn from the stories I have heard in the community around me.

I am grateful to Rev. Harold Segura who pointed me and others to this passage in Luke as the basis for lament during a recent gathering of the Latino Christian National Network.

For more on a structured process for lament…

Churches and Immigration Raids: A Brief Legal Introduction

It was well established policy of both the past Trump administration and previous administrations of both parties, that immigration officers would not enter “sensitive” locations such as churches, schools or hospitals to make arrests. This was considered basic human decency because children, worshipers and the sick might otherwise be placed in fear. The Trump Administration has now revoked this policy on “safe spaces.” What follows is a legal introduction for churches to consider. It is neither legally exhaustive, nor should it be considered official legal advice, but perhaps it may be a good starting point for churches and their boards to consider. What I present now are the generalized contours of the law. Please consult attorneys of your church or denomination for deeper understanding of the specific situation of your church community. For those that may be wondering about my qualifications to speak on this matter, I am a graduate of the Berkeley School of Law.

It is important to speak on this topic because the goal of the changed policy is to stoke fear and terror in immigrant communities. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of churches will not be subject to targeted arrests. Nevertheless, it is best practice to have a plan in place.

An understanding of the basic legal issues involved can calm fears. According to the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, immigration enforcement officers cannot enter a “private” area without a judicial warrant. Note that a “judicial warrant” is different from the usual type of administrative warrant that ICE officers typically have. A judicial warrant can be granted only by a federal judge following a special procedure. Most times, ICE officers do not have a judicial warrant and so can only enter “public” areas of churches, schools and hospitals—unless they are given permission. In a church, sanctuaries and parking lots are typically considered public because members of the general public can enter these areas freely. Church offices,however, are generally considered private. Check with your church board to see what areas are designated private or public on your church campus. Also, consult a denominational attorney to come up with a specific plan which is best for your church. And know that you can always deny access to a private area of your church if an ICE officer does not have a judicial warrant. You can always tell them that they need to speak with the senior pastor and church attorney.

Be careful because ICE often pretends that their administrative warrant gives them permission to enter constitutionally protected spaces, or may attempt to get you to unknowingly give them permission. This happens frequently at homes. Without a judicial warrant they cannot enter a private home or other private space.

Let’s not give into fear. Let’s share equal concern, suffer with, and give greater honor to our immigrant sisters and brothers in whom we see the face of Christ. As sacred Scripture admonishes us:

“But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.” 1 Corinthians 12: 24-26.

Birthright Citizenship: 150 years of civil rights struggle

Birthright citizenship.

Comes from the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

It was enacted, and has since been interpreted, to protect the citizenship rights of those of African, Chinese, and other ethnic minority descent because there have always been those who have considered us illegitimate Americans. It was originally passed by Congress after the Civil War to cancel out the US Supreme Court Dred Scott decision of 1858 which said that African Americans were not entitled to US citizenship. Even after the passage of the 14th Amendment, in 1898, some attempted to deny birthright citizenship to Chinese Americans in the US Supreme Court case of Wong Kim Ark. Anti-Chinese activists claimed that the Chinese Exclusion Act (which was in effect officially from 1882-1943, and practically until 1965) nullified birthright citizenship for Chinese Americans. Thankfully, the US Supreme Court disagreed and applied birthright citizenship to Chinese Americans. All Native Americans, however, were not granted citizenship until 1924. On a related note, from 1790-1952, non-whites were barred from becoming naturalized US citizens.

And so, birthright citizenship, and citizenship in general, have been a hard fought civil rights struggle in the United States for well over 150 years.

The settled law for over a century has been: if you are born in the US, then you are a citizen.

Because the concept of birthright citizenship derives from the Constitution, the current president cannot just wipe it away unilaterally through an executive order as he has tried to do. That would be like a president saying unilaterally that he/she is canceling out the constitutional rights to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or the right to vote.

The Constitution can only be changed by a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, together with ratification by three-quarters of the states.

Absent such congressional action, the only other path for the executive order to stand is for the US Supreme Court to issue a bizarre ruling which radically departed from its own well established precedent for over a century. I suppose stranger things have happened, but it is still quite unlikely.

Welcome back to 1858.

The Beatitudes and Post-Election Reflections

Still stunned, and now exhausted, from the past 24 hours. In 2016 it hit me in a different way—emotional devastation, deep disappointment, and anger. Deep disappointment because so many voted for a blatant anti-immigrant racist who called my people ‘criminals and rapists,’ and who threatened to do unspeakable harm towards us and our community. He followed through just as he said he would and caused unspeakable harms and violence towards so many immigrant families.

This time I feel some shock, but not the disappointment and grief. Grief and disappointment come from loss, but there’s not much more for me to lose in terms of expectations. It’s so sad to say, but it is true.

Our country elected a rapist, racist, misogynist, coup-leading, anti-democratic, compulsive lying, conspiracy theorist, malignant narcissist, convicted felon. These attributes are not even in dispute (apart from fringe, yet highly influential media echo chambers) and yet it wasn’t even close. Why?

One common theme emerges from exit polls: the economy.

The majority of Americans were willing to overlook the profound character flaws of Donald Trump, and the grave threat to democracy which he represents, because they think he will bring them more economic prosperity.

Scary, scary stuff. This is the well trodden road of dictators and authoritarian leaders across the globe today, and over the past century. It can lead to: “As long as he’s looking out for me, I won’t worry too much about indigenous communities, religious minorities, immigrants, the poor, lgbt people, or any other minority groups. They’re part of the problem after all. They’re not ‘real’ Americans.”

To be clear, I do not think that most people who voted for Trump feel this way. Sadly, some actually do—white nationalists have not been quiet in their support of Trump, and Trump has never disavowed them. With those caveats, I have no doubt that through this election the US has taken a monumental step down this path. And I suppose I am scared. I also hope with all my heart that I am wrong.

I recently shared a post about Jesus’ beatitudes as a prayer and moral filter for this election. It’s still my prayer. And when the time comes to act, it will still be my inspiration:

20 Then he looked up at his disciples and said:

“Blessed are you who are poor,

for yours is the kingdom of God.

21 “Blessed are you who are hungry now,

for you will be filled.

“Blessed are you who weep now,

for you will laugh.

22 “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you, revile you, and defame youon account of the Son of Man. 23 Rejoice on that day and leap for joy, for surely your reward is great in heaven, for that is how their ancestors treated the prophets.

24 “But woe to you who are rich,

for you have received your consolation.

25 “Woe to you who are full now,

for you will be hungry.

“Woe to you who are laughing now,

for you will mourn and weep.

26 “Woe to you when all speak well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.

Luke 6: 20-26

Finding Hope in the Elections: Jesus, the Beatitudes, and the Presidential Race

Like many, I have felt distraught over this election. It’s easy to fall into despair. At La Fuente Ministries yesterday, I got some hope.

Pastor Marcos Canales talked about how the beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-11; Luke 6: 2-26) are like a core value statement for Jesus and his followers. He encouraged us to reflect upon the beatitudes when we vote. After the service I spoke with a friend who just returned from a trip to Berlin and who had been studying the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer had first been sympathetic to German nationalism but did a complete 360, ultimately giving his life to challenge Hitler, after reflecting upon the beatitudes and learning from Abyssinian Baptist Church, a Black Church in Harlem. The beatitudes were his launch boat which opened his eyes to the evils of US racial segregation and which compelled him to return to Germany to oppose Nazism.

My challenge to myself, and to whoever might feel so inspired, is to prayerfully reflect upon Jesus’ beatitudes in the week leading up to the election. Who knows what the Holy Spirit might inspire in us:

3 “God blesses those who are poor and realize their need for him,

for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.

4 God blesses those who mourn,

for they will be comforted.

5 God blesses those who are humble,

for they will inherit the whole earth.

6 God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice,

for they will be satisfied.

7 God blesses those who are merciful,

for they will be shown mercy.

8 God blesses those whose hearts are pure,

for they will see God.

9 God blesses those who work for peace,

for they will be called the children of God.

10 God blesses those who are persecuted for doing right,

for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.

Matthew 5:3-10

——

20 Looking at his disciples, he said:

“Blessed are you who are poor,

for yours is the kingdom of God.

21 Blessed are you who hunger now,

for you will be satisfied.

Blessed are you who weep now,

for you will laugh.

22 Blessed are you when people hate you,

when they exclude you and insult you

and reject your name as evil,

because of the Son of Man.

23 “Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the prophets.

24 “But woe to you who are rich,

for you have already received your comfort.

25 Woe to you who are well fed now,

for you will go hungry.

Woe to you who laugh now,

for you will mourn and weep.

26 Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you,

for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.

Luke 6:20-26

Lausanne IV and the Brown Church: An Asian-Latino Reflection on the Inspiration, Pains and Public Witness of the Fourth Lausanne Congress

As a professor and pastor, Lausanne was a privilege to attend because it brought together my identity as an “evangélico” in the tradition of Samuel Escobar and René Padilla, and my research and teaching on the Brown Church. 50 years ago, when asked by Billy Graham to serve on the planning committee for the first Lausanne, Escobar worried that “Lausanne would cheer a ‘mutilated Gospel,’ an American middle-class gospel tainted by the ‘American way of life’ and loyalties to conservative politics” (Kirkpatrick, A Gospel for the Poor, 19). Despite his concerns, Escobar went ahead with his participation: “I think that our presence and our contribution in this committee…is worth the time, work and patience involved in it” (Kirkpatrick, 19). In his now famous plenary talk at Lausanne I, René Padilla introduced the world to the concept of “misión integral,” or holistic mission, which had been recently been developed by Latin American evangelicals in the context of military dictatorships, poverty, and civil war: “Concern for man’s reconciliation with God cannot be separated from concern for social justice…the mission of the church is indivisible from its life. I refuse, therefore, to drive a wedge between a primary task, namely the proclamation of the Gospel, and a secondary task (at best) or even optional (at worst) task of the church” (Kirkpatrick, 21). According to Padilla, any dichotomy between social action and evangelism is a false dichotomy. Christian mission is like a plane with two wings—one wing consists of the verbal proclamation of the Good News of Jesus Christ and the other the embodiment of the Gospel through justice and love of neighbor. If either wing is missing, the Gospel plane will crash.

Padilla’s speech received long applause by Christian leaders of the Global South but frowned faces and crossed arms from many North American leaders. Time magazine described his talk as “one of the meeting’s most provocative speeches” and another observer declared: “The blue touchpaper for evangelical social responsibility this century was lit at the Lausanne Congress in 1974 by two staff workers of the Inter-Varsity Fellowship in Latin America, Rene Padilla and Samuel Escobar. Their papers on evangelism triggered an explosion” (Kirkpatrick, 22). The unflagging advocacy of Padilla, Escobar, John Stott, and others, led to Lausanne’s current stated approach of Proclamation and Action. With much enthusiasm, I came to Incheon to follow in the footsteps of these three heroes of mine, be inspired in faith and action, and explore the current state of the global Evangelical movement. To be honest, I was warned by some friends that I might encounter the same “mutilated gospel” and “American middle-class gospel” that Escobar described five decades before.

The joy of Lausanne for me was connecting with new friends and family members of the global church. It was like a big family reunion. For the first time in my life, I truly worshipped together with people of every tribe, language, nation and tongue. Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, Europe. US North Americans were only 500 out of the 5,000 gathered. It was a living picture of Revelation 7:9. I also came to see firsthand what Andrew Walls, Samuel Escobar, Philip Jenkins, and others have been saying for the past several decades—the pendulum of Christianity has now shifted to the Global South. As Western Christianity sadly faces decline, Africa, Asia, Latin America, and immigrant churches in North America are the new vital centers of global Christianity. According to Walls, this pattern of Christianity’s rise and fall in different geographic centers has occurred six times throughout world history and is a Christian distinctive: “Christianity is a generational process, an ongoing dialogue with culture…The full-grown humanity of Christ requires all the Christian generations, just as it embodies all the cultural variety that six continents can bring” (Walls, The Missionary Movement in Christian History, xvii,22). Christianity is infinitely translatable and the Gospel is a “liberator of culture” (Walls, The Missionary Movement, 3, 22). Christ sanctifies us individually, and our cultures corporately, allowing our cultural treasures to shine more brightly as a sweet offering to our Savior for eternity (Revelation 21:26).

Comprised of sisters and brothers from Niger, Ghana, Singapore, the Philippines, and the US, my table group was a highlight celebrating the new reality of Christianity’s geographic pendulum shift. Unplanned and unexpectedly, I even met a brother whose parents were part of my grandparents’ ministry in China in the 1940’s. My grandfather, Calvin Chao, planted InterVarsity in China in the 1940’s and was called the “Billy Graham of China.” One of the biggest highlights was celebrating communion together led by pastors from Korea and Japan, and as a sign of the healing which Christ can bring between nations centuries at war. Revelation 22:2 experienced now, a foretaste of the future, God’s restoration of all things and healing of the nations.

Like any family reunion, however, it’s just a matter of time before familiar dysfunctions rise to the surface. They are always painful and always come with a sting of surprise, although in hindsight they should have been expected. This happened at Lausanne, too. I share some of these pains now because I want the Lausanne family to heal and grow, and I care deeply about the Church. I also share these honest words because, as a UCLA professor since 2005, I know that our Christian public witness is on the line. As shared by Dr. Anne Zaki, such truth telling is costly but necessary.

As Latinos/as sometimes we get invited to speak in predominantly white ministry spaces because, at best, conveners intuit that our voices have a meaningful contribution to make, or, at worst, because they feel obliged but don’t really understand the value of our diverse perspectives. For Lausanne, I have no reason to believe that it was the latter, but it still turned out quite badly.

Like her father 50 years ago, Dr. Ruth Padilla DeBorst was invited as a plenary speaker to speak about justice and the social implications of the Gospel. Dr. Padilla is one of the leading theological voices representing the Latino community in the global church today, and she is the modern heir of the misión integral movement begun by Rene Padilla and Samuel Escobar.

Dr. Ruth Padilla shared a compelling message on the topic of justice on Monday night of the conference. In fact, it was the only plenary talk on the subject. Her talk was wide ranging, and several sentences of her 15-minute presentation spoke to the deadly injustices occurring among the Palestinian people. To the dismay and deep anger of myself and many others, Lausanne sent out an email several days after Dr. Padilla’s talk, apologizing for it (even though Lausanne leadership was given an advance copy which they approved), and shaming her publicly in front of the 5,000 physical attendees and thousands more participating in the conference virtually.

After this occurred I was so angry that I left the conference for a day to process my feelings with Erica while seeing the sights of Seoul. I know I was not alone in my indignation. I did not recover until the last day of the conference, supported by Erica, friends from justice orgs and my diverse table group, and lifted by the inspiration of worship with brothers and sisters from Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East.

What Dr. Padilla experienced was a grave injustice. Of all the talks given that week, hers was the only one singled out for criticism. Prior to the apology email being sent out, I was already wrestling deeply with the conference because all of the chosen speakers from the US were white men, notwithstanding the fact that the greatest vitality of the US church is found today among immigrant churches. Neither was white Christian nationalism addressed, even though it represents one of the most significant obstacles to the spread of the Gospel in the world today. And then the email came. It knocked me off my feet because it threw Dr. Padilla “under the bus.”

It’s a familiar feeling. Being wanted for our Brown skin, but dismissed for sharing our perspectives which flow from living and journeying with Jesus in the same Brown skin. Welcome until our perspective departs from dominant white perspectives claiming objectivity. It’s a familiar pattern for the Brown Church over the centuries whenever we have raised our prophetic voice.

This pattern of exclusion is also a common pattern in the larger world of academia of which I am a part. My own field of Chicana/o Studies came about because research about the Mexican American community and other Latino groups was not deemed a worthy topic of investigation and because few Latina/o professors were represented in the professorial ranks owing to decades of educational segregation. When such patterns occur in the “secular” academy it is one thing. When it replicates itself in a conference like Lausanne, it destroys the witness of the Church. Many of my colleagues dismiss Christianity as a racist, sexist, and colonial religion, and what happened to Dr. Padilla reinforces that perception in their minds.

Dr. Padilla’s mistreatment made me, and I’m sure many others, feel unwelcome. “Am I really welcome here?”, I continued to ask myself. “If they did this to one of the most important leaders and voices of our community, the heir of Rene Padilla no less, what about the rest of us?”

Inspired by the radical faith modeled by my brothers and sisters from the Global South, I spent time in prayer and reflection in my hotel room on Sunday, the morning after the conference. The image that came to mind was that of a family. In that same spirit, I offer these words of honest truth because otherwise the family of Lausanne cannot heal. My feelings of anger are real and deep, but I have not given up on my family, the Church, the Body of Christ. Where else will I go? But will my siblings listen?

#L4Congress

#CongressVX

The End of Affirmative Action

As a lawyer and historian, I have taught about the legal history of affirmative action at UCLA for nearly two decades. Today’s Supreme Court opinion drastically departs from more than four decades of its own legal precedent, and represents a political and philosophical pre-commitment to colorblindness in search of a legal theory. Any 19 year old undergrad who took my class this past quarter could tell you the same.

Today’s decision is based upon several political and philosophical pre-commitments, rather than Supreme Court precedent itself:

1. U.S. society is fundamentally equal for all now, regardless of racial background. The educational playing field is equal, and so there is no compelling need for tools such as affirmative action.

2. Ethnic diversity offers little value-added to the learning experience of university students. The experiences and perspectives of students of Color in the U.S. are basically the same as every other student of any other racial background. To say the opposite is to traffic in stereotypes. A diverse classroom and university does not prepare all students in a vital way, for the increasingly diverse present and future workforce in the U.S. and the globe.

3. Because racism in no longer a significant issue in the U.S., our country has no moral obligation to utilize tools such as affirmative action to level the professional or educational playing field.

In Grutter and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) and Fisher v. Texas (2012), SCOTUS reaffirmed Justice Powell’s legal reasoning in the Bakke case (1978) and held that universities could consider race as one limited factor in admissions in order to further the compelling interest of educational diversity. According to mounds of social scientific data, when you have a diverse classroom students learn better because they are exposed to different experiences and perspectives of students from varied backgrounds. Moreover, based upon the testimony of big business and the military alike, diverse learning experiences better prepare students for a diverse global and national workforce. In order to further this compelling interest in educational diversity, well established Supreme Court precedent held that colleges and universities were permitted to take race into account as a “plus” factor, though not as a “decisive” factor in admissions. All students should be reviewed together, regardless of race or ethnicity and treated as individuals in the process (as opposed to just their race); and quotas are never constitutional. Recent legal debate tended to revolve around whether colleges and universities should be required to pursue the compelling interest of diversity first using “race neutral” means (such as accepting the top 10% of every public high school graduating class), before turning to the explicit consideration of race/ethnicity as one factor. I expected the ruling to affirm the compelling interest of diversity while requiring that race neutral means first be applied before race was directly taken into account as one limited factor among many.

In ruling to essentially overturn affirmative today, SCOTUS (along directly partisan and mostly racial lines), drastically reversed decades of its own legal precedent. It also did so in a way that is viciously overbroad.

First, SCOTUS essentially banned affirmative action for both public and private university systems. All prior major rulings centered upon public universities because the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (the central legal issue in contention) only applies to “state action”—i.e., laws or policies implemented by local, state, or federal governments. SCOTUS very easily could have limited its ruling consistent with its own prior train of courses, but instead the conservative majority felt so offended by the concept of affirmative action that it decided to go after both private and public universities using an expanded legal theory. What about the conservative rallying cry about the limited hand of government?

Second, as previously discussed, SCOTUS could have taken the approach of eliminating the explicit consideration of race in university admissions decisions under certain circumstances, while still upholding the well-established legal principle of diversity as a compelling interest. Instead, the majority went after affirmative action in terms of both diversity as a compelling interest and what constitutes a narrowly tailored affirmative action plan. With respect to diversity, it basically said that, while “commendable” (note, not “compelling”), the benefits of such diversity are not easily measurable (inconsistent with decades of its own rulings to the contrary).

It is also important to note that affirmative action has been opposed ever since its inception in the late 1960’s/early 1970’s based upon many of the same philosophical arguments that are used today—i.e., affirmative action is wrong because it requires reverse racism against whites. As a twist of reasoning, opponents of affirmative action today say things like, “In the civil rights era affirmative action was important because racism was alive and well. MLK had it right. But today, such racism is not a major issue, and therefore unnecessary.” This is disingenuous because many of those who opposed affirmative action in its beginnings still do so today—on the same grounds. In addition, one of the primary historical beneficiaries of affirmative action in educational admissions have been White women. I have nothing against White women, but it is ironic that some of the most outspoken opponents of affirmative action have been White women. Their strong opposition is akin to someone using the tool of affirmative action in order to open up the door of inclusion for themselves, but then closing the door behind them.

I also deeply resent SCOTUS’ decision because it race baits Asian Americans against Latinos, Blacks, and other ethnic minorities. This is despicable because it is a divide and conquer strategy by White opponents of affirmative action who have spearheaded the demise of affirmative action. Moreover, today’s ruling could have an impact far beyond the educational sector because affirmative action also has to do with racial and gender discrimination in employment and government contracts. Today’s decision could also make it harder for women and minorities—including Asian Americans like myself—to combat discrimination in the workplace.

In conclusion, affirmative has never been a perfect tool to level the playing field of educational diversity. But it has made an important impact for thousands such as myself who otherwise were overlooked and not given a fair chance. In 2023, racial circumstances in the U.S. are certainly different from the 19760’s, 70’s and 80’s, and for that reason it would have been understandable to update it. But instead of revision and update, a largely white majority, based upon explicitly partisan political lines, took it upon itself to throw the baby out with the bathwater and speak definitively upon current racial realities that are far from its first-hand experience. In doing so they unwittingly make the case for affirmative action itself—we all have blindspots, and that is why diversity is critical to expand our individual and corporate understandings beyond our own limited cultural perspectives. Fortunately the Bible takes a high and solemn view of the importance of cultural diversity, but that is a topic for another occasion.

I am deeply saddened. I will be for a long time to come.

RCR

"Christianity and Critical Race Theory" (Baker Academic Press, 2023): An Excerpt, Chapter 3, Redemption: Critical Race Theory In Institutions.

What follows is an excerpt of my new book with Jeff Liou entitled, Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive Conversation (Baker Academic 2023). In the excerpt below, I discuss my painful experience of being recruited for an executive-level administrative diversity position at a Christian university. My experience is quite common among Latina/o administrators and other faculty and administrators of Color.

————————

Several years ago, I was invited to apply for an executive- level administrative diversity position at a Christian university. After much prayer and reflection, I thought I should at least put my hat in the ring. I was excited by the opportunity to integrate my years of experience of teaching and leadership within the secular academy with my pastoral experience of training and mobilizing students, professors, campus ministries, and local churches in issues of race, diversity, and Christianity. I thought to myself, What a dream it would be to live an integrated life of ministry and academic vocation and to help shepherd a Christian university in issues of diversity and inclusion from a Christ-centered and biblical perspective…

In hindsight, there were some serious warning signs during the interview—some of which I can share publicly, and others that I do not feel would be ethically appropriate to share. Something just didn’t smell right. The warning signs that I will discuss exemplify many of the barriers that hinder Christian colleges, universities, and seminaries from keeping step with the Spirit’s work in the US church. In what follows, I will draw from my personal experience—my counterstory— and from the CRT frameworks of reactionary color blindness and the voices of color thesis to analyze some of these common barriers to the diversification of Christian colleges and seminaries, local churches, denominational leadership, and nonprofit organizations and parachurch ministries.

Red Flag 1: Racial Passivity and Lack of Sincere Commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

In my conversation with one senior campus leader, I mentioned that although the level of student body diversity was strong on the campus, the issue of faculty diversity was a significant concern. I noted that UCLA’s faculty was twice as diverse as the faculty at this Christian university. I also shared my ideas for faculty diversification in light of my positive experiences with programs like the Ford Foundation and the UC President’s Postdoctoral Fellowship Program. How amazing it would be to create a pipeline of recruitment for faculty of color in the CCCU based on these models in the “secular world” that have been producing positive results for decades. In response, I was told that they thought faculty diversity would naturally flow from a diverse student body. Every bone in my body knows that this is not true. In fact, five decades of social scientific research in education proves the opposite point. As will be discussed further below, this passive approach evinces an opposition to the proactive creation of programs designed to improve diverse, equitable representation in the faculty and administrative leadership of Christian colleges and universities.

Red Flags 2 and 3: Lack of Transparency and Resistance to Outside Accountability; Hostile Campus Climate for Students of Color.

This university had recently had a diversity audit conducted by, ironically, UCLA. Since I could not track down the findings of this audit online, I asked the search committee for a summary of the audit. I was told that the faculty and staff did not even know the details of the audit because the findings had not been publicly released. It was also shared with me that the university disagreed with the metrics utilized by the UCLA audit to measure its diversity; the school claimed that it was doing a better job at diversity than was reported by the audit. In addition, when I met with students of color during the campus interview, there was much pain in their eyes and in the stories they shared. They expressed concerns of a racial climate that was largely inhospitable to their perspectives and experiences.

Red Flag 4: Racially Monolithic Senior Cabinet.

Another concern had to do with the cultural makeup of the existing senior leadership and the decision-making structure of the university. Members of the senior administration with whom I met were almost exclusively white. I do not recall a single Latina/o or Asian American senior administrator. To give them the credit they deserve, they also seemed to be earnest about the desire for increased racial diversity in the univer- sity ranks. Some were “woke,” and most acknowledged that diversity was a needed biblical goal that they were seeking guidance in how to pursue—only a minority seemed resistant. One person made a negative and uninformed comment about CRT, but I was willing to let that slide. I was also bluntly honest with them when I said, “If you are not really open to ‘going there,’ please do not hire me. It would be a travesty for me to leave UCLA to come to an institution that was not serious about change.” One administrator replied that they could not afford to not go there. And a board of trustees member seemed to concur.

Red Flag 5: Disregard for Democratic Processes and Voices of Color.

At the end of the exhaustive search process, one troubling signal also occurred that forecast the final decision to be made. Though the diverse hiring committee recommended my name be put forward as the single finalist for the position, the senior leader charged with making the decision did not agree. He instructed the committee to include the name of an internal candidate on the list of finalists. In the end, a decision was made that would lead to the maintenance of the racial status quo on this particular campus.

Unfortunately, as Peter Rios,Senior Organization Development Consultant and Executive Coach at Harvard University, examines in Untold Stories: The Latinx Leadership Experience in Higher Education, my negative experience with the hiring process in Christian higher education fits a larger, consistent pattern…”

—————

To read more, see: Robert Chao Romero, Jeff Liou. Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive Conversation

Empire and Atonement

For someone who might need to hear this because of current social media debates regarding the atonement:

"You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth." Revelation 5:9-10

Much of the book of Revelation can be interpreted as a prophetic critique against the Roman Empire (symbolized as Babylon) and a warning to Christian believers of all ages against the enchantment of empire and its destructive cultural practices (Justo Gonzalez, For the Healing of the Nations).

To the seven churches of the earliest church in Asia, the writings of John declared that Jesus died on the cross, and with his blood purchased for God persons from every, tribe, language, people, and nation, and nation. The cross was indeed a rebel's death, the most vicious tool of state violence perpetrated by Rome upon those who would dare challenge the lordship and authority of Caesar who was declared "Son of God," "Lord of all," and "Savior." But what human beings, and empire, intended for evil, God redeemed for the liberation of human kind from every form of sin and bondage, both social and personal. No one took Jesus' life from him, but he laid it down of his own accord (John 10:18) to bring about the reconciliation and renewal of all things:

"For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross." Colossians 1: 19-20

Not even the powers and authorities saw this coming (Colossians 2:15).

Various theories of the atonement have developed over the millennia to try and grasp the many layers of meaning of Christ's death, resurrection, and example on the cross. Some of these include the Socinian Theory, Moral-Influence Theory, Governmental Theory, Ranson Theory, Satisfaction Theory, etc. Recently, some have been exploring the relationship between empire and the cross. In fairness, they all shed some light, and they all have shortcomings. Some have been overemphasized at times. They seek to bring glimmers of understanding to a glorious subject that our frail human minds can never fully comprehend: God incarnate came to this little marble and marvel we call the earth; lived and ministered among the marginalized, despised and colonized of Galilee and the larger Jewish nation; shared in the depths of their, and all of our human suffering; modeled a new way of living founded upon justice, mercy, and even love of our enemies; walked a road of persecution to Jerusalem as a literal and symbolic challenge to every religious, political, economic, and institutional obstacle which violates the sacred image of God in human beings and hinders their free and loving access to God; gave His life on the cross and rose on the third day to make possible the redemption of all of humankind and every aspect of God's creation which is broken and fallen because of sin.

The historical lynchpin of the various theories of the atonement which have sought to understand these great mysteries over the centuries, as attested to by multitudinous passages from sacred Scripture, is that Jesus died for us. It is a modern phenomenon with largely western roots to declare dogmatically otherwise.

In a social media age that draws likes from extreme positions, binaries, and shock value, I tremble in my boots because I know that we who teach will be held to a higher standard before God (James 3:1). On a personal level, I also know that it can be very disturbing and disorienting to be exposed to any form of biblical teaching which dogmatically asserts a single position in response to a complex topic. Healthy theology is a dialogue with, and among the saints of 2,000 years, from every place and time; the early church centered in the Middle East, the Mediterranean, Asia, and Northern Africa; the majority church which is now centered in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the immigrant and Black churches; and the historic western church which has meaningful theology to contribute to the conversation, sans its various colonial baggage.

In the glorious hope that Jesus died and rose again FOR US. And in the humility of knowing that this is a profound mystery.

Robert

Moon Knight, Más Allá del Sol, and Lessons from Liberation Theology

I'm thankful for the generations of faith that have come before us in the Brown Church, as expressed through timeless coritos such as Más Allá Del Sol and Un Día A La Vez ( Más Allá Del Sol & Moon Knight). These songs give voice to the deepest struggles, suffering, and HOPE of our parents, abuelas, abuelos and family members across the decades. They hold an important historical lesson for those of us today who are engaged in the disorienting and often painful process of spiritual deconstruction and reconstruction.

When the Liberation Theology movement in Latin America was in its early years, it articulated powerful theologies which reminded the Church of God's unique love and concern for the poor. After a number of years, however, Gutierrez, Boff, and others came to a disarming realization: they had left the poor themselves out of the process of theological reflection on poverty and the social injustices that they themselves were experiencing.

Base Christian Communities which Rev. Dr. Alexia Salvatierra talks about in her new book, Buried Seeds, played an important role in correcting this oversight. BCC's centered the spiritual lives and theological reflections of El Pueblo itself, and through them a second generation of liberation theology writings such as The God Life and We Drink From Our Own Wells were birthed. The poor went from the objects of theological reflection, to the privileged interpreters of their own experience. In my opinion, this turning inward gave the movement deeper roots and second wings.

In the current historical moment, I'm afraid that many of us are, however well intentioned, repeating the error of the Liberation Theology movement in its early days. We are pursuing important theoretical and theological responses to the pressing issues of our day, but leaving out El Pueblo itself. Sociological and political models have a role, as does the study of academic theology; but the pursuit of theological reflection about justice and race apart from deep, beautiful and messy communion with the communities for which we claim to represent is a grave error.

No doubt, many of us in the second generation carry deep wounds from our experiences in the immigrant church and have needed time and space to heal. Much work lay ahead to heal the trauma and conflict between generations. I am not naive to the complicated nature of such an endeavor. And yet. And yet.

I, least of all, know the answers to these complicated concerns.

I do know, however, that the task at hand requires a return to our radical roots lest the entire tree be uprooted.

Lord have mercy. Christ have mercy. Guide us, oh Holy Spirit.

The Buffalo Massacre, Racial Violence, and the "Great Replacement": A Biblical Rebuke from the Book of Revelation

"The Great Replacement." These are three words that should never be found within 10,000 miles of the lips of anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus. With origins about a century ago, the Great Replacement refers to the racist belief that the so-called non-white ethnic groups of the world pose an existential threat to the so-called white nations of the world through immigration. In 2022 this view takes various forms, and it is what inspired the horrific Buffalo massacre this weekend. Great Replacement theory became legitimated by Trump on a popular level through his political rhetoric which proclaimed: "all Mexicans are rapists, criminals, and drug dealers;" Covid is the "China virus;" and the U.S. needs to implement a "Muslim ban." Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham play "footsies" with the Great Replacement theory on their popular opinion programs which reach millions, and when confronted they claim they are simply speaking to issues of voting, bereft of any racialized animus. They are vipers. Wolves dressed in sheep's clothing.

Scripture is clear: We are called to a multicultural Beloved Community of hope comprised of people from every nation, tribe, people, and language and we will all offer our distinct and diverse cultural treasures as a precious and celebratory offering to God.

“After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice:

‘Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.’” Revelation 7:9-10

“I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple…The glory and honor of the nations [the God-given cultural treasure and wealth of the different ethnic groups of the world] will be brought into it [forever].” Revelation 21:22-26-27

One can be a believer in the Great Replacement or a follower of Jesus, but not both.

John’s vision of the Beloved Community from every nation, tribe, people, and language is the future to which we are called. In the words of Justo Gonzalez, “this is the vision from which, out of which, the church must live. The church lives not only out of its past, but also out of its future; not only out of its efficient cause, but also out of its final cause” (Gonzales, “For the Healing of the Nations”).

We are called from a future hope. May Jesus give us eyes to see God’s heavenly vision for the multicultural Kingdom of God, and may the Holy Spirit empower us to live from this future hope.

The Immigrant Church and the Future of Christianity in the United States

Several days ago I did a FB exercise where I asked: What is the future of the US Church in the next 30 years?

Here is my synthesis of the answers received, coupled with my own nascent interpretation. My analysis is far from complete as it leaves out consideration of important religious constituencies such as the Black Church and the Roman Catholic Church. Moreover, I am fully implicated in all of the troubles which this brief essay highlights; what follows will likely offend most people of most church traditions in some way. I apologize in advance, but hope that healthy discussion might be generated. Here goes:

Euro-American Christianity will experience continued decline in the U.S. for the next several decades. This includes the poles of white nationalist Christianity which conflates the church with US civil religion, as well as elements of progressive white Christianity which limit faith to social activism while deemphasizing personal transformation and deep spiritual encounter with the Holy Spirit. We seem to have reached a culmination of the fundamentalist-modernist debate of a century ago in which the ensuing theologies and practices do not possess within themselves what is required to successfully address the pressing problems and spiritual hunger of our day. Nonetheless, these two brands will continue to duke it out in the coming decades because they represent powerful political interests and are fueled by many financial resources. A symptom of all of this is the flight of millions of “nones” from organized religion and church affiliation, as well as the precipitous decline in regular church attendance—largely along generational lines. There is a feeling that there must be something more than Christianity as either a Sunday iteration of Fox News or MSNBC.

In the decades to come, immigrants and immigrant families will fuel the numerical growth of the US church, as well as the US in general. The data clearly show that the white US population is aging and having fewer children. Immigration will sustain the US socially, economically, and even spiritually. These domestic trends coincide with the fact that the global pendulum of Christianity is has already swung in the direction of Africa, Latin America, and Asia. The expression that Christianity is a “white man’s religion” is already not true. The present and future face of the Church of Jesus of Nazareth is “brown,” and Christianity is returning to its historical origins as a faith of the marginalized born in the Near East. In the decades to come, Christian immigrants from Latin America, Africa, and Asia will redefine the US church in practice, polity, and theology. An important related discussion not addressed in this essay is how the immigrant church will learn from, and interact with, the historic Black Church which has led the U.S. in issues of racial justice for centuries.

Christian immigrants from the Majority World bring with them a vibrant personal faith driven by radical dependence on Jesus made necessary by suffering and the struggle to survive. There’s an “abuelita faith” that has been tested and purified by many testimonies of God’s faithfulness. Global theologians also bring distinct perspectives that have the potential to address the burning questions which the US is struggling with today. Calvin and Zwingli have good things to say, but little poignance for pressing issues of race and culture. The faith of immigrants will revitalize the US church in many ways unforeseen. From such faith, revival can certainly spring.

At the same time, however, immigrant churches also possess ticking time bombs that if left unchecked might sabotage the long term revival of the US church. Examples include the prosperity gospel and Christian nationalism which were exported from the US church in recent years, and which many immigrants bring back with them. Many immigrants also bring with them beliefs and practices which have yet to be decolonized. Moreover, it is all too easy for many immigrants to assimilate dangerous US theologies through their denominational and social ties. TBN and Fox News are always just a click away. That being said and the US aside, those of us from immigrant families also have sinful human natures and generational patterns of sin that wreak havoc in our churches and families all on their own. We don’t need others to teach us how to sin, and we need Jesus just as much as any cultural group.

These promises and dangers of the immigrant church speak to the vital importance of healthy Christian education and theological formation. I’m thankful that such efforts have been long underway by immigrant led grassroots organizations. But much work remains.

If you’ve continued to read this far, thank you! I know I’m implicated in everything just said, so I point 10 fingers also back at myself. May the Holy Spirit revive the Church!

Cruel Trump Administration Policy Targets International Students

It has been said that Chinese international students who came to know Christ in the United States and returned to China are like a burning branch which set the Gospel ablaze in China, leading the house church movement to multiply into the tens of millions. This was my “Gung Gung” (Calvin Chao) and “Po Po’s” (Faith Chao) vision decades ago for their ministry Chinese for Christ. If they were still alive, I wonder what they would say about Trump’s cruel new policy targeting international students for deportation?

Trump’s inhumane policy weaponizes Covid-19 as an excuse to deport one million international students—including seminary students and students at CCCU’s—who are completely “legal” and who contribute billions of dollars per year to the U.S. economy. In fact, because they pay exhorbitant tuition rates, these international students play a vital role in keeping campuses like UCLA economically solvent.

The racist Trump policy requires international students to enroll in in-person classes this fall or face deportation. It is cruel. To illustrate the massive harm this policy engenders, take for example the University of California system of which I’m a part and which is the largest in the world. There are 40,000 international students (undergraduate and graduate) of the University of California from Asia, Africa, Latin America, Europe, and the Middle East, who can’t take in person classes in the fall because almost all of our classes will be offered online to prevent spread of a Covid and death. Another case in point—the large numbers of international seminary students at places like Fuller who are training to become pastors throughout the Global South where the Christian faith is most thriving and the Spirit of God is most at work. Also, what about the hardworking students who live in the borderlands of the U.S. and for whom international student status is their last line of protection from being deported and separated from their family members and loved ones? I could go on and on. Literally, what the hell is going on?

Will Jesus-followers stand up en masse to this naked racist aggression of the Trump administration? What about the international student ministries of large organizations like InterVarsity, Cru, Navigators? What about our local churches and million member denominations? Tens of thousands are suffering and living in deep fear and dread right now because the laws of Caesar are colliding with God’s moral law of hospitality towards the visitors of our land. Our neighbors are suffering. Our testimony is on the line. Jesus appears to us in their faces of suffering. What will we do?

————

Post-script: I'm glad that IV, Cru, and the SBC have pushed back against this policy: https://intervarsity.org/news/intervarsity-leads-christian-ministry-letter-opposition-international-student-visa-policy?fbclid=IwAR27-jJlhzkuFsAp7SvLnxACvO7doSnHsDOJmRHqUZts2C1fRvcQCMJiha0

"Brown Church" Backlash: Aquí Estamos y No Nos Vamos!

This is a response to Brown Church I received this week from a white, male Christian who did not read the book, but felt compelled to comment on it:

"There is no white, brown, or black church anyone who says otherwise is preaching a different gospel. Anyone praising the acts of Christians because the color of their skin is an anathema."

Really? I'm CURSED? I'm cursed because I wrote a book telling the inspiring story of how the Holy Spirit has been at work among my sisters and brothers of the Church in Latin America and the Latina/o community of the United States over the past 500 years as an extension of Pentecost (Acts 2: 1-12)? I'm cursed because I wrote a book which highlights the God-given community cultural treasure and wealth of the Latin American and U.S. Latina/o church (Revelation 21: 26-27)? I'm cursed because I believe that Latin American and Latina/o Christians possess dignity as equal members of the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12)?

After processing the profound arrogance of the above opening statement, my heart sank. It sank because I also thought about how such disrespectful comments are not isolated incidents, but something that Christian leaders of Color experience all the time, and have experienced for many decades. I myself have a twenty year track record in Christian ministry, am an ordained minister and national speaker and trainer on issues of race and Christianity, hold two doctorates, and am a tenured professor at UCLA. And yet they show me no respect. My heart sank further because I realized that there are probably thousands of pastors and urban youth leaders like this person who shepherd thousands of Latina/o youth in ways that erase their God-given community cultural wealth and pressure them to assimilate into a white, middle class, individualistic Gospel which claims to be normative, objective, and without cultural bias. They are damaging the lives of so many precious Brown children made in the image of God, and yet are a law unto themselves.

And then I turn to HOPE. I praise Jesus for the ways in which Brown Church has drawn many people closer to Himself, given dignity to many as His unique Latina/o sons and daughters, and provided them a spiritual home filled with hope. I think about the many life-giving responses I have received from Latina/o young adults, pastors, seminary professors, denominational leaders, and urban youth workers, and also from many African American, Asian American, and white sisters and brothers from across the denominational spectrum.

"I cried all night also. No podia dejar el libro. I've finally found a home. What's amazing is that home has been there this whole time.. I've struggled so much...While I am fairly versed on liberation theology...I never considered the fact that other Brown people are wrestling to find their place as Christians as I have. I woke up feeling so proud of being who God created me to be in such a time as this."

"This isn’t only a historical and/or educational piece but at the heart of this is a pastoral heart to reach those found in the spiritual borderlands. It gives us language, gives us a voice, gives us a home to know that being a Christian/Evangelical/pentecostal isn’t just about focusing on being saved and negating everything else. It’s keeping our feet on the ground while our eyes on Christ. Letting us find a home. It is letting us know that yes, it’s okay to have a heart for God and also an activist heart especially within the Latinx context and in the social climate we find ourselves in today."

"As a U.S. Latina Christian, this book was inspiring, educational and deeply moving! This book rediscovers and validates the theological and practical contributions of the Brown Church from Las Casas to Chavez in an honest and critical way. As a Latin@, it is deeply moving to read Brown Church in a context where our contributions have been minimized or even completely erased and where social justice has been framed as a threat to American Christianity. ¡Te felicito enormemente...!"

Thank you friends.

Nada nos detendrá porque el Espíritu de Dios está sobre nosotros.

The 4th of July, Donald Trump, and Mount Rushmore: A #BrownTheology Reflection

Have you ever had a family intervention? Family members meet at the office of a trusted therapist to confront one member of the family who has caused deep pain by their actions—marital abuse, sexual abuse, alcoholism, drug abuse, financial irresponsibility, domestic violence, or other painful actions. What happens when that family member denies all responsibility, makes up excuses, denies the harm, or, even worse, projects their guilt onto the very victims of their abuse?

Tragically, this is the situation of the United States on this 4th of July. We’ve had our racial reckoning, our racist intervention, but our president is like the abusive and narcissistic father who eschews all responsibility and projects his guilt upon those whom he has most deeply wronged. His ardent supporters are like the enabling siblings who reinforce the pathology and deep seated familial dysfunction. And last night’s 4th of July rally at Mount Rushmore was the equivalent of purposefully holding a family reunion at the scene of a father’s most obscene and destructive act of domestic violence in order to normalize his abusive behavior and absolve him of responsibility.

I’m thankful that, whether in a nation or a family, God does not overlook such abuse.

“The entire Bible, beginning with the story of Cain and Abel, mirrors God’s predilection for the weak and abused of human history. This preference brings out the gratuitous or unmerited character of God’s love. The same revelation is given in the...Beatitudes, for they tell us with the utmost simplicity that God’s predilection for the poor, the hungry, and the suffering is based on God’s unmerited goodness to us.” Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation.

“God addresses a message of life to every human being without exception, while at the same time God shows preference for the poor and the oppressed.” Gustavo Gutierrez, The God of Life.

Like a loving father, God cannot stand idly by when one of his children is being mistreated or oppressed—especially when they are being taken advantage of by another sibling. He must intervene on their behalf in the face of their suffering. To remain neutral would be to condone their abuse and the structures and circumstances that give rise to their suffering. Roberto Goizueta, Caminemos Con Jesus.

This is #BrownTheology.

Anti-Latino Police Violence: A Brown Church Historical and Theological Perspective

When I was a senior in high school my parents bought me a new black Nissan Sentra. One day I was driving with my cousin and two other Latino friends in the middle of the day in the suburbs of Alhambra, California. We saw a police car behind us, so I tried to drive especially safely. Within a few blocks, the officer pulled us over. He asked, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" He said that he couldn't see our temporary registration, which was a lie, because it was clearly posted in the back window of the car. After showing him my license and registration he tells us, "I pulled you over because I thought you stole the car. Four Mexicans in a new car." The police officer was Mexican American himself.

I am glad that so many more people are now becoming open to understanding the reality of racism in policing and other aspects of society. As a Latino, however, it is at the same time very frustrating because POC have been talking about these important matters for decades. Why are people just now starting to listen?

With respect to Latinas/os in the Southwest, we have been on the receiving end of U.S. government violence for hundreds of years--ever since half of Mexico (California, New Mexico, Nevada, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Oklahoma) was stolen by the United States in 1848 as part of what Abraham Lincoln and General Ulysses Grant called the unjust U.S.-Mexico War (and prior to that, Texas). According to Grant, "I do not think that there was ever a more wicked war than that waged by the United States on Mexico...Only I had not moral courage enough to resign...I considered my supreme duty was to my flag." Grant even believed that the overwhelming bloodshed of the U.S. Civil War was God's punishment for the wickedness of the war against Mexico.

The U.S.-Mexico War was fueled by a twisted theology called "Manifest Destiny," which said that God had given Anglo-Saxon Protestants the divine destiny of conquering North America from the East Coast to the West Coast in order to spread their form of Christianity and democracy. The violent toll of this theology was the genocide of Native American communities and the murder and colonization of the 100,000 Mexican Americans who had lived in the land for hundreds of years prior, but who were considered racially undesirable and inferior. Along with the horror of African Slavery, Manifest Destiny is one of the grave original sins of the United States. Here are two quotes from Anglo American soldiers of the time which exemplify the mad theology of Manifest Destiny and its violent consequences:

"I wish I had the power to stop their churches...to bring off this treasure hoard of gold and jewels, and to put the greasy priests, monks, friars and other officials at work on the public highways as a preliminary step to mending their ways...It is perfectly clear that this war is a divine dispensation intended to purify and punish this misguided nation." "The majority of the Volunteers sent here, are a disgrace to the nation; think of one of them shooting a woman while washing in the bank of the river--merely to test his rifle; another tore forcibly from a Mexican woman the rings from her ears. Their officers take no notice of these outrages, and the offenders escape."

The violent attitudes of Manifest Destiny ring through the ages in modern day quotes and attitudes such as, "Mexicans are rapists and criminals," we have the right to put their children in cages. Make America Great Again by keeping the "dirty Mexicans" out and sending them back home where they belong.

If the Church in America is serious about repentance from its complicity in the horrors of African Slavery and Manifest Destiny, then it must also recognize the violent consequences of such complicity which have rippled through decades to the present moment. And then it must ACT. Transform the structures and systems of local churches, denominations, Christian colleges, seminaries, and campus ministries which still reflect the attitudes of Manifest Destiny and ignore the voices and leadership of Latinas/os, Native Americans, and African Americans. And also go to the voting booth to elect officials who are truly committed to understanding and remedying the vast socio-economic and political inequalities which persist in Communities of Color because of the jagged racial legacies of our country. If all we hear is talk without action, then we will have to lament once again, with the brother of Jesus:

"14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." James 2:14-17

Robert Chao Romero

The Brown Church Poem

The Brown Church is older than the Protestant Reformation and the Protestant-Catholic divide. 6 years before Luther proclaimed his famous 95 theses, the Brown Church was protesting racial injustice in Latin America. For those who live in the "borderlands" of Christianity and social justice, the Brown Church offers a spiritual home. The "Brown Church Poem" tells the story of the Brown Church and welcomes all.

This poem is excerpted from, Robert Chao Romero, “Brown Church: Five Centuries of Latina/o Social Justice, Theology, and Identity” ( IVP Academic, release date May 26, 2020). https://www.ivpress.com/brown-church

————————————

I am the Brown Church

God calls me mija/mijo

Brown, black, white, even yellow, are all within me

When Black and White come to talk, my voice is not heard, 

            I am not invited to the table

I share much with my Black sisters and brothers, yet my voice is distinct

I long, I cry out to be heard for who I am

                        THE BROWN CHURCH

Yo soy Montesinos, gritando, in 1511, “The Conquest is opposed to Christ!”

y Bartolomé de Las Casas, whose eyes like Moses were opened to the suffering of his people and never looked back 

Yo soy Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, 

My heart burns for the treasures of wisdom which are hidden in Christ

Though machísmo assails me, aunque está bloqueado el camino, I do not relent

Yo soy Catarina de San Juan, “La China Poblana”

Stolen from Asia, enslaved by Spanish masters, I find freedom as the Bride of Christ

I too hold the keys of the Kingdom

Yo soy Padre Antonio Martínez de Nuevo México

Aunque robaron a Aztlán, I know no nation holds a manifest destiny to decimate the people of another, also beloved of God 

In the time of Jim Crow, they called me “wetback,” “beaner,” “spic,” and sent me to “Mexican schools”

Yet, I am Méndez, Bernal, Perales, Calleros

My children are not cows; you cannot place them in a barn

Yo soy Mama Leo y Santos Elizondo, MUJERES, forged in tongues of fire 

Nadie me detendrá; El Espíritu del Señor está sobre mi

I am Dolores Huerta and César Chávez

I was raised in the bosom of Abuelita Theology

And know that the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of God

Unos años despues, mis primos huyeron la tierra madre

The land of the Savior, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, Centroamérica

Argentina, Peru, Bolívia, Brasil, y al resto del Sudamerica

Empujada por el huracán de violencia

Guerillas, Reagan, priest, all vied for me

            Yet on Christ my eyes were fixed

 I am Gutiérrez, Boff y Romero

            Yo sé que el Reino de Díos trae liberación

            Que el Espiritu nos libera           

Como Protestantes, we also protested—

Porque “la ropa anglo-sajon” strangled

 la Buena Nueva

Soy Padilla y Escobar,

Recobrando la misión integral del Señor

Yo soy los dos alas del mismo pájaro, 

            Puerto Riqueño, Neyorican, Cubano, y Dominicano también

Though the colonizers have changed, the cries of Las Casas still ring strong in my ears

I am a Dreamer; indocumentado; sin papeles 

No human being is illegal.  Jesús es mi refugio.   I am a child of God.

I now seek my voice, thoughts of God my own

I also am among the 12 

God calls me mija/mijo

I AM THE BROWN CHURCH

Robert Chao Romero

Los Angeles, May 21, 2020

#BrownChurch

"The Christian-Activist Borderlands and the Brown Church"

Excerpt, “Brown Church: Five Centuries of Latina/o Social Justice, Theology, and Identity” (IVP Academic, release date, May 26, 2020).

Angel was raised in an immigrant Latino community in Santa Ana, California.  He grew up in church and was the leader of his church youth group throughout his high school years.  His working-class parents were elders and deacons, and church provided one of the few social spaces where they were treated with dignity.  As a Chicana/o Studies major at U.C. Berkeley, Angel learned about the many injustices experienced by Latinos in Latin America and the United States over the past 500 years.   He learned about the Spanish Conquest that led to the decimation of 90% of the indigenous population of Central Mexico—more than 20 million people.  He discovered that the conquest was justified by many in religious terms, based upon the belief that God had ordained for the Spanish to slaughter the indigenous people so that they might become converted to Christianity.  

 Angel was also taught about the unjust Mexican-American War which led to the violent seizure of half of Mexico and which was justified by Anglo-Americans based upon a belief in “manifest destiny.”  He learned that these same settlers created a segregated American society in which those legally defined as “white” received special socio-economic and political privileges, while Latinos, African Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Americans were segregated and treated as second-class citizens.  Angel also studied the structural inequalities in education, healthcare, and law which persist to the present-day in many Latino communities and which have their roots in this historic discrimination.   As his “praxis,” Angel got involved with the activist student group MEChA and became a leader in the struggle for undocumented student rights.  

While home for summer break, Angel tried to talk with his pastor about all that he was learning at Berkeley.   He hadn’t gone to church in six months and was struggling to reconcile the faith of his family with what he was learning about the historical abuses of Christianity.  He was also greatly angered by his church’s apathy toward the unjust deportations of millions of undocumented immigrants.  In response, his pastor told him, “Don’t worry about those things.  Those professors and students are liberals.  The ‘gospel’ is about a personal relationship with God and doesn’t have to do with that so-called social justice.”  Unsatisfied with his pastor’s response, Angel walked away from church and declared himself a Marxist.

 
As reflected in this critical race counterstory, Latina/o millennials and Gen Z’s who care about faith and justice occupy a “Christian-Activist Borderlands.”   In many institutional religious spaces they feel out of place because their concern for social justice issues is not understood and rejected as “political” and unspiritual.   On the other hand, in the world of Chicana/o Studies and social activism, their faith is usually discouraged or criticized as well.  They are told, “You can’t be a Christian and care about issues of racial and gender justice.  It’s the white man’s religion and it’s a tool of colonization.  It’s racist, classist, and sexist.”  As a result of such hostility, many Latinos keep silent about their faith in activist circles for fear of persecution or ostracization.   Others, like Angel, lose their faith after some struggles.  Some cling tenuously to a personal relationship with God but abandon institutionalized Christianity altogether.  

This negative perspective of Christianity within Chicano/Latino Studies is understandable because it is grounded in centuries of historical and contemporary misrepresentation of the teachings of Jesus.  In a very real sense, the history of Latinos in the Americas is one of systemic racism perpetuated by white individuals claiming to be Christian.  From the Spanish Conquest, to 19th century Manifest Destiny in the United States, to Jim Crow segregation and Operation Wetback, to the present-day evangelical movement that helped elect Donald Trump, many individuals continue to perpetuate the stereotype that Christianity is a racist, classist, and sexist religion. 

This is just half the story, however.  Over the past five centuries, in both Latin America and the United States, Latina/o followers of Jesus have risen up to challenge the most horrific injustices of their day.  They have fought such great evils as the Spanish Conquest and Spanish colonialism, the “sistema de castas,” Manifest Destiny and U.S. settler colonialism in the Southwest, Latin American dictatorships, U.S. imperialism in Central America, the oppression of farmworkers, and the current exploitation and marginalization of undocumented immigrants.  In every instance of racial and social injustice in Latin America and the United States over the centuries, Latino Christians—both Catholic and Protestant—have arisen to challenge the religious, socio-economic, and political status quo.  Collectively, they may be called the “Brown Church.” 

Robert Chao Romero

#BrownChurch

 https://www.ivpress.com/brown-church

Racist Zoom Bombing, Covid-19: The "Tea Bag" Reveals

As many of my friends have heard, I experienced a racist “Zoom bombing” at UCLA this week. 11 racist Zoom Bombers hacked into our class and started gleefully chanting “No-word, N-word, N-word, monkey, monkey, monkey.” It went on and on until I was forced to cancel the meeting. https://dailybruin.com/2020/03/31/racist-zoombombing-incidents-at-ucla-disrupt-online-classes-and-students/

I’ve since learned of similar stories from friends and colleagues throughout the country. After recovering from the initial trauma, I’ve been asking: What about covid-19 is bringing out the worst in people?

Moments of trial are like putting a tea bag into a cup of steaming hot water. The true scent, flavors, and colors come out.

In times of crisis, most of us retreat into our “social identities” and the values and priorities which define that identity. Social identity refers to the emotional attachment we feel to certain groups in society. Each of these social groups is defined by certain values and beliefs. Social identities are most frequently created around the “master statuses” of race, class, gender, sexuality, religion, and politics. Social identity often expresses itself in “I am” statements such as: “I am a conservative Republican,” “I am a Democratic Socialist,” “I am an Asian American,” “I am an Asian-Latino,” “I am a feminist,” “I am an evangelical Christian,” “I am Catholic,” etc.

In and of themselves, social identities are neither right nor wrong. They give us a way to find friends and affinity groups, build social organizations, and give order to society. Social identity can quickly cross the line into something bad, however, when they become defined by an “us” vs. “them” mentality: Anybody who is part of my “in group” is fully human and worthy of love and mutual respect, but anyone else is an “enemy” to be disparaged, dehumanized, and excluded. And Zoom bombed. And put in internment camps. And deported. And left to die from Coronavirus because we don’t have enough resources to take care of everyone that does not belong to our social group.

This, I believe, is why Jesus teaches us to love our neighbor as ourself (Mark 12:30-31) and even to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-45).

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.” Matthew 5:43-45

As followers of Jesus, our primary social identity as children of God must encompass a love for those like us and those most unlike us. Those from our “in group” and those who are “outside.” Not a sappy, sentimental love with no teeth, but a gritty, self-sacrificial love that costs something to the giver and seeks the full human flourishing of the other for whom Christ also died. This cuts across social affiliations of race, ethnicity, politics, gender, sexuality, religion, denomination, and whatever other social identities which may exist. And, if we say we know Jesus, then this love must extend in a unique way to whoever is most marginalized in our world (Matthew 25:31-46).

The tea bag reveals. If we say we love Jesus, then our care, compassion, and welcome must extend to all. If it doesn’t, then we are placing some other social identity ahead of Jesus and the values of his Kingdom. We cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6:24).