Christianity, Patriotism & Black Lives Matter
I was raised by a single mother on welfare in the city of Detroit. As an adult with better circumstances, I moved to the suburbs. This background has given me a wide range of experiences and a diverse circle of friends. It has also led to an interesting dynamic in my social media sphere of influence. Like most people, my social media is filled with a network of Christians and non-Christians, local and nationally, that share their political and religious views with fervor. But due to my background mine is almost split about 50/50 with “conservative” and “liberal” views. Both sides often grasping for hope in the ideas of their favorite political party’s narrative. Admittedly, I used to get really frustrated when Christians in particular would conflate their politics and religion. Well, actually I still do, but I have come to grips with it in some regard as I have learned of the historical context of Christianity and the Gospel. Specifically, I learned that the Bible presents its narrative predominantly in a historically political context. The image bearer concept (Gen 1:27–30), the messiah motif, and even the gospel (Mark 1:1, Rom 1:1–4) help to explain this reality.
The word “gospel” itself is a great example for us to start with. Gospel simply means “good news” and the phrase “good news” was a political slogan from very early on in the Roman Empire as captured in the Priene Inscription (9 BCE). There were also many other Roman political slogans that were co-opted and polemicized within Christianity. “Jesus is Lord” (Romans 10:9) was a play on “Caesar is Lord,” which appears on Roman coins and refers to one’s allegiance to the empire. Additionally, the concept of peace was codified in the Roman empire mantra of “Pax Romana” or Roman Peace (Res Gestae Divi Augusti 14CE). The Romans claimed to offer something that no other empire could or had done up until that point . . . peace. So, the practice of seeing the Bible and Christianity through our political lenses is not a new thing at all and again makes some sense (Isaiah 44:6). The problem comes when we Christians unknowingly revert back to trusting in the empire or our country for salvation or hope instead of Christ. The polemical point was that Christ and His kingdom truly embodied these principles that empires strive to represent. Therefore, we should align ourselves with Him and go forth representing His kingdom values which could be represented in a very crude sense as restoring human dignity (Matthew 28:19–20 & Ephesians 2:14–17).
Fast forward 1700 years and you have the “birth of a nation”, but not just any nation. America with its exceptionalism, freedoms, and mantra of liberty. Like most empires, it stood for ideal principles such as “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights”. The problem is that much like the Roman Empire, America could never live up to these promises for everyone. The Romans fixed this by instituting a caste system that delivered to some but was only an abstract hope for others. America likewise delivered “equality and rights” as well as liberty to some, but these virtues, remnants of a victory against tyranny, were ironically excluded from the members of society they chose to enslave. For those who were free, opportunities to speak freely even against the government, protection against an oppressive government, opportunities to build wealth, own a home, practice religion, and keep the money you earned were afforded. They experienced the unprecedented benefits and opportunities that America had to offer, which was surely worthy of their allegiance and patriotism.
For people of color, it took 86 years (emancipation 1862) for minor progress to occur, and those principles of “equality” and “rights” to begin to be steadily applied. It would take another 102 years (Civil Rights 1964) before greater progress was made, yet substantive equality remained aloof. Today, inequities in schooling, housing, and income still exist, as well as oppression through imprisonment, the yet remaining legal way to own slaves (13th amendment). In fact, since the Civil Rights era of the mid 1900s, Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed in 1968, Rodney King was almost beaten to death in 1991, and Malice Green was beaten to death in 1992. Now in our technologically advanced 21st century where camera phones are the norm, we are bombarded with the reality that the equality of blacks is still in question. These mounting cases and recordings came to a vigorous boil in 2013 after the acquittal of George Zimmerman, the vigilante that chased down and murdered the Trayvon Martin, the African American teenager who had just left a store from purchasing Skittles and juice in Florida. This event sparked a renewed cry for justice and equality that was summarized in the tweet #Black Lives Matter. Subsequently, the list of unarmed African Americans who are losing their lives at the hands of police and vigilante citizens rarely with consequences or justice continues to grow. As also videos of white women nicknamed “Karen” likewise continue to reveal the callous and dehumanizing attitudes that many still hold towards African Americans collectively.
Eventually, a silent protest began led by NFL football player Colin Kaepernick along with others where they kneeled during the national anthem. This was the match that sparked the outrage and tensions even within Christendom between those who believe that Americans should be patriotic and those who were exclaiming “black lives matter” as a cry for justice and equality. Even the president of the United States, a self-professed Christian, stated “wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when someone disrespects our flag to say, ‘get that son of a bitch off the field right now. Out. He’s fired. He’s fired”. This coincided with a movement within Christendom of blogs, vlogs, and hashtags of their own, such as #all lives matter, #blue lives matter, and others. There was a growing sense of “righteous” indignation towards those who were saying “black lives matter” and kneeling, as they were seen as disrespectful, considering all that America had delivered to them. Adding to the problem, the “black lives matter” proclamation eventually became an official organization and brought with it some confusion. They promote several anti-Christian ethics and principles, which rightly alienated many Christians. That said, I know virtually no Christian who is a member of the organization nor supports it financially. So, while they do hold to a number of anti-Christians principles, they don’t have the influence within the church that many assume and fear. As a matter of fact, I’m convinced that they have gained popularity more from Christians in their anti-advocacy of Black Lives Matter the organization than from the organization's own advocacy. This is sad because the movement, which is distinct from the organization, fits the Christian ethic and mission of restoring the image of God in the oppressed and marginalized (Luke 4:17–21 & Acts 1:8).
Sadly, many Christians conflate the organization with the movement and then spend countless amounts of energy on the organization which again seems to have no presence or relevance in the church. In lieu of standing in opposition to the historically perpetual oppression and inequality African Americans continue to endure (i.e. 200 plus years of de jure and de facto racism), these Christians balk at opportunities to fight injustice. Instead, they opt to call regard those who believe in the black lives matter movement as unpatriotic and consider them ungrateful, completely missing the reality that all the benefits that would make someone patriotic they have to experience unencumbered. Not to mention the problem of the compromise that hyper patriotism is to Christianity (Matthew 6:24). In their conflation of the organization and movement, they demand the dismissal of both on the grounds that it undermines Christianity. But there is no need for this conflation, the movement is distinct from the organization just as good Christians are distinct from those who only carry the title yet are not faithful. Some of the most well-known “Christians” today we do not associate with. We see them as sub biblical and just note the distinction in conversation rather than starting a movement to dissociate ourselves from the title Christian. We know that our life and doctrine will justify the distinction. The same is true of the phrase and organization of black lives matter; in conversation, if you make the distinction, your life and other beliefs will ground your advocacy.*
As Christians we are image-bearers of God, this is not just descriptive of how we are different than the rest of creation, but a calling, a mission. Fulfilling that mission is what Christ left us here to do until his return. Often that mission is separated into two parts, advocacy for justice and righteousness in our society and knowledge that Jesus as Savior and Lord. But I think this is a mistake, far from a Platonic dualist approach where our bodies wellbeing is less of a concern to God than our souls, Christianity presents a paradigm where God is redeeming and renewing our entire humanity, culminating with resurrection and shalom (the fullness of peace on earth, Matthew 6:10). Our advocacy in politics can be a means of attaining justice and righteousness, only not in the subversion of our hope in Christ and His Kingdom. Black lives matter is also a means of attaining justice and righteousness in the specific area of how black bodies are treated by police. But without the required blind allegiance and hope in state or demand of hyper patriotism.
* I did not address much on the problems with Christians who subscribe to the less patriotic political platform. That is because they do not have a problem using the phrase or supporting the movement and this piece is specifically about the freedom to do those two things. But for clarity’s sake, my omission in addressing their problems is not to endorse or condone their conflation of hope either.
