Today I sat down to lunch with a guest lecturer at our school. There were 4 students present including myself and 3 members of our faculty as well as our president. The conversation initially centered around the lecturer's thoughts on a particular program at our school in which I am enrolled. After this conversation ended, several folks left including myself. There was another meeting scheduled that I wanted to attend but something pulled me back to the convversation with the lecturer. As I was deciding what to do, one of the other students encouraged me to return to the conversation. We were the only students in the room.
The conversation continued turning to the subject of another program at our school in which both of us participate as students. I listened with interest to the lecturers response to questions about both fields of study. Then the lecturer proceeded to show a distinct and personal interest in the other student. When I say personal, I mean that he took an interest in her studies and her professional development. I sat beside her, listening with interest to their conversation, which he at time extended to include us all. I found myself wondering if he would then turn to me and show a similar interest in my studies and professional development. He did not. Upon finishing his remarks to her, he quickly brought the discussion to a close and we left.
I remark upon this because of the dynamics which were involved. You see, when I returned to that conversation, I was the only white person in a room full of African-Americans. It changed the dynamics for me. There was a different feel to the room and the conversation. In addition, I was the only person not working in an urban environment. I had a sense that, though I was there, I was set aside. I choose these words carefully. I was not ignored, nor was I overlooked--at 6 feet 300 pounds, I'm impossible to overlook in a group of only 6 people. No, I was set aside in the way that items of business are set aside in committee meetings because they do not merit consideration at the time. I felt dismissed, neither accepted nor rejected, just outside the conversation the way a fan in the bleachers is outside the game being played on the basketball court. It's an uncomfortable feeling, one that I have experienced before as a white person living in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods.
I found myself wondering why I felt set aside, so to speak. Was I just imagining things? I can't see it that way. When two chldren are left on the playground, and one is chosen to play and the other is not, it is easy to say that the one not chosen is "making a big deal out of nothing" when she expresses her disappointment. The truth is a judgment was made and there were reasons. Was it simply a matter of my race? Was it the fact that I currently work in a suburban setting and the lecturer did not know of my residence in and passion for the urban core.? Was it my gender? Something else about myself or my situation? I do not and cannot know for certain. However, I am prepared to say that race played at least some role in the lecturer's decision to show interest in my fellow student and not myself. In part, I base this judgment on past experience and in part because race plays into so many of our interactions, particularly those which cross racial boundaries.
I then thought about a conversation I had the previous day regarding Moses' experience as described in Exodus 2. Moses is an Egyptian prince, having been adopted by Pharaoh's daughter. He is of Hebrew descent, however, and was raised in part by his Hebrew birth mother. In this passage Moses intervenes on behalf of a Hebrew slave, killing the Egyptian slave master who was beating him or her. Most certainly, his Hebrew heritage had a part in his decision to intervene. Moses then tries to mediate a dispute between two Hebrews. The Hebrews want nothing to do with Moses. They dismiss him and his offer of assistance.
Again, there are a variety of dynamics in play. Moses is a member of the Egyptian royal family and I am sure the Hebrew slaves thought little enough of them in both senses of the phrase. So, social status is a factor in this incident. Possibly religion played a role and perhaps family relationships were involved between the two Hebrews. And race. One might argue that the Hebrews would have known Moses was of Hebrew descent, but this is not necessarily true since the Hebrews were quite numerous. The only previous knowledge we are told these two Hebrews had of Moses is that he killed the Egyptian slave master. This in and of itself begs the question, Why did they reject Moses when they knew he had intervened to help one of their own? Did their hatred and mistrust of Egyptians run so deep as to cause them to reject one who had come to their aid? It appears so.
This doesn't necesarily apply to the encounter I had this afternoon, but it does remind me that cross-racial ministries and relationships are very difficult. Healthy, honest, open relationships are hard even when race isn't involved. Moses' story reminds me that I will face rejection even from those I am trying to help. This rejection can happen even when race is not a factor, but it is more likely to happen when race is involved. This is an uncomfortable reality. Moses' story continues as he flees Egypt and again intervenes on behalf of those different from, one could even say foreign to, himself. This time his help is gratefully received and he later marries one of the women he helped. Moses inpsires me to continue reaching out even after experiencing rejection.
My encounter also leads me to think about Galatians 3:26-29 which says that our unity in Christ supercedes all boundaries of race, class, and gender. We are called as Christians to choose unity in Christ over divisions based on the color of our skin, the balance in our bank account, or our biological make up. We are called to a ministry of reconciliation as the ones whom Christ has called out of and sent into our broken world.
No comments:
Post a Comment