What do you think?
Rate this book
Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America
Through a nationwide telephone survey of 2,000 people and an additional 200 face-to-face interviews, Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith probed the grassroots of white evangelical America. They found that despite recent efforts by the movement's leaders to address the problem of racial discrimination, evangelicals themselves seem to be preserving America's racial chasm. In fact, most white evangelicals see no systematic discrimination against blacks. But the authors contend that it is not active racism that prevents evangelicals from recognizing ongoing problems in American society. Instead, it is the evangelical movement's emphasis on individualism, free will, and personal relationships that makes invisible the pervasive injustice that perpetuates racial inequality. Most racial problems, the subjects told the authors, can be solved by the repentance and conversion of the sinful individuals at fault.
Combining a substantial body of evidence with sophisticated analysis and interpretation, the authors throw sharp light on the oldest American dilemma. In the end, they conclude that despite the best intentions of evangelical leaders and some positive trends, real racial reconciliation remains far over the horizon.
Combining a substantial body of evidence with sophisticated analysis and interpretation, the authors throw sharp light on the oldest American dilemma. In the end, they conclude that despite the best intentions of evangelical leaders and some positive trends, real racial reconciliation remains far over the horizon.
224 pages, Paperback
First published July 20, 2000
440 people are currently reading
5564 people want to read
About the author
Michael O. Emerson
34Ìýbooks45ÌýfollowersMichael O. Emerson (Ph.D., University of North Carolina, 1991) is Professor and Head in the Department of Sociology at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He has published widely in the areas of race, religion, and urban sociology. He is the author of 15 books and nearly 100 other publications, secured over 7 million dollars in research grants, helped secure over 20 million dollars in institutional grants, and has won several national awards for his research.
He has published with Oxford University Press, Princeton University Press, New York University Press, Chicago University Press, Allyn & Bacon, Prentice-Hall, Palgrave Macmillan, ASR, AJS, Social Forces, Social Problems, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Urban Research and Practice, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, Annual Review of Sociology, and Sociological Quarterly among others.
Dr. Emerson also has won 7 teaching awards, mentored many graduate students, and had his work appear in hundreds of media outlets. He has served as chair of the ASA’s Public Understanding of Sociology Award, Chair of the ASA’s Religion Section, President of the Association of the Sociology of Religion, on the Council of ASA’s Racial and Ethnic Minorities Section and is the founding associate editor of ASA’s Sociology of Race and Ethnicity journal.
Currently, he is the principal investigator of the largest study of race and religion ever conducted in the United States, funded by the Lilly Endowment. This project is a multimethod study involving thousands of interviews, several experiments, focus groups, participant observation, ethnography, and content analyses. Along with co-investigator Dr. Glenn Bracey (Villanova), he is working on two books from the project. Along with Dr. Gwendolyn Purifoye (North Park), he is also studying urban public transportation systems and their impact on racial inequality.
He has published with Oxford University Press, Princeton University Press, New York University Press, Chicago University Press, Allyn & Bacon, Prentice-Hall, Palgrave Macmillan, ASR, AJS, Social Forces, Social Problems, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Urban Research and Practice, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, Annual Review of Sociology, and Sociological Quarterly among others.
Dr. Emerson also has won 7 teaching awards, mentored many graduate students, and had his work appear in hundreds of media outlets. He has served as chair of the ASA’s Public Understanding of Sociology Award, Chair of the ASA’s Religion Section, President of the Association of the Sociology of Religion, on the Council of ASA’s Racial and Ethnic Minorities Section and is the founding associate editor of ASA’s Sociology of Race and Ethnicity journal.
Currently, he is the principal investigator of the largest study of race and religion ever conducted in the United States, funded by the Lilly Endowment. This project is a multimethod study involving thousands of interviews, several experiments, focus groups, participant observation, ethnography, and content analyses. Along with co-investigator Dr. Glenn Bracey (Villanova), he is working on two books from the project. Along with Dr. Gwendolyn Purifoye (North Park), he is also studying urban public transportation systems and their impact on racial inequality.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 362 reviews
October 31, 2012
Here's the thing...I really didn't want to like this book. In fact in the first several chapters I was convinced that this was a book written with an agenda and all that the author was doing was backing up his bias with data that supported his bias. The more I read the book, the more this book caused me to think and reflect on the racialization of America and what role Evangelical Christianity has had in maintaining that racialization.
Where I am now is that the author presents the evangelical church with uncomfortable truths that we must reflect on and think through.
The solutions and the realities of internal bias for the familiar...I am not sure what to do with all that. In one sense, in order to lead you have spur one another to good works. But there's fine line where the spurring becomes spearing...and when that happens, you are no longer leading because eventually no one is following.
No matter where you are on this issue, the book is well worth the read and the discussions and reflections that are spurred on by the author are well worth thinking and praying through.
Where I am now is that the author presents the evangelical church with uncomfortable truths that we must reflect on and think through.
The solutions and the realities of internal bias for the familiar...I am not sure what to do with all that. In one sense, in order to lead you have spur one another to good works. But there's fine line where the spurring becomes spearing...and when that happens, you are no longer leading because eventually no one is following.
No matter where you are on this issue, the book is well worth the read and the discussions and reflections that are spurred on by the author are well worth thinking and praying through.
December 28, 2007
This book rocked my world. I developed a heart for racial reconciliation in college through InterVarsity and saw the need for it in the church at large. I watched as minority bible stuides were formed, and collapsed, as some leaders will developed and as the fellowship remained relatively mono-ethnic.
This book, written from a socialogical point of view, articulated a lot of the frustrations I have had over the years with the high inertia and heavy cost required for racial reconciliation. As they articulated how the very tools evangelicals used to deal with issues of race actually perpetuate the problem i could think of examples of this being true.
Though sobering, I would say this is a must read for any evangelical, heck any white american interested in issues of ethnic and racial reconciliation.
This book, written from a socialogical point of view, articulated a lot of the frustrations I have had over the years with the high inertia and heavy cost required for racial reconciliation. As they articulated how the very tools evangelicals used to deal with issues of race actually perpetuate the problem i could think of examples of this being true.
Though sobering, I would say this is a must read for any evangelical, heck any white american interested in issues of ethnic and racial reconciliation.
February 18, 2018
"The congregation often looks to religion not as an external force that places radical demands on their lives, but rather as a way to fulfill their needs" (p164).
Divided by Faith is getting long in the tooth now (published in 2000), but it still offers a challenging window into conservative evangelical thinking on race. Emerson and Smith reveal (confirm?) that a majority of American evangelicals take an individualistic and moralistic approach to racial issues. In so doing, no matter how well-meaning, they reproduce and in some cases exacerbate racial inequality.
Emerson and Smith, like most humanities and social science academics that I know, favor structural explanations and solutions for inequality. Such solutions usually mean state coercion, as the authors imply by criticizing individual freedom, choice, and similar "American" values. The book stops short of offering any solutions, which limits the power of its critique. The authors are so confident that their enlightened sociological perspective is adequate to diagnose the shortcomings of religious views on racial inequality, the "real" cause of racial inequality, and therefore the most effective solutions, but they refuse to give readers any idea of what a sociologically acceptable, structural solution would be. Are they afraid that most would find it unacceptable?
Still, the book is 2/3 right. Many Christians are consumerist beyond their knowing it in their lives and religious practice. We are too individualistic and only interested in justice to a comfortable degree. And racial divisions do indeed have structural components. For example, the book highlights a fascinating and troubling paradox: that the marketplace structure of American religion (you are free to choose where you worship and who you listen to) means that religion's potential to spread a prophetic and radical message is constrained by the need to attract and keep parishioners. So leaders who want to challenge the comfortable and racially segregated lives of their congregants risk losing their audience, so they can only be as challenging as their group allows. But what is the solution? Surely Emerson and Smith aren't advocating the establishment of religion? They don't really say beyond more vague references to "structural solutions." The implication is that producing economic equality through housing, education, and jobs policies will lead to integrated social lives (including religious).
So is their problem with evangelicalism that its frame prevents parishioners from adopting structural change? Or that religion itself should produce social change but doesn't because of its arbitrary emphasis on individual morality? Again, the authors never come out and say it, though they imply in the conclusion that Christianity could encourage much needed reconciliation and forgiveness, while the state (led by experts) creates policies that constrain and direct individual choices towards equality, integration, and interdependence.
My major annoyance with the book is the positivistic arrogance of sociology. The discussion of data and sociological "laws" needed to be supplemented by more history and humility. Indeed, if congregations segregate according to established sociological principle, what hope do we have? Sociology and religion come from two very different ways of knowing and understanding the world - approaches that are in some ways incompatible and in other ways complementary. Their complementarity is finally discussed in the book's short conclusion, but the tension between them was apparent throughout. Is sociology necessary to change evangelical views on race, or would better theology do just as well?
In short, Divided by Faith is an enlightening and frustrating read. It can help readers reflect on the realities of racial segregation within Christianity and what might be done. But it also reveals epistemological hubris and condescension of sociology. The book would be stronger if the authors challenged themselves to the kind of self-critical reflection that they demand of evangelicals.
Divided by Faith is getting long in the tooth now (published in 2000), but it still offers a challenging window into conservative evangelical thinking on race. Emerson and Smith reveal (confirm?) that a majority of American evangelicals take an individualistic and moralistic approach to racial issues. In so doing, no matter how well-meaning, they reproduce and in some cases exacerbate racial inequality.
Emerson and Smith, like most humanities and social science academics that I know, favor structural explanations and solutions for inequality. Such solutions usually mean state coercion, as the authors imply by criticizing individual freedom, choice, and similar "American" values. The book stops short of offering any solutions, which limits the power of its critique. The authors are so confident that their enlightened sociological perspective is adequate to diagnose the shortcomings of religious views on racial inequality, the "real" cause of racial inequality, and therefore the most effective solutions, but they refuse to give readers any idea of what a sociologically acceptable, structural solution would be. Are they afraid that most would find it unacceptable?
Still, the book is 2/3 right. Many Christians are consumerist beyond their knowing it in their lives and religious practice. We are too individualistic and only interested in justice to a comfortable degree. And racial divisions do indeed have structural components. For example, the book highlights a fascinating and troubling paradox: that the marketplace structure of American religion (you are free to choose where you worship and who you listen to) means that religion's potential to spread a prophetic and radical message is constrained by the need to attract and keep parishioners. So leaders who want to challenge the comfortable and racially segregated lives of their congregants risk losing their audience, so they can only be as challenging as their group allows. But what is the solution? Surely Emerson and Smith aren't advocating the establishment of religion? They don't really say beyond more vague references to "structural solutions." The implication is that producing economic equality through housing, education, and jobs policies will lead to integrated social lives (including religious).
So is their problem with evangelicalism that its frame prevents parishioners from adopting structural change? Or that religion itself should produce social change but doesn't because of its arbitrary emphasis on individual morality? Again, the authors never come out and say it, though they imply in the conclusion that Christianity could encourage much needed reconciliation and forgiveness, while the state (led by experts) creates policies that constrain and direct individual choices towards equality, integration, and interdependence.
My major annoyance with the book is the positivistic arrogance of sociology. The discussion of data and sociological "laws" needed to be supplemented by more history and humility. Indeed, if congregations segregate according to established sociological principle, what hope do we have? Sociology and religion come from two very different ways of knowing and understanding the world - approaches that are in some ways incompatible and in other ways complementary. Their complementarity is finally discussed in the book's short conclusion, but the tension between them was apparent throughout. Is sociology necessary to change evangelical views on race, or would better theology do just as well?
In short, Divided by Faith is an enlightening and frustrating read. It can help readers reflect on the realities of racial segregation within Christianity and what might be done. But it also reveals epistemological hubris and condescension of sociology. The book would be stronger if the authors challenged themselves to the kind of self-critical reflection that they demand of evangelicals.
October 23, 2018
I read this book as research for a paper I am working on for a seminary class. I was interested to learn about the church's involvement in racial issues and strategies for improving areas of conflict. After reading this book, I have no more tools than when I started.
Though the authors are not forthcoming with their own perspective or motivation for writing this book, their bias is evident from the reductionistic way they talk about their data, the descriptors and tone they use when referencing their subjects and the simplistic, one-sided conclusions at which they arrive. While the overall tone of the book tries to sound neutral, the interpretation of history, current trends and data points is anything but. The authors bring assumptions to the writing of this book and dismiss opposing viewpoints from the people they interviewed as ignorance or bias. With very few exceptions, white people, especially "isolated" and evangelical white people, are the problem because they fail to recognize and actively correct the systematic and institutional racialization that creates "separate networks and differential access to valued resources, such as health, wealth and status." The authors fail to make note of (or even, it seems, conceive of) other factors that could be at play or the essential caveat of all research: correlation does not equal causation.
Perhaps the most unfortunate bias is the one that drives the entire argument. The author's narrow, flawed understanding of the Church (its purpose and goals) leads them to this conclusion: "Despite devoting considerable time and energy to solving the problem of racial division, white evangelism likely does more to perpetuate the racialized society than to reduce it." They claim that the stronger the religious tie to church, the more intensely the "structural arrangements" of churches show "formation and maintenance of group biases, direct altruistic religious impulses to express themselves primarily within racially separate groups, contribute to segregated social networks and identities, help perpetuate socioeconomic inequality by race and generally fragment and drown out religious prophetic voices calling for an end to racialization."
The authors criticize church leaders who are explicitly pursuing gospel opportunities and evangelism instead of focusing on what they consider to be the most important issue: solving the racialization of America. Defined as a society "wherein race matters profoundly for differences in life experiences, life opportunities, and social relationships," the authors argue that reducing racialization should be the highest priority and that evangelicals, far from making it the highest priority "view their primary task as evangelism and discipleship" and therefore shy away from pursuits that take away from those goals. Not only that, but the nature of church (as the author's see it) perpetuates racial separation just by being what it is.
Citing the individualistic and relational values of white evangelicals and the natural outcome of division when people are grouped according to similarities, in addition to the tendency of people to spend more resources on their own "ingroup," the evangelical church is, to the authors, an unhelpful (and even detrimental) force in American society. Even though the authors concede that "religion has tremendous potential for mitigating racial division and inequality" and that "most religions teach love, respect, and equality of all peoples" and that "faith motivated the fight against slavery" and "played a central role in the Civil Rights movement," nevertheless the "countervailing influences" of religion on racialization "ironically help generate and perpetuate the very conditions that these positive actions seek to end."
The authors, in an extremely, irresponsibly brief and mission-seeking consultation of scripture, claim that "racial reconciliation is God's imperative." Listing several steps that Christians are therefore compelled to take toward that end (developed by the early leaders of the cause to end racialization), the authors evaluate evangelicals on the performance of these steps and find them overwhelmingly wanting.
Unfortunately, what the authors fail to perceive is that ending racialization is actually not the primary goal of the Church and it never has been. To hold the Church (or evangelicals on which this book is focused) accountable to a goal that the authors somehow deemed primary at the exclusion of the Church's actual stated goals is foolish and arrogant. It would be like me claiming that car companies are failing at reducing the class gap because car companies make cars at different price points and perpetuate the rich having nicer cars than the poor. Placing a priority on car manufacturers to solve the class gap and then evaluating them on their progress when they never claimed to be about that objective is ridiculous. It's not a perfect analogy because the Church does have something to do with justice and brotherhood, but even if we assumed that every culture dealt with the same problems that we do in the United States (making racialization a common theme in every society that ever existed), the Bible simply does not place racial reconciliation specificaly in the center of God's directive to the church and believers. Is it incumbent on all believers to oppose injustice and pursue relationships with others in the freedom of Christ (not according to social, racial or any other distinguishable trait)? Yes, absolutely. But the church is not about the reduction of racialization. It's about Christ. It's about the gospel. It's about treasuring Christ even while we suffer the effects of sin in this world (in a variety of forms). If you want to try make the case (from Scripture since that is the charter for the Church) that ending racialization is the most important thing ever for the church and then point out areas in which evangelicals may inadvertently (or even sinfully) be perpetuating racial injustice and how it can improve in line with what it already believes, go ahead. Declaring the church to be about your own idea of a perfect society, though, and then holding the church accountable to that idea and claiming that it is inherently incompatible with that idea is just a ridiculous premise for a book.
While there was some food for thought in this book (like how premilienialism/postmilenialism impacts how people view the urgency of cultural/societal change; how "homogenous networks" naturally create advantages for some; how the relational emphasis of evangelicalism influences people to see the solution to societal problems as being solved on the individual person-to-person level), the deeply misconceived understanding of the Church undermines almost everything the authors try to argue. There's more I could say, and I'll be organizing my thoughts further as I start writing my paper, but, overall, I was pretty disappointed with the idea of an entire book being written about how evangelicals are failing at a goal that they never claimed as their primary drive in the first place. I think it's very shortsighted and narrow-minded of the authors to make the Church, an entity that has existed for 2000 years and has explicit goals and teachings, revolve around something that, according to their own summarization, began as early as the 1700s and isn't mentioned in Scripture at all (as such). Not only that, but there are no answers to the question "What can/should be done?" other than, stated in the last few paragraphs, that the church should engage in "more serious reflection on race-relation issues, in dialogue with educated others."
So the church, despite its best efforts to do what the church is actually designed to do, is failing at the authors' idea of reducing racialization in America because the church inherently creates an environment where racialization flourishes, but it's beyond the authors' scope to do anything but criticize. And, again, given the authors' misunderstanding of the church and Christianity's goals in general, that criticism rings very hollow. If anything, this book has confirmed that fact that the Church will have many priorities put on it (even by people who have a very shallow understanding of the Bible and Christianity), but it needs to stay true to the Great Commission and the teachings of Christ (to make disciples and to "grow in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.") These goals will impact the world and our relationships with others according to God's plan, not the changing perspectives of men.
Though the authors are not forthcoming with their own perspective or motivation for writing this book, their bias is evident from the reductionistic way they talk about their data, the descriptors and tone they use when referencing their subjects and the simplistic, one-sided conclusions at which they arrive. While the overall tone of the book tries to sound neutral, the interpretation of history, current trends and data points is anything but. The authors bring assumptions to the writing of this book and dismiss opposing viewpoints from the people they interviewed as ignorance or bias. With very few exceptions, white people, especially "isolated" and evangelical white people, are the problem because they fail to recognize and actively correct the systematic and institutional racialization that creates "separate networks and differential access to valued resources, such as health, wealth and status." The authors fail to make note of (or even, it seems, conceive of) other factors that could be at play or the essential caveat of all research: correlation does not equal causation.
Perhaps the most unfortunate bias is the one that drives the entire argument. The author's narrow, flawed understanding of the Church (its purpose and goals) leads them to this conclusion: "Despite devoting considerable time and energy to solving the problem of racial division, white evangelism likely does more to perpetuate the racialized society than to reduce it." They claim that the stronger the religious tie to church, the more intensely the "structural arrangements" of churches show "formation and maintenance of group biases, direct altruistic religious impulses to express themselves primarily within racially separate groups, contribute to segregated social networks and identities, help perpetuate socioeconomic inequality by race and generally fragment and drown out religious prophetic voices calling for an end to racialization."
The authors criticize church leaders who are explicitly pursuing gospel opportunities and evangelism instead of focusing on what they consider to be the most important issue: solving the racialization of America. Defined as a society "wherein race matters profoundly for differences in life experiences, life opportunities, and social relationships," the authors argue that reducing racialization should be the highest priority and that evangelicals, far from making it the highest priority "view their primary task as evangelism and discipleship" and therefore shy away from pursuits that take away from those goals. Not only that, but the nature of church (as the author's see it) perpetuates racial separation just by being what it is.
Citing the individualistic and relational values of white evangelicals and the natural outcome of division when people are grouped according to similarities, in addition to the tendency of people to spend more resources on their own "ingroup," the evangelical church is, to the authors, an unhelpful (and even detrimental) force in American society. Even though the authors concede that "religion has tremendous potential for mitigating racial division and inequality" and that "most religions teach love, respect, and equality of all peoples" and that "faith motivated the fight against slavery" and "played a central role in the Civil Rights movement," nevertheless the "countervailing influences" of religion on racialization "ironically help generate and perpetuate the very conditions that these positive actions seek to end."
The authors, in an extremely, irresponsibly brief and mission-seeking consultation of scripture, claim that "racial reconciliation is God's imperative." Listing several steps that Christians are therefore compelled to take toward that end (developed by the early leaders of the cause to end racialization), the authors evaluate evangelicals on the performance of these steps and find them overwhelmingly wanting.
Unfortunately, what the authors fail to perceive is that ending racialization is actually not the primary goal of the Church and it never has been. To hold the Church (or evangelicals on which this book is focused) accountable to a goal that the authors somehow deemed primary at the exclusion of the Church's actual stated goals is foolish and arrogant. It would be like me claiming that car companies are failing at reducing the class gap because car companies make cars at different price points and perpetuate the rich having nicer cars than the poor. Placing a priority on car manufacturers to solve the class gap and then evaluating them on their progress when they never claimed to be about that objective is ridiculous. It's not a perfect analogy because the Church does have something to do with justice and brotherhood, but even if we assumed that every culture dealt with the same problems that we do in the United States (making racialization a common theme in every society that ever existed), the Bible simply does not place racial reconciliation specificaly in the center of God's directive to the church and believers. Is it incumbent on all believers to oppose injustice and pursue relationships with others in the freedom of Christ (not according to social, racial or any other distinguishable trait)? Yes, absolutely. But the church is not about the reduction of racialization. It's about Christ. It's about the gospel. It's about treasuring Christ even while we suffer the effects of sin in this world (in a variety of forms). If you want to try make the case (from Scripture since that is the charter for the Church) that ending racialization is the most important thing ever for the church and then point out areas in which evangelicals may inadvertently (or even sinfully) be perpetuating racial injustice and how it can improve in line with what it already believes, go ahead. Declaring the church to be about your own idea of a perfect society, though, and then holding the church accountable to that idea and claiming that it is inherently incompatible with that idea is just a ridiculous premise for a book.
While there was some food for thought in this book (like how premilienialism/postmilenialism impacts how people view the urgency of cultural/societal change; how "homogenous networks" naturally create advantages for some; how the relational emphasis of evangelicalism influences people to see the solution to societal problems as being solved on the individual person-to-person level), the deeply misconceived understanding of the Church undermines almost everything the authors try to argue. There's more I could say, and I'll be organizing my thoughts further as I start writing my paper, but, overall, I was pretty disappointed with the idea of an entire book being written about how evangelicals are failing at a goal that they never claimed as their primary drive in the first place. I think it's very shortsighted and narrow-minded of the authors to make the Church, an entity that has existed for 2000 years and has explicit goals and teachings, revolve around something that, according to their own summarization, began as early as the 1700s and isn't mentioned in Scripture at all (as such). Not only that, but there are no answers to the question "What can/should be done?" other than, stated in the last few paragraphs, that the church should engage in "more serious reflection on race-relation issues, in dialogue with educated others."
So the church, despite its best efforts to do what the church is actually designed to do, is failing at the authors' idea of reducing racialization in America because the church inherently creates an environment where racialization flourishes, but it's beyond the authors' scope to do anything but criticize. And, again, given the authors' misunderstanding of the church and Christianity's goals in general, that criticism rings very hollow. If anything, this book has confirmed that fact that the Church will have many priorities put on it (even by people who have a very shallow understanding of the Bible and Christianity), but it needs to stay true to the Great Commission and the teachings of Christ (to make disciples and to "grow in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.") These goals will impact the world and our relationships with others according to God's plan, not the changing perspectives of men.
July 10, 2016
I wanted to hate this book. Perhaps I even literally threw the book at the wall several times. But there's no denying how grateful I am to have let this book marinate my soul.
I never personally struggled with racism. So I walked through life thinking everyone is responsible for themselves and what they put in this world. And that's not false. But I discovered so much more. I discovered systemic racism. And it rocked me.
So before you speak out on race relations at all, I urge you to study about the history of our country, the history of our religion and how both are intertwined and are the foundation for the problems we are continuing to have today in a racialized society.
I never personally struggled with racism. So I walked through life thinking everyone is responsible for themselves and what they put in this world. And that's not false. But I discovered so much more. I discovered systemic racism. And it rocked me.
So before you speak out on race relations at all, I urge you to study about the history of our country, the history of our religion and how both are intertwined and are the foundation for the problems we are continuing to have today in a racialized society.
March 9, 2007
This is a very good sociology book on how evangelical America is just as divided (if not more) by race and socio-economics. It is a sharp criticism of the American church, of its racism and bias towards class and ethnicity. Truly a wake up call for anyone who says they're a follower of Jesus.
October 6, 2016
I honestly believe everyone in America should read this book, especially white America. I can't claim to know the solution now to solve racialization but this book has drastically open my eyes to the truth, depth and pains of racial injustice in our country and I think the last sentences of the books sum it up well..."Good intentions are not enough. But educated, sacrificial, realistic, efforts made in faith across racial line can help us together move toward a more just, equitable, and peaceful society. And that is a purpose well worth striving toward."
July 13, 2018
This book is written by sociologists from Rice and UNC who write in the typical detached pseudo-objective world of scholarship. You will find no solutions here. They do not freely reveal their own experiences, convictions, world-views, etc. Their book is an analysis of white evangelicals and our perpetuation of what they call "racialization." In short, they argue that well-meaning (and fairly stupid) evangelicals perpetuate and even exasperate the disparate life experiences, economic opportunities, and social relationships of African Americans. They helpfully differentiate between racism, which America has basically left behind, and racialism, which is the condition of keeping blacks in their place in part due to a well intentioned over-emphasis on individual and inter-personal relationships while ignoring social, ecclesiastical, and governmental structures. Fortunately the authors are transparent about their critical book with no solutions. Near the end of the book they write, "Our analysis has not led us to specific solutions for ending racialization. (171)." From someone who lives in the real world instead of the academic world, we have no such liberty to write or think or live like that! Also, the book is dated. It was written in 2000 and I do not find it speaking to the situation on the ground here in the foothills of Northern California or in the more diverse and metropolitan Bay Area. Those things aside, I am glad I read this book for the following reasons:
(1) Their concise history of black-white relations from 1700 through the civil rights era to the present day (2000) was eminently helpful. Their chapter "From Separate Pews to Separate Churches" was educational for me. I had never thought through the reality that our churches were integrated prior to the Civil War. The black man did not have the opportunity or resources to start and shepherd churches in the South until well after the Civil War. At that point both whites and blacks were for segregated churches (see p 39). In reality, Christ's church in America has never recovered. In large part we remain segregated today. The reasons for segregation have changed, but the reality has not.
(2) The book serves as a rebuke to Christians like me who believe that the make-up of local congregations should reflect, in their leadership and their membership, the racial, economic, and educational diversity represented in their communities at-large. Our neighborhoods are not integrated, but His church should be (Gal 3:28; Col 3:9-11, et. al.) The book serves as a challenge for us who believe the gospel should be visible by unifying very different peoples because of faith in Christ alone.
(3) The book introduced me to helpful categories and concepts. E.g., "The _miracle motif_ is the theologically rooted idea that as more individuals become Christians, social and personal problems will be solved automatically (117)." The miracle motif misunderstands the ecclesial and corporate implications of the gospel. Another example is what the authors call "The Ethical Paradox of Group Loyalty." In short, they point out that individual unselfishness transmutes into group selfishness. When a bunch of well-intentioned, unselfish people get together and form a group identity, the group views actions to protect and strengthen the group as loyalty. The unintended consequences of this "loyalty" can be detrimental to others. This is cogently argued on 159.
(4) They highlighted the major shift that takes place in a white evangelical's view of a minority race when the white evangelical lives in a neighborhood with minorities, befriends some of them (have you had someone of a minority ethnicity to dinner at your home in the last year?), and finally develops a friendship with someone from the minority race that is of equal or higher socioeconomic status.
A fascinating and frustrating read that will be of interest to few people. What needs to be written are books that are well-informed biblically and historically that deal with both the implications of the gospel for ethnicities and various economic strata _that_ have practical solutions for contemporary congregations in urban, suburban, small-town, and rural areas.
(1) Their concise history of black-white relations from 1700 through the civil rights era to the present day (2000) was eminently helpful. Their chapter "From Separate Pews to Separate Churches" was educational for me. I had never thought through the reality that our churches were integrated prior to the Civil War. The black man did not have the opportunity or resources to start and shepherd churches in the South until well after the Civil War. At that point both whites and blacks were for segregated churches (see p 39). In reality, Christ's church in America has never recovered. In large part we remain segregated today. The reasons for segregation have changed, but the reality has not.
(2) The book serves as a rebuke to Christians like me who believe that the make-up of local congregations should reflect, in their leadership and their membership, the racial, economic, and educational diversity represented in their communities at-large. Our neighborhoods are not integrated, but His church should be (Gal 3:28; Col 3:9-11, et. al.) The book serves as a challenge for us who believe the gospel should be visible by unifying very different peoples because of faith in Christ alone.
(3) The book introduced me to helpful categories and concepts. E.g., "The _miracle motif_ is the theologically rooted idea that as more individuals become Christians, social and personal problems will be solved automatically (117)." The miracle motif misunderstands the ecclesial and corporate implications of the gospel. Another example is what the authors call "The Ethical Paradox of Group Loyalty." In short, they point out that individual unselfishness transmutes into group selfishness. When a bunch of well-intentioned, unselfish people get together and form a group identity, the group views actions to protect and strengthen the group as loyalty. The unintended consequences of this "loyalty" can be detrimental to others. This is cogently argued on 159.
(4) They highlighted the major shift that takes place in a white evangelical's view of a minority race when the white evangelical lives in a neighborhood with minorities, befriends some of them (have you had someone of a minority ethnicity to dinner at your home in the last year?), and finally develops a friendship with someone from the minority race that is of equal or higher socioeconomic status.
A fascinating and frustrating read that will be of interest to few people. What needs to be written are books that are well-informed biblically and historically that deal with both the implications of the gospel for ethnicities and various economic strata _that_ have practical solutions for contemporary congregations in urban, suburban, small-town, and rural areas.
August 10, 2020
Outside of the literal publishing year and cited statistics, it would be horrifyingly easy to assume this book was written last year. That being said, our current political / religious situation now feels inevitable after reading this book, which is tragic in its own right. I can’t tell if understanding this at a deeper level is better or worse than not knowing. It must be both.
March 18, 2019
First reading (07/05/17)�
A must read. Insightful and convicting.
Second reading (13/03/19)�
The recently documented slow and steady exodus of African Americans from Protestant evangelical churches in America raises a pointed question not many are willing to engage: why is the majority of the black population in America uncomfortable in majority white churches? Better still, why is there even a racial divide within American churches? The Apostle Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 2:11�22 paints a radical picture of the most divided people coming together as one new humanity in Christ. Contra Paul’s teaching, the evangelical landscape resembles a reality less than satisfying, falling far short from the supposed unity we have in Christ. Written almost twenty years ago, Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America is Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith’s attempt to unearth evangelicalism and its relationship to race relations in America.
Michael O. Emerson is author of Religion Matters: What Sociology Teaches Us About Religion in Our World and serves as provost of North Park University in Chicago. In this title, Emerson is joined by leading American theorist of the philosophy of critical realism and the social theory of personalism, Christian Smith. Currently serving as the William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center for the Study of Religion and Society at the University of Notre Dame, Smith is the also author of American Evangelicalism and Christian America? What Evangelicals Really Want.
In this present work Emerson and Smith examine the role of white evangelicalism in black-white relations (ix). Divided by Faith combines history with the authors� own socio-theological research in which over two thousand interviews were conducted with contemporary evangelicals and other Americans in the late 1990’s. Emerson and Smith’s thesis is this: in spite of evangelicals attempting to end racial division and inequality their cultural and epistemological tools as well as the very structure of Protestant religion is more likely to perpetuate the racial division. The reader in challenged by the authors� attempts to go beyond the “old idea that racial problems result from ignorant, prejudiced, mean people.� Instead, effects of culture, values, norms, and the very structure of evangelical religion in America are explored and shown to “paradoxically have negative effects on race relations.� (ix) Divided by Faith speaks directly to the recent exodus of African Americans from white churches, the latter serving as a fulfilment of the concerns espoused by Emerson and Smith some twenty years ago.
Summary & Critical Evaluation�
The introduction of Divided by Faith delineates key terms in their study, particularly the identity of evangelicals, which the authors apply broadly: holding to the authority of Scripture, believe Christ died for the salvation of all, and teaching the necessity of “being born again,� with evangelism being a central tenet. (3) I think that a broad application of ‘evangelical� aided their research as it brought more variety into their field of questioning.
Chapter one sees Emerson and Smith further defining the scope of their study. More specifically, they get to the heart of the book’s fundamental concern: a “racialized society� (7). This is no doubt the most essential concept in the book’s intended aims. Without understanding this concept, not much of what follows will make sense. A racialized society is one wherein “race matters profoundly for differences in life experiences, life opportunities, and social relationships.� (7) But this concept has particular specificity in mind: economic, political, social, and even psychological discrepancies that are evidenced along racial lines. Another important aspect of the racialized society is that it is a dynamic phenomenon, adapting and existing in a state of fluidity. Racism, then, is not merely individual, overt prejudice, but the “collective misuse of power that results in diminished life opportunities for some racial groups.� (9) Racism, then, is perpetually changing, continually in motion, whilst simultaneously, and paradoxically so, remaining immutable in its application and justification of the racialized societal system. (9) To prove the reality of the racialized society, the authors engage and utilize several areas of disparity between white and black Americans: from marriage (11), to economic inequality (12�14), to health, life and even death (14). The statistics appear to be used fairly and represent clear lines of disparity. The more than 2, 500 phone calls and almost 200 face-to-face interviews over twenty-three states (18�19), more clearly reveal the theology and sociological underpinning that produce such statistics.
In chapter two the authors further support their thesis with a brief but concise examination of evangelical thought and practice from the beginning of the 18th century up until 1964. This chapter primarily seeks to understand how evangelicals have thought of race in the past and “what sorts of actions they have taken to address racial issues.� (19) Evangelicalism has historically been driven by evangelism and discipleship, whilst challenging institutions and social structures has not been a major concern (21). From Cotton Mather (23), to Billy Graham (46), racialization has remained intact, though, no doubt, it “changed in form� (48). In fact, from Mather to Graham, the white-black race divide has ironically regressed from separate pews to separate churches. The historical survey is compelling and reveals a sad state of affairs in which changing wider and larger structures has been something white Protestants have offered resistance to, perhaps in favor for the economic and political power it presented.
The author’s additionally looked at the Promise Keeper organization, which aimed at bringing about reconciliation between blacks and whites. They were, however, one of many organizations that represented the contemporary involvement after the Civil-Rights movement. The authors look at this involvement, surveying publications such as Christianity Today and the experiences of Curtiss DeYoung to demonstrate that even contemporary models and initiatives have been unable to repair the past.
Why is this case? How can significant moves toward racial reconciliation on the part of white evangelicals further exasperate the problem? Chapter four attempts to unearth the substratum that lies, for the most part, hidden in the minds of white evangelicals. Here, the authors begin to showcase some of the data from their interviews. The question is there a race problem in America? consistently reveals a stark divide between white and black conceptions of race relations in America. (68) To try to understand why this is, Emerson and Smith discuss the “religio-cultural toolkit� that white evangelicals use to make sense of reality (76). Included in this toolkit are three elements: “accountable freewill individualism,� “relationalism,� and “antistructuralism.� (76) Added to these elements is the relative isolation from racial pluralism that is typical of white evangelicals (80�82). The net result is that white evangelicals miss the “racialized patterns that transcend and encompass individuals,� (90) rendering a “color-blind� society (91).
As discussed briefly in chapter one, Emerson and Smith return to the issue of economic inequality in chapter five. Here, findings from national surveys reveal the explanations given for racial inequality among white and black evangelicals. The staggering consequence is the apparent divide between black and white evangelicals, with conservative religion actually intensifying and increasing the division. (97) The concept of “equal opportunity,� as an American phenomenon (98), and intergroup isolation (106), severely handicap white evangelicals from making sense of the black experience.
Chapter six sees Emerson and Smith exploring solutions to the problem of race in America. On a spectrum ranging from interracial relationships to racially integrated residential neighborhoods, the authors show how their interactions with evangelicals yet again display a variance on just how race-relations ought to be improved. Typically white evangelicals favor solutions involving personal relationships with a view to changing individuals, whilst simultaneously avoiding any change that would effect “institutions, laws or programs� (119), such as integrating neighborhoods.
Is there more to this racialized society than the religio-cultural tools applied by the respective groups? In chapter seven Emerson and Smith are so bold as to claim that the very fabric of American religion, specifically evangelical Protestant Christianity, is structured in such a way so as to harden and secure the divide between white and black evangelicals. Religious pluralism “powerfully drives religious groups toward internal similarity,� (136) fueling the “homogenous unit principle� (150). The need for boundaries, social solidarity (142), as well as the rampant religious marketplace (137), renders evangelicalism as resembling internally similar congregations.
Chapter eight continues the examination of the organization of religion in America, specifically two structural arrangements, that of racially homogenous religious ingroups and the segmented religious market (154). The authors examine how these two sociological concepts work to “contribute to segregated social networks,� as well as “perpetuate socioeconomic inequality by race.� (168).
In concluding the study, Emerson and Smith summarize their efforts as well as offer an exhortation to the reader to consider the complexities of the subject at hand. Any change to America’s racialized society will at once require “multiple factors—from historical forces to subcultural tools to the very organization of American religion.� (172)
Does Divided by Faith adequately discern the complexities of black-white race relations in American evangelicalism? On reading Divided by Faith, one has to admit the gravity of the study presented: it is a masterful and careful exhibition of historical, religio-cultural, and sociological enquiry.
As reality would have it, such a work cannot remain in the realm of the abstract: does the study line up with reality? In many ways, I am of the opinion that the answer is an emphatic yes. The book’s thesis that “evangelicals desire to end racial division and inequality but more likely do more to perpetuate the radical divide� is sadly, yet wonderfully exhibited in the authors� findings. What is simply remarkable is how the many responses recorded in their interviews reflect many conversations I myself have had in another country with its own racialized society. The fact that their findings appear to resemble a conceptually universal integrity is a strong argument for their validity.
In many ways, Divided by Faith has also served as metaphor for my own journey in the world of race-relations. The painful truth is that I myself have mirrored the as-to-be-expected responses of white evangelicals, stressing interpersonal relationships, failing to discern the structures and wider political and economic context that is largely determinative for the lives of people of color. I am a living testament of the reality that racial pluralism and interracial contact is also powerfully determinative for ones response to solutions to eradicating a racialized society.
Additionally, I am of the opinion that another strength of this book is its critique of evangelicalism and the unwarranted inflation of certain theological ideas and concepts. The trio of “accountable freewill individualism,� “relationalism,� and “antistructuralism,� (76) are realities inherent in orthodox Protestant theology. However, to stress these without the dimension of corporate aspects of our being called as the people of God is to truncate the Gospel message. Christ not only saved us as individuals, he also destroyed the larger works of Satan that held us captive. Along with the authors, I am in agreement that until white evangelicals are ready to discern a broader perspective and examine their own biases, some of which are sadly more cultural than biblical, racial reconciliation will be a slow, and dreary road ahead.
Of course, one notable weakness is the lack of solutions provided by the authors. Nevertheless, the authors never intended to go that far and it would be unfair to insist that they present such a conclusion. Theirs was a survey and analyses seeking to unearth the paradigms that shape the evangelical mind and render it as, ironically, incapable in effecting change in race-relations, which I believe they accomplished.
°ä´Ç²Ô³¦±ô³Ü²õ¾±´Ç²Ôâ€�
The question left with the reader is this: will we pursue the radically, transformed life that Christ calls us to? Emerson and Smith have labored to bring to the surface many challenging and convincing religio-cultural and historical realities that readers have to wrestle with. Will the reader be content to rest with the status quo, or will the steady exodus of African-Americans from white evangelical churches be something that does not arrest us, does not set off alarm bells that something is wrong with the very structure of evangelicalism? Will evangelicals, those who stand on the ‘evangel,� be ready to cling to Christ and his word, and cut off the cancerous cultural norms and values that undermine the very ‘evangel� we stand on? Only then can the one new humanity be realized.
A must read. Insightful and convicting.
Second reading (13/03/19)�
The recently documented slow and steady exodus of African Americans from Protestant evangelical churches in America raises a pointed question not many are willing to engage: why is the majority of the black population in America uncomfortable in majority white churches? Better still, why is there even a racial divide within American churches? The Apostle Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 2:11�22 paints a radical picture of the most divided people coming together as one new humanity in Christ. Contra Paul’s teaching, the evangelical landscape resembles a reality less than satisfying, falling far short from the supposed unity we have in Christ. Written almost twenty years ago, Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America is Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith’s attempt to unearth evangelicalism and its relationship to race relations in America.
Michael O. Emerson is author of Religion Matters: What Sociology Teaches Us About Religion in Our World and serves as provost of North Park University in Chicago. In this title, Emerson is joined by leading American theorist of the philosophy of critical realism and the social theory of personalism, Christian Smith. Currently serving as the William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center for the Study of Religion and Society at the University of Notre Dame, Smith is the also author of American Evangelicalism and Christian America? What Evangelicals Really Want.
In this present work Emerson and Smith examine the role of white evangelicalism in black-white relations (ix). Divided by Faith combines history with the authors� own socio-theological research in which over two thousand interviews were conducted with contemporary evangelicals and other Americans in the late 1990’s. Emerson and Smith’s thesis is this: in spite of evangelicals attempting to end racial division and inequality their cultural and epistemological tools as well as the very structure of Protestant religion is more likely to perpetuate the racial division. The reader in challenged by the authors� attempts to go beyond the “old idea that racial problems result from ignorant, prejudiced, mean people.� Instead, effects of culture, values, norms, and the very structure of evangelical religion in America are explored and shown to “paradoxically have negative effects on race relations.� (ix) Divided by Faith speaks directly to the recent exodus of African Americans from white churches, the latter serving as a fulfilment of the concerns espoused by Emerson and Smith some twenty years ago.
Summary & Critical Evaluation�
The introduction of Divided by Faith delineates key terms in their study, particularly the identity of evangelicals, which the authors apply broadly: holding to the authority of Scripture, believe Christ died for the salvation of all, and teaching the necessity of “being born again,� with evangelism being a central tenet. (3) I think that a broad application of ‘evangelical� aided their research as it brought more variety into their field of questioning.
Chapter one sees Emerson and Smith further defining the scope of their study. More specifically, they get to the heart of the book’s fundamental concern: a “racialized society� (7). This is no doubt the most essential concept in the book’s intended aims. Without understanding this concept, not much of what follows will make sense. A racialized society is one wherein “race matters profoundly for differences in life experiences, life opportunities, and social relationships.� (7) But this concept has particular specificity in mind: economic, political, social, and even psychological discrepancies that are evidenced along racial lines. Another important aspect of the racialized society is that it is a dynamic phenomenon, adapting and existing in a state of fluidity. Racism, then, is not merely individual, overt prejudice, but the “collective misuse of power that results in diminished life opportunities for some racial groups.� (9) Racism, then, is perpetually changing, continually in motion, whilst simultaneously, and paradoxically so, remaining immutable in its application and justification of the racialized societal system. (9) To prove the reality of the racialized society, the authors engage and utilize several areas of disparity between white and black Americans: from marriage (11), to economic inequality (12�14), to health, life and even death (14). The statistics appear to be used fairly and represent clear lines of disparity. The more than 2, 500 phone calls and almost 200 face-to-face interviews over twenty-three states (18�19), more clearly reveal the theology and sociological underpinning that produce such statistics.
In chapter two the authors further support their thesis with a brief but concise examination of evangelical thought and practice from the beginning of the 18th century up until 1964. This chapter primarily seeks to understand how evangelicals have thought of race in the past and “what sorts of actions they have taken to address racial issues.� (19) Evangelicalism has historically been driven by evangelism and discipleship, whilst challenging institutions and social structures has not been a major concern (21). From Cotton Mather (23), to Billy Graham (46), racialization has remained intact, though, no doubt, it “changed in form� (48). In fact, from Mather to Graham, the white-black race divide has ironically regressed from separate pews to separate churches. The historical survey is compelling and reveals a sad state of affairs in which changing wider and larger structures has been something white Protestants have offered resistance to, perhaps in favor for the economic and political power it presented.
The author’s additionally looked at the Promise Keeper organization, which aimed at bringing about reconciliation between blacks and whites. They were, however, one of many organizations that represented the contemporary involvement after the Civil-Rights movement. The authors look at this involvement, surveying publications such as Christianity Today and the experiences of Curtiss DeYoung to demonstrate that even contemporary models and initiatives have been unable to repair the past.
Why is this case? How can significant moves toward racial reconciliation on the part of white evangelicals further exasperate the problem? Chapter four attempts to unearth the substratum that lies, for the most part, hidden in the minds of white evangelicals. Here, the authors begin to showcase some of the data from their interviews. The question is there a race problem in America? consistently reveals a stark divide between white and black conceptions of race relations in America. (68) To try to understand why this is, Emerson and Smith discuss the “religio-cultural toolkit� that white evangelicals use to make sense of reality (76). Included in this toolkit are three elements: “accountable freewill individualism,� “relationalism,� and “antistructuralism.� (76) Added to these elements is the relative isolation from racial pluralism that is typical of white evangelicals (80�82). The net result is that white evangelicals miss the “racialized patterns that transcend and encompass individuals,� (90) rendering a “color-blind� society (91).
As discussed briefly in chapter one, Emerson and Smith return to the issue of economic inequality in chapter five. Here, findings from national surveys reveal the explanations given for racial inequality among white and black evangelicals. The staggering consequence is the apparent divide between black and white evangelicals, with conservative religion actually intensifying and increasing the division. (97) The concept of “equal opportunity,� as an American phenomenon (98), and intergroup isolation (106), severely handicap white evangelicals from making sense of the black experience.
Chapter six sees Emerson and Smith exploring solutions to the problem of race in America. On a spectrum ranging from interracial relationships to racially integrated residential neighborhoods, the authors show how their interactions with evangelicals yet again display a variance on just how race-relations ought to be improved. Typically white evangelicals favor solutions involving personal relationships with a view to changing individuals, whilst simultaneously avoiding any change that would effect “institutions, laws or programs� (119), such as integrating neighborhoods.
Is there more to this racialized society than the religio-cultural tools applied by the respective groups? In chapter seven Emerson and Smith are so bold as to claim that the very fabric of American religion, specifically evangelical Protestant Christianity, is structured in such a way so as to harden and secure the divide between white and black evangelicals. Religious pluralism “powerfully drives religious groups toward internal similarity,� (136) fueling the “homogenous unit principle� (150). The need for boundaries, social solidarity (142), as well as the rampant religious marketplace (137), renders evangelicalism as resembling internally similar congregations.
Chapter eight continues the examination of the organization of religion in America, specifically two structural arrangements, that of racially homogenous religious ingroups and the segmented religious market (154). The authors examine how these two sociological concepts work to “contribute to segregated social networks,� as well as “perpetuate socioeconomic inequality by race.� (168).
In concluding the study, Emerson and Smith summarize their efforts as well as offer an exhortation to the reader to consider the complexities of the subject at hand. Any change to America’s racialized society will at once require “multiple factors—from historical forces to subcultural tools to the very organization of American religion.� (172)
Does Divided by Faith adequately discern the complexities of black-white race relations in American evangelicalism? On reading Divided by Faith, one has to admit the gravity of the study presented: it is a masterful and careful exhibition of historical, religio-cultural, and sociological enquiry.
As reality would have it, such a work cannot remain in the realm of the abstract: does the study line up with reality? In many ways, I am of the opinion that the answer is an emphatic yes. The book’s thesis that “evangelicals desire to end racial division and inequality but more likely do more to perpetuate the radical divide� is sadly, yet wonderfully exhibited in the authors� findings. What is simply remarkable is how the many responses recorded in their interviews reflect many conversations I myself have had in another country with its own racialized society. The fact that their findings appear to resemble a conceptually universal integrity is a strong argument for their validity.
In many ways, Divided by Faith has also served as metaphor for my own journey in the world of race-relations. The painful truth is that I myself have mirrored the as-to-be-expected responses of white evangelicals, stressing interpersonal relationships, failing to discern the structures and wider political and economic context that is largely determinative for the lives of people of color. I am a living testament of the reality that racial pluralism and interracial contact is also powerfully determinative for ones response to solutions to eradicating a racialized society.
Additionally, I am of the opinion that another strength of this book is its critique of evangelicalism and the unwarranted inflation of certain theological ideas and concepts. The trio of “accountable freewill individualism,� “relationalism,� and “antistructuralism,� (76) are realities inherent in orthodox Protestant theology. However, to stress these without the dimension of corporate aspects of our being called as the people of God is to truncate the Gospel message. Christ not only saved us as individuals, he also destroyed the larger works of Satan that held us captive. Along with the authors, I am in agreement that until white evangelicals are ready to discern a broader perspective and examine their own biases, some of which are sadly more cultural than biblical, racial reconciliation will be a slow, and dreary road ahead.
Of course, one notable weakness is the lack of solutions provided by the authors. Nevertheless, the authors never intended to go that far and it would be unfair to insist that they present such a conclusion. Theirs was a survey and analyses seeking to unearth the paradigms that shape the evangelical mind and render it as, ironically, incapable in effecting change in race-relations, which I believe they accomplished.
°ä´Ç²Ô³¦±ô³Ü²õ¾±´Ç²Ôâ€�
The question left with the reader is this: will we pursue the radically, transformed life that Christ calls us to? Emerson and Smith have labored to bring to the surface many challenging and convincing religio-cultural and historical realities that readers have to wrestle with. Will the reader be content to rest with the status quo, or will the steady exodus of African-Americans from white evangelical churches be something that does not arrest us, does not set off alarm bells that something is wrong with the very structure of evangelicalism? Will evangelicals, those who stand on the ‘evangel,� be ready to cling to Christ and his word, and cut off the cancerous cultural norms and values that undermine the very ‘evangel� we stand on? Only then can the one new humanity be realized.
July 18, 2023
The strength of this book was in its method of directly asking white evangelicals about the origins of racial divisions. I didn’t expect to find myself convicted here, but I did. The authors argue that inherent assumptions of white American evangelicalism (individualism, self-reliance, equal opportunity rather than actual equality) prevent real progress on race relations, despite good intentions. Especially notable was when the authors asked whites why blacks are at economic disadvantage and almost all the answers were variations on character flaws (from laziness to “they don’t have a vision�). None seemed capable of acknowledging systemic biases or even historical legacies of slavery, reconstruction, and Jim Crow.
It was also interesting to hear the authors� reasoning for why it is sociologically unlikely for a group (ie church) to have people who are unlike each other. This makes the biblical nature of the church so remarkable and so challenging.
It was also interesting to hear the authors� reasoning for why it is sociologically unlikely for a group (ie church) to have people who are unlike each other. This makes the biblical nature of the church so remarkable and so challenging.
December 21, 2020
This book is an analysis of the continued racial division in the evangelical church and an attempt to understand why this persists despite evangelicalisms stated desire to act otherwise. It’s no page turner...very data driven, but also very probing, important, balanced, and honest. I think this should be one of the key books you read if you want to understand this issue and begin to do anything about it.
February 27, 2018
Short Review: A sociological look at why the Evangelical church is racially divided. I would probably rate this as a five star book if it weren't so dated. At this point it is nearly 20 years old and the data it cites is even older.
Even dated, it is still helpful and I understand why it is so commonly recommended. Two parts I think are particularly dated. One, the chapter on history I think is too simple and too easy for White christians to assume they would be 'on the right side of history'. The reality is that as Noll and many others have suggested, most of us would not have been on the right side of history with regard to racial segregation or slavery.
The second very dated part of the book is the exploration of the racial reconciliation efforts in the Evangelical church in the mid to late 1990s. Most of those efforts quietly faded, if not crashed and burned. Even from close look of 2000, Emerson and Smith suggest that a significant part of the decline of Promise Keepers should be attributed to their very public focus on racial reconciliation. And I wonder about that now as some new movements of evangelicals are starting to take a more public stand around racial issues and running up against similar problems of apathy and ignorance.
What I think helps to make this a good introduction to racial issues is the academic detachment. Emerson and Smith focus on 'racialized practices' and not 'racism'. Many whites want to separate themselves from racism because they view racism as an individualized activity and not a corporate reality. I think it is likely that churches are slightly more racially integrated today than the data suggests from 2000, but that starting point was so low that it would be difficult to become more racially isolated.
One of the insights that I hadn't really thought about was that Evangelicals are particularly racially isolated because of their commitment to the church. Evangelicals go to church more, have more friend and family groups rooted in the church and have less community involvement or volunteering outside of the church that non-Evangelicals. That does not require active racism to be racially isolated. But it will require active change to overcome.
My full review (nearly 1500 words) is on my blog at
Even dated, it is still helpful and I understand why it is so commonly recommended. Two parts I think are particularly dated. One, the chapter on history I think is too simple and too easy for White christians to assume they would be 'on the right side of history'. The reality is that as Noll and many others have suggested, most of us would not have been on the right side of history with regard to racial segregation or slavery.
The second very dated part of the book is the exploration of the racial reconciliation efforts in the Evangelical church in the mid to late 1990s. Most of those efforts quietly faded, if not crashed and burned. Even from close look of 2000, Emerson and Smith suggest that a significant part of the decline of Promise Keepers should be attributed to their very public focus on racial reconciliation. And I wonder about that now as some new movements of evangelicals are starting to take a more public stand around racial issues and running up against similar problems of apathy and ignorance.
What I think helps to make this a good introduction to racial issues is the academic detachment. Emerson and Smith focus on 'racialized practices' and not 'racism'. Many whites want to separate themselves from racism because they view racism as an individualized activity and not a corporate reality. I think it is likely that churches are slightly more racially integrated today than the data suggests from 2000, but that starting point was so low that it would be difficult to become more racially isolated.
One of the insights that I hadn't really thought about was that Evangelicals are particularly racially isolated because of their commitment to the church. Evangelicals go to church more, have more friend and family groups rooted in the church and have less community involvement or volunteering outside of the church that non-Evangelicals. That does not require active racism to be racially isolated. But it will require active change to overcome.
My full review (nearly 1500 words) is on my blog at
June 10, 2019
This book is really helpful in exposing some of the conceptual and relational differences that causes evangelical churches and Christians to unintentionally perpetuate racialization and racial inequality in the US.
The consideration of structural versus individual solutions was helpful in establishing categories.
The authors sometime wavered back and forth between acting as social scientists or social prophets, which sometimes confused the explanation of their data. Likewise, they seem to discount the significance of individual commitment to the gospel to change bad structures over time (though the thrust of their critique that white evangelical tends to not see structural inequality still stands).
Considering social ways to work towards equality was helpful for me, given that I live in a country that is not a democracy or republic.
I would have been helped by further study and explanation of the views of black evangelicals in these issues. While this is referred to somewhat, it functions as the backdrop for the more intensive analysis of white evangelical views. But then, that would significantly increase the research load for the writers, so I can understand why they didn't.
The consideration of structural versus individual solutions was helpful in establishing categories.
The authors sometime wavered back and forth between acting as social scientists or social prophets, which sometimes confused the explanation of their data. Likewise, they seem to discount the significance of individual commitment to the gospel to change bad structures over time (though the thrust of their critique that white evangelical tends to not see structural inequality still stands).
Considering social ways to work towards equality was helpful for me, given that I live in a country that is not a democracy or republic.
I would have been helped by further study and explanation of the views of black evangelicals in these issues. While this is referred to somewhat, it functions as the backdrop for the more intensive analysis of white evangelical views. But then, that would significantly increase the research load for the writers, so I can understand why they didn't.
September 13, 2017
Today I told someone this book was good. It was thought provoking and it made me think a lot about my cultural assumptions as a white evangelical. However, I didn't recommend this white evangelical to buy a copy and read it because I felt like the best advice was to encourage them to do their own "interviews." This book is the fruit of some historical and sociological research. The main research these authors did was interviewing with hundreds of people about race, religion and society in America. So instead of encouraging them to read this book I kept thinking we should encourage white evangelicals to spend the time meeting with others from different ethnicities and getting to know their stories. It would also be good to ask them how they think issues of race can be solved. I appreciate this book because these men took the time to listen and be open to various factors that are causing division in the church and in our communities. Reading their book would be one way to honor their work but many of us might be better served if we followed their example and see what conclusions we come to.
December 30, 2021
I liked much of this book a lot, especially the historical discussion and the surveys of evangelical Christians. I know the book wasn't written from a Christian perspective, but as a white evangelical Christian myself, I am now very curious to hear a discussion of what part of evangelical views on these topics came from the Bible and why. I can think of a lot of Bible verses talking about sin affecting social structures and the environment and the need for Christians to work against poverty and welcome outsiders. I agree with the book that one big problem in the US is the narrow focus of evangelical white Christians on sin being just an individual problem and responsibility. One potential solution is training pastors better on these topics so that they can change the narrative that the congregants receive. Another issue I had with the book is that the authors assume that the "miracle motif" is wrong. This is perhaps expected since it wasn't written from a Christian perspective. The "miracle motif" they talk about is that when people become Christians, social problems get better for everyone. From my perspective, this would also require that Christians follow Christian teaching, which often isn't done on topics related to poverty and race in the US. The teaching in US churches is often very skewed Biblically. However, the reason society in general cares about poverty and racism is because of the effect of Christianity on culture's views over the past 2000 years. Apart from Christianity, there is no reason to assume all people have equal worth and value. People before Jesus were in general cruel and mainly cared about power and domination. In addition to fixing individual sin, Christianity should cause people to want to make social structures more just. Also, the book assumes a cause/effect relationship between white evangelicals being in diverse settings and their political views on race. However, I wasn't totally convinced by this. I think other factors are likely at play too. I think some white evangelicals choose diverse friend groups because they are predisposed to like/want that perhaps because of some other aspect of their personality. Jonathan Haidt talks about this in the Righteous Mind. He says that isn't not just because of their upbringing or family that some people are drawn to diversity. I go to a multi-ethnic church, and I also grew up as a white girl in China and Taiwan (2-18 years old). I like being in diverse settings. I also know of white people I grew up with in Asia who never learned Chinese and only had white friends. I think diversifying people's social networks certainly helps, but I don't think that is the only thing that explains people's views on the topics. As a physician involved in clinical research studies, I noticed that this research presented correlations as causative. This wasn't a randomized trial, so the conclusions were over-stated. The authors should have acknowledged that their research doesn't explain why people got into those diverse settings to begin with. For instance, why was Curtiss DeYoung enamored by Martin Luther King Jr growing up, when he was in an all-white setting, and why did he stay at a black church when he accidentally went to one? The authors should have acknowledged unmeasured factors. Overall, I found the book very interesting, eye opening, and helpful. The author tries to argue at the end about the powerlessness of religion to make a change. Perhaps that's true if the white evangelical church in the US doesn't change. But I ultimately still believe that only in God is there any power to overcome racism and racialization in the US.
January 20, 2023
If you identify as an evangelical and have any concern at all about the segregation in the majority of evangelical churches, this book is a must read.
If you identify as an evangelical and believe that evangelicals are called to love their neighbor, this book is a must read.
Written two decades before the murder of George Floyd and the recent rise of engagement (and pushback) about race, our racial divide, and what to do about it, Emerson and Smith provide a substantial amount of data that reveals much about the thinking of evangelicals in the US on these issues. Their findings are well analyzed and interpreted. Their findings also make clear that while white evangelicals proclaim a desire for a unified church and publicly oppose racial divisions, the thinking and practices of white evangelicalism perpetuates the problem instead of reducing it.
Andy Couch sums up one of the key findings in their book this way - “In their important book about race and religion in America, Divided by Faith, sociologists Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith observe that what most distinguishes white evangelical Protestants from black Protestants is not their theology or even their desire for racial reconciliation, but evangelicals� lack of institutional thinking. When evangelicals think about solving social problems like the legacy of slavery and racism in the United States, they think almost exclusively in terms of personal, one-on-one relationships—which is why so many white evangelicals can imagine the problem of racism is solved if they simply have a handful of friends of other races. To think of race this way is to miss the fact that race and racism are institutional realities built on a complex set of artifacts, arenas, rules and roles. A few friendships that happen outside of those arenas and temporarily suspend a few of those rules and roles do little to change the multigenerational patterns of distorted image bearing and god playing based on skin color. Black Christians instinctively know that for the gospel to keep transforming America’s sorry racial story, it will have to keep challenging these deeply ingrained patterns and the structures that even now perpetuate them—while white evangelicals, who identify racism with a handful of dismantled artifacts like twentieth-century Jim Crow laws and legally segregated schools, cannot imagine that racism has a continuing institutional reality.�
And sadly, the evidence in the book reveals that not only do white evangelicals not imagine the institutional reality of racism, one reason they are resistant to accepting this truth is because they benefit from the institutions - further revealing a lack of evaluation on their part as to whether compliance with institutional practices aligns with their Christian convictions.
Though much energy has been focused on the racial divide by the white evangelical community and many intentions have been good, the problem continues. Emerson and Smith's findings expose the complex network of factors that have prevented the white evangelical community from making progress - and unless lessons are finally learned from the past, the future looks bleak. Thankfully, by studying Emerson and Smith's findings, the white evangelical community can be better equipped to thoughtfully approach the racial division in the country and evangelical churches, and strive towards healing.
If you're a white evangelical, this book is a must read.
If you identify as an evangelical and believe that evangelicals are called to love their neighbor, this book is a must read.
Written two decades before the murder of George Floyd and the recent rise of engagement (and pushback) about race, our racial divide, and what to do about it, Emerson and Smith provide a substantial amount of data that reveals much about the thinking of evangelicals in the US on these issues. Their findings are well analyzed and interpreted. Their findings also make clear that while white evangelicals proclaim a desire for a unified church and publicly oppose racial divisions, the thinking and practices of white evangelicalism perpetuates the problem instead of reducing it.
Andy Couch sums up one of the key findings in their book this way - “In their important book about race and religion in America, Divided by Faith, sociologists Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith observe that what most distinguishes white evangelical Protestants from black Protestants is not their theology or even their desire for racial reconciliation, but evangelicals� lack of institutional thinking. When evangelicals think about solving social problems like the legacy of slavery and racism in the United States, they think almost exclusively in terms of personal, one-on-one relationships—which is why so many white evangelicals can imagine the problem of racism is solved if they simply have a handful of friends of other races. To think of race this way is to miss the fact that race and racism are institutional realities built on a complex set of artifacts, arenas, rules and roles. A few friendships that happen outside of those arenas and temporarily suspend a few of those rules and roles do little to change the multigenerational patterns of distorted image bearing and god playing based on skin color. Black Christians instinctively know that for the gospel to keep transforming America’s sorry racial story, it will have to keep challenging these deeply ingrained patterns and the structures that even now perpetuate them—while white evangelicals, who identify racism with a handful of dismantled artifacts like twentieth-century Jim Crow laws and legally segregated schools, cannot imagine that racism has a continuing institutional reality.�
And sadly, the evidence in the book reveals that not only do white evangelicals not imagine the institutional reality of racism, one reason they are resistant to accepting this truth is because they benefit from the institutions - further revealing a lack of evaluation on their part as to whether compliance with institutional practices aligns with their Christian convictions.
Though much energy has been focused on the racial divide by the white evangelical community and many intentions have been good, the problem continues. Emerson and Smith's findings expose the complex network of factors that have prevented the white evangelical community from making progress - and unless lessons are finally learned from the past, the future looks bleak. Thankfully, by studying Emerson and Smith's findings, the white evangelical community can be better equipped to thoughtfully approach the racial division in the country and evangelical churches, and strive towards healing.
If you're a white evangelical, this book is a must read.
March 9, 2021
I enjoyed reading the parts about the history of race in the evangelical church and found the parts about evangelical culture being individual and it’s relation to race
interesting. But I also had problems with this book including being written by white authors and quoting interviews (which were difficult to read) without giving acknowledgment of how problematic the statements were for how many evangelicals were speaking about race.
interesting. But I also had problems with this book including being written by white authors and quoting interviews (which were difficult to read) without giving acknowledgment of how problematic the statements were for how many evangelicals were speaking about race.
March 10, 2021
Added this to my list 10 years ago, and then the title came up as part of a course I was involved with at my job this fall, so I bought it. So glad I did. Fascinating and interesting research into American Evangelicals. Some great history on the church and race. Though the book ultimately raises more questions than it provides answers, it gave me so much food for thought even as I make my own personal decisions in regards to church. Would be a really rich book to discuss, and is something I think every evangelical Christian should read for perspective and insight.
September 24, 2022
While a little outdated at this point, what an exceptional look at Evangelicals and why they think what they think/do what they do. This was fascinating, validating, infuriating, convicting, and generally a great resource for those of us trying to understand the current landscape of America.
Highly highly recommend, be you a Christian yourself or you regularly interact with Christians and want some insight into what's going on behind the proverbial scenes.
Highly highly recommend, be you a Christian yourself or you regularly interact with Christians and want some insight into what's going on behind the proverbial scenes.
August 16, 2023
Excellent and thorough analysis of race and religion in the U.S. And, proving the authors' thesis, (i.e., racial division in the church isn't going to be meaningfully addressed anytime soon), this book is still incredibly relevant despite being published nearly 25 years ago.
July 1, 2021
Read’s like a textbook. I found this on Bridgetown Church’s recommended reading list and was captivated by the title. Essentially, this book is full of survey’s and statistics that shed light on the racism that has been apparent in american culture. Being a book written in the year 2000 it’s pretty ahead of it’s time.
All in all, I want to listen & learn from my black brothers and sisters. Have listened to a handful of helpful podcast interviews (primarily with bridgetown church / bible project) from black theologians, learning their perspective and the appropriate response to everything as a white person.
As Jesus prayed to the Father in John 17, may we all be one as he and the Father are one so that the world may believe that Jesus was sent by the Father. Our unity preaches.
All in all, I want to listen & learn from my black brothers and sisters. Have listened to a handful of helpful podcast interviews (primarily with bridgetown church / bible project) from black theologians, learning their perspective and the appropriate response to everything as a white person.
As Jesus prayed to the Father in John 17, may we all be one as he and the Father are one so that the world may believe that Jesus was sent by the Father. Our unity preaches.
January 29, 2018
I can't recommend this enough, particularly to white Christians like me. Discusses the racial divide in the American church from a historical and sociological point of view in a way that's accessible, humbling, thought-provoking, and logical. Deeply challenging without shaming.
August 7, 2019
A must read!
March 14, 2024
A point that hits home for me is that on some level, church goers are just marketplace consumers looking for belonging and meaning � and catering to the comfortable status quo version of what belonging looks like results in homogenous communities.
June 8, 2017
I found this book on a list going around Twitter with the heading 'Books that helped my white friends get it'. In the aftermath of an election that I was struggling to make sense of, this felt like a good place to start. While the book is nearly twenty years old, I found myself going - 'oh multiple times throughout it.
I am at best an amateur sociologist, it felt well written and researched, and overall readable for the most part. The most complicated and abstract part was probably the chapter looking at the sociology of groups and how the marketplace atmosphere of denominations and congregations within the U.S. discourages diversity and encourages homogeneity (particularly with the added emphasis of evangelism).
The author provides a brief history of evangelicals in the U.S., including looking at the complex views of slavery, the toolkits that Evangelicals use to explain the world, including a heavy emphasis on individualism, and relationships, and then provides both survey data, and data gathered with interviews about views on race. He also looks a how the structural aspects of how the church works and evangelizes in the U.S. reinforces segregation in a structural way, even without it being a specific desire of those in the congregations, and indeed those congregations may report a desire to improve race relationships. Overall, I feel as if I do have a more solid understanding of the why, if not the how to fix it.
And this isn't a how to fix it book. It is a look at explanation and history, it's not offering a way to solve the problem. A few ideas are given in the final chapters, but it lacks specific actions to take. In short I would consider this a really good read for anyone looking to explore the thinking of race among white evangelicals in particular, and more generally the history of racial segregation within churches and denominations.
I am at best an amateur sociologist, it felt well written and researched, and overall readable for the most part. The most complicated and abstract part was probably the chapter looking at the sociology of groups and how the marketplace atmosphere of denominations and congregations within the U.S. discourages diversity and encourages homogeneity (particularly with the added emphasis of evangelism).
The author provides a brief history of evangelicals in the U.S., including looking at the complex views of slavery, the toolkits that Evangelicals use to explain the world, including a heavy emphasis on individualism, and relationships, and then provides both survey data, and data gathered with interviews about views on race. He also looks a how the structural aspects of how the church works and evangelizes in the U.S. reinforces segregation in a structural way, even without it being a specific desire of those in the congregations, and indeed those congregations may report a desire to improve race relationships. Overall, I feel as if I do have a more solid understanding of the why, if not the how to fix it.
And this isn't a how to fix it book. It is a look at explanation and history, it's not offering a way to solve the problem. A few ideas are given in the final chapters, but it lacks specific actions to take. In short I would consider this a really good read for anyone looking to explore the thinking of race among white evangelicals in particular, and more generally the history of racial segregation within churches and denominations.
November 16, 2017
This is an ASTOUNDING book. It provides a lucid overview of the historical issue of race in America, along with a clear and incisive critique of Evangelicalism's participation in the divide. But lest you think this is some "mindless, liberal rant," the author's themselves self-identify as evangelicals, at least at the time of this writing, and the critique is clearly born from a deep love and hope for what evangelical Christianity could be. It is this sense that animates the argument throughout, which places it a cut above many, many other books about the same topic.
Additionally, the authors are academically-trained sociologists, and they bring this (very) helpful lens to the discussion. What results is a profound explanation of what socio-cultural factors contribute to the gulf of understanding between white and black people in America generally, and how the particular way evangelicalism is practiced in white communities in America actually perpetuates and deepens this gulf.
In some ways, it's a damning analysis, because it's hard to see the way forward when confronted with how deeply imprinted "individualism" and "anti-structuralism" are into the white-evangelical psyche. But on the other hand, I personally found it extremely liberating to have language for these factors. Frankly, the authors spoke directly to a dynamic that I have run into over and over again as I have attempted honest conversations about race in an evangelical context, and it wasn't until reading their analysis that I felt able to articulate the impasse. So, rather than assuming I must be crazy (the only way I've been able to resolve the tension so far), I can thank Emerson and Smith for elucidating one of the single most significant points of tension in my own religious practice and understanding of the world I occupy.
This is a radically important book.
Additionally, the authors are academically-trained sociologists, and they bring this (very) helpful lens to the discussion. What results is a profound explanation of what socio-cultural factors contribute to the gulf of understanding between white and black people in America generally, and how the particular way evangelicalism is practiced in white communities in America actually perpetuates and deepens this gulf.
In some ways, it's a damning analysis, because it's hard to see the way forward when confronted with how deeply imprinted "individualism" and "anti-structuralism" are into the white-evangelical psyche. But on the other hand, I personally found it extremely liberating to have language for these factors. Frankly, the authors spoke directly to a dynamic that I have run into over and over again as I have attempted honest conversations about race in an evangelical context, and it wasn't until reading their analysis that I felt able to articulate the impasse. So, rather than assuming I must be crazy (the only way I've been able to resolve the tension so far), I can thank Emerson and Smith for elucidating one of the single most significant points of tension in my own religious practice and understanding of the world I occupy.
This is a radically important book.
June 15, 2016
A thought-provoking and convicting examination of why, despite a decades-long concerted effort on the part of evangelical Christians, race relations in America and among its curches remain in a state of de facto segregation. Emerson and Smith explore the sociological underpinnings of American evangelicalism and describe how the assumptions that make evangelicalism what it is also work against racial reconciliation, especially on a systemic level. Despite being more than 15 years old, it's impressive and depressing how well this book holds up. If I have any complaint, it's that there's no effort to really address what true reconciliation � individual AND systemic � would look like. The result is a book that is bleak, even fatalistic, although still one I would highly recommend to those trying to get a better handle on race relations in the modern American church.
October 23, 2007
Fantastic book. It's been a few years since I first read it, and I have yet to come across such an excellent assessment of the issues of race in today's church. It also contains great material for helping White Christians understand the concerns of those of other racial groups. I wish all American Christians would read this book.
January 5, 2008
Emerson opens up a can of worms... he gets below the surface of the average discussions on racism... expands the issue with his concept of "racialization" and really moves the reader to re-think his/her own racism. Whether you are into racial reconciliation or not, this book should be read by everyone.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 362 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.