Problematizing Whiteness in Religious Scholarship: A Call for Racial Justice

Introduction

A recent Twitter thread asked users to “Watch Whiteness Work” by pointing out examples of White Privilege[1] across various contexts (Husky 2023). This raises important questions for religious scholarship regarding whether our academic disciplines may also perpetuate systems of inequality[2] we ostensibly critique. As Christian ethicists and theologians concerned with justice and righteousness, how might our scholarship be vulnerable to racial bias?

The study of religion and theology within higher education is responsible for confronting internalized racism within its canon and methods. As womanist scholar Emilie Townes notes, appeals to the Bible and doctrine often supplied the ideological justifications for systems of slavery, segregation, and other evils propagated upon Black bodies.[3]

Though some challenge the term “Black bodies,” significant scholarship provides a framework for differentiating between “body” and “flesh” by thinkers such as Hortense Spillers.[4]

Consequently, the origins of prominent strains of Christian theology are inextricably bound up with providing moral warrants for White Supremacy. Even today, debates regarding reparations, mass incarceration, policing, and other racial justice issues often hinge on differing religious interpretations. Without exorcising racialized hermeneutics and reasonings from its intellectual tradition, religious discourse risks perpetuating the same distorted frameworks used to legitimate oppression under purportedly ethical premises. (Though many authors discuss this, Lucius Outlaw’s Cultural Hermeneutics and Racialized life-worlds,”[5] is particularly helpful.) Progress requires more than simply diversifying voices; interrogating entire paradigmatic assumptions remains imperative.

As Joyce E. King documents in her text “Dysconscious Racism,”[6] Christian seminaries and theological institutions frequently served as key sites for indoctrinating religious justifications of segregation amongst future White ministers and congregations. Academies and missionary training programs reinforced ideas of Euro-centered cultural superiority and Black inferiority through their teaching and selective historiography well into the mid-20th century. Generations of religious leaders consumed and distributed racialized theologies they imbibed under the guise of formal theological education.[7] Undoing this damaging legacy requires not only adding diverse voices but fundamentally transforming deeply embedded pedagogies, curricular framings, and modes of knowledge production that normalize Whiteness within religious studies.

The Social Construction of Whiteness

Before analyzing how Whiteness manifests in religious scholarship, it is important to understand Whiteness as a socially constructed racial identity built on systems of oppression. Modern genetic science confirms race as a social construct rather than a biological fact. As leading scholars in the field note, because human genetic variation is continuous and nested with broader geographical ancestry, it is statistically inaccurate to partition groups into discrete racial clusters[8]. Whiteness has no coherent biological basis; it emerged as a political mechanism for apportioning economic, social, and legal entitlements[9]. When religious scholarship fails to engage the constructed nature of Whiteness, it risks subtly reifying race science’s spurious ontological claims about inherent differences.

As critical race scholars like Cheryl Harris have explored, Whiteness confers tangible and intangible benefits, functioning as a form of property and protecting the status of those defined as “White.”[10] Religious studies scholar Willie James Jennings describes Whiteness as a distorted ideological framework that falsely universalizes the White experience.[11]

These analyses require us to move beyond conceptualizations of race as merely skin color. Rather, Whiteness represents an institutionalized assumption of superiority, an implicit sense of entitlement to dominant status, and a set of cultural norms falsely framed as religiously or morally neutral. In assessing religious scholarship’s engagement with racial justice, we must examine whether White normativity subtly frames our questions, analyses, and proposed solutions.

When examining Whiteness as a systemic social force, it is vital to note that the contemporary notion of a unitary “White” race originates relatively recently. As historian Nell Irvin Painter chronicles in her acclaimed work A History of White People (2010), even those later defined as White held diverse ethnic identities until economic incentives and legal frameworks encouraged solidarity based on skin color privilege. 

For example, 19^th-century Irish and Italian immigrants occupied racial identities as Celts, Hebrews, or Mediterranean, seen by Anglo-Saxon elites as inferior “off-Whites.” However, as Painter notes, access to New Deal government benefits and housing programs often hinged on claiming Whiteness, incentivizing unified racial identification.[12]  Consequently, previously excluded European ethnicities learned to define themselves in opposition to those facing more extreme exclusion, like African Americans or Native Americans. 

Racialization in Religious Reasoning

Is religious reasoning particularly prone to racial bias? Womanist theologian Emilie Townes contends that when White Christians theologize from unexamined privilege rather than in solidarity with the oppressed, even our best ethical intentions are compromised from the start.[13] White religious scholars often focus more on understanding oppressors than listening to the exploited, prioritizing dominant voices over subjugated ones.

Philosopher of race Charles Mills argues that conceptions of personhood and ethics, developed under centuries of White supremacy, cannot but carry traces of their racist origins.[14] Racism often lingers not solely in explicit references to race but in unstated background assumptions that shape what questions scholars ask, what evidence we highlight, and whose experiences we center in analysis. Before addressing racism directly, we must confront meta-level issues regarding framing and methodology.

Womanist ethicist Katie G. Cannon has extensively analyzed how conceptions of sin and salvation developed by White male theologians fail to address the actual systemic oppression experienced by Black women.[15] She critiques revered theological anthropologies as reflections of privileged social locations unable to grapple with the deceit, violence, and dehumanization pervading Black female lives under racism.

Cannon contends that without fully incorporating the insights from those facing oppression, religious reasoning remains severely limited, repeatedly recentering the privileged through appeals to abstract universals that functionally ignore differentiated experience. As womanist theologian Delores Williams argues, analyses of sin must move beyond individual transgressions to confront corporate, institutionalized evils if they wish to speak to the realities of Black women’s lives.[16]

Watching Whiteness in Religious Education

What evidence might reveal problematic racial frameworks in religious scholarship? Sociologists have noted the overrepresentation of White authors and Eurocentric perspectives in theology anthologies,[17] while critical educators critique assumptions of instructor neutrality that disguise White cultural norms.[18] Syllabi, which focused exclusively on historical White figures, implicitly defines the White voice as intellectually normative. Who is included as an authoritative voice, and whose experiences are recentered, if mentioned at all? Watching Whiteness requires scrutinizing not only our arguments’ content but also their embedded perspectives. 

Furthermore, many have noted Evangelical religious institutions frequently espouse antiracist goals while opposing concrete policy steps to redress racial inequality, revealing a disconnect between stated values and actual priorities.[19] Does our scholarship make racial justice integral to religious understanding, or does it provide theological warrants for dismissal, distraction, and delay? If we wish to truly “do justice,” merely critiquing injustice is insufficient; actual transformation toward righteousness remains necessary.

Sociologist Patricia Hill Collins demonstrates how supposedly neutral pedagogical norms reward qualities associated with White masculinity, like rhetoric styles, communication patterns, and modes of argumentation.[20] This renders legitimate alternative approaches seen as more feminine, emotional, subjective, or impassioned as inherently less credible. Consequently, the contributions of womanist scholars emphasizing visionary pragmatism, personal expressiveness, and engaged subjectivities are unfairly marginalized through implicit biases in conceptions of intellectual rigor.

Jacquelyn Grant warns Christian educators that resistance to curricular diversity often stems not from outright racism but from seemingly benign paternalism that claims inclusion risks lowering “standards of excellence.”[21] This implicitly assumes White forms of education as intellectually superior while characterizing engagements with Black scholarship as less developed. Unless intersecting privileges shaping religious education are confessed and contested, diversity initiatives risk reifying White normativity. 

Challenges to Superficial Solutions

Noting problematic racial patterns is the first step; constructive solutions building on this diagnosis remain essential. Merely diversifying syllabi without rethinking classroom power dynamics risks superficial inclusion, masking ongoing exclusion.[22] Rethinking ingrained assumptions about knowledge production, scholarly authority, and what constitutes academic rigor and excellence provides a path forward. This requires humility in receptively learning from historically marginalized voices, not defensive posturing seeking to dictate the terms of acceptable discourse. 

Noting racism’s insidious presence cannot be an end; constructive solutions building on diagnosis remain essential. At Union Theological Seminary, a Racial Justice Transformation Committee has enacted curricular reforms, policy changes, and accountability measures to dismantle structural biases and promote an anti-racist institutional culture.

Moving from theory to praxis, allyship can become more than merely performative by engaging in some of these practices: Allies play a crucial role in this process which includes: advocating for the hiring, promotion and tenure of their qualified Black women colleagues; supporting and amplifying the work of Black women scholars in academic discourse and publications; using networks to provide mentorship and sponsorship opportunities to advance career goals; challenging various forms of discrimination, as it occurs, by calling out “microaggressions” and marginalization to foster an environment of mutual respect and understanding; and allocating resources and funding opportunities to support research, programming, and initiatives that center the experiences and perspectives of Black women. These are but a few of many specific ways Black women academics can be supported.

Religious scholars must humbly receptively learn from marginalized voices, not defensively dictating terms of acceptable discourse. Rethinking ingrained pedagogical and curricular assumptions privileging certain knowledge forms provides a path forward. The ethical telos compels commitment beyond isolated insight toward sustained institutional transformation combating racial bias in religious study and practice.

We must remain ever vigilant and bring flashes of insight into sustained commitment. The kingdom of God – our true ethical telos – compels nothing less. 

A Call to Action for Transformative Change

Addressing the deep-rooted issues of racial bias in religious scholarship demands concrete and actionable steps beyond acknowledging the problem. Within the UK, here are several key initiatives to drive meaningful change:

1. Require External Examiners for Viva: Implement a policy mandating at least two external examiners for viva examinations in the UK when no qualified internal examiner is available. This ensures a fairer evaluation process, free from internal biases that might influence the assessment of minority scholars.

2. Revision of International Rankings: Advocate for a revision of international academic rankings to prioritize institutions that incorporate majority world scholars in their faculty and integrate their work into the core curriculum. This promotes a more global and inclusive approach to religious studies, challenging the dominance of Eurocentric perspectives.

3. Robust Funding for Independent Scholars: Establish and expand funding opportunities specifically for independent scholars who face barriers in traditional academic hiring. By providing financial support, these scholars can continue to contribute valuable insights and research, ensuring their voices are not lost due to systemic hiring biases.

4. Curricular Reforms: Encourage theological institutions to undertake comprehensive curricular reforms. This includes integrating works by scholars from diverse racial and cultural backgrounds into the core syllabus and critically examining the historical and ideological biases present in existing theological frameworks.

5. Transform Pedagogical Practices: Shift pedagogical practices to include diverse rhetorical styles, communication patterns, and modes of argumentation. Recognize and validate alternative approaches often marginalized by traditional academic norms, thus broadening the scope of what is considered rigorous and credible scholarship.

6. Support Networks and Mentorship: Develop strong support networks and mentorship programs for minority scholars, particularly Black women. This includes advocating for their hiring, promotion, and tenure, amplifying their work, providing mentorship, and actively challenging discrimination and microaggressions within academic settings.

7. Allocate Resources for Racial Justice Initiatives: Dedicate resources and funding to support research, programming, and initiatives that center the experiences and perspectives of marginalized scholars. This demonstrates a commitment to systemic change and ensures these initiatives are sustainable and impactful.

Conclusion

Religious scholars must humbly and receptively learn from marginalized voices, rather than defensively dictating the terms of acceptable discourse. Rethinking ingrained pedagogical and curricular assumptions that privilege certain knowledge forms provides a clear path forward. Our ethical commitment compels us to move beyond isolated insights toward sustained institutional transformation that combats racial bias in religious study and practice.

We must remain ever vigilant, transforming moments of insight into enduring commitments. The vision of the kingdom of God – our true ethical telos – demands nothing less.

---

References

[1] Cory Collins, “What is White Privilege, Really?,” Learning for Justice, 2018, https://www.learningforjustice.org/magazine/fall-2018/what-is-white-privilege-really; Caffeine Husky, “Watch Whiteness Work,” Twitter, January 14, 2023, https://Twitter.Com/Caffeinehusky/Status/1615081908217536512.

[2] Andy Hayyes, Christopher Williams, Jimin Khim and Andrew Hayes, “System of Inequalities,” Brilliant, (no date), https://brilliant.org/wiki/systems-of-inequalities/#:~:text=A%20system%20of%20inequalities%20is,manager%20of%20a%20textile%20factory.

[3]  Emilie M. Townes, “Womanist Theology,“ Vanderbilt University, 2003, https://ir.vanderbilt.edu/bitstream/handle/1803/8226/Townes-WomanistTheology.pdf?isAllowed=y&sequence=1#:~:text=Walker%20has%20a%20four%2Dpart,critique%20of%20White%20feminist%20thought.

[4] Vincent Lloyd, “Critical Theory for Political Theology 2.0: Hortense Spillers,” Political Theology Network, January 11, 2022, https://politicaltheology.com/hortense-spillers/; H. Spillers, “Mama’s Baby, Papa’s Maybe: an American Grammar Book,” in Diacritics 17, no. 2, Culture and Countermemory: The “American” Connection (Summer, 1987): 64-81.

[5] Lucius Outlaw (Jr), “Cultural Hermeneutics and Racialized life-worlds,” Philosophy & Social Criticism (1998): 101-111.

[6] Joyce E. King, “Dyconscious Racism: Ideology, Identity, and the Miseducation of Teachers,” The Journal of Negro Education (1991): 133-146.

[7] A. M. Sacco, “Race Rendered Theologically: The Entangled Theological and Racial Discourse of Josiah Strong, 1885-1915,” Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (2021); M. Naidoo, “Challenging the Status Quo of an Institutional Culture in Theological Training,” Stellenbosch Theological Journal (2017).

[8] M. Yudell, D. Roberts, R. Desalle, and S. Tishkoff, “Taking Race Out of Human Genetics,” Science 351, no. 6273 (2016): 564-565.

[9] Cheryl Harris, “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review 106, no. 8 (1993): 1707-1791.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Willie James Jennings, After Whiteness: An Education in Belonging (Grand Rapids, William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020).

[12] N. I. Painter, The History of White People (WW Norton & Company, 2010); S. Middleton et al., The Construction of Whiteness: an Interdisciplinary Analysis of Race Formation and the Meaning of White Identity (Oxford University Press, 2016).

[13] E. M. Townes, Womanist Ethics and the Cultural Production of Evil (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 36-59.

[14] Charles Mills, Black Rights/White Wrongs: The Critique of Racial Liberalism (Oxford University Press, 2017).

[15] K. G. Cannon, Katie’s Canon: Womanism and the Soul of the Black Community (Continuum, 1998), 46-71.

[16] D. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness (Orbis Books, 2013).

[17] G. A. Yancey and Y. J. Kim, “Racial Diversity, Gender Equality, and SES Diversity in Christian Congregations: Exploring the Connections of Racism, Sexism, and Classism in Multiracial and Nonmultiracial Churches,” Journal For The Scientific Study Of Religion 47, no. 1 (2008): 103-111.

[18] C. E. Matias and J. Mackey, “Breakin’ Down Whiteness in Antiracist Teaching: Introducing Critical Whiteness Pedagogy,” The Urban Review 48, no. 1 (2016): 32-50.

[19] M. O. Emerson and C. Smith, Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America (Oxford University Press, 2001), 132-154; R. P. Jones, The End of White Christian America (Simon & Schuster, 2017); R. P. Jones, The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy. (Blackstone Publishers, 2023).

[20] P. H. Collins, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (Routledge, 2000).

[21] J. Grant, White Women’s Christ and Black Women’s Jesus: Feminist Christology and Womanist Response (American Academy of Religion, 1989), 200-215.

[22] L. Patel, Decolonizing Educational Research: From Ownership to Answerability (Routledge Publishers, 2016), 1-18, 189-212.

---

© C L Nash, 2024.

This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).

Cover Image: “White 13′ Apple Macbook 2.4 GHz, 10/31/08 – 10 of 63” by goodrob13 is licensed under CC BY 2.0.