Abstract
This paper uses the idea of the hidden curriculum to discuss how predominantly White Christian Organizations (PWCOs) teach about race. By introducing multicultural education into PWCOs, they have the potential to function as sites of combatting racism. Using a case study of a Christian conference that was focused on racial unity, I describe how Christian organizations can join in the efforts to create a more racially equitable society.
Introduction
Racism has been a problem that has plagued the United States even before its conception as a nation (Takaki, 2008). Contemporary U.S. society continues to feel the effects of this past legacy, while continuing to struggle with contemporary manifestations of racial inequalities (Alexander, 2010; Bonilla-Silva, 2014; DeGruy, 2005). In the past, scholars have thought that one of the ways to create a more equitable society was through the application of multicultural education in schools; this has been implemented in formal institutions of education in an attempt to combat racism since the 1960s (Banks, 2004). Yet, despite these attempts within the field of multicultural education, racism remains an issue of paramount importance in our society. Because schools alone cannot be reasonably expected to shoulder the burden of fixing all of society’s woes, it is useful to look beyond formal institutions of schooling to aid in the fight against racism in society. In this paper, I argue that churches and parachurch organizations can be sites of learning outside of schools that can be studied as places where multicultural education can be practiced. Using the lens of the hidden curriculum, the first purpose of this paper is to discuss how Christian organizations 1 teach about race. This paper focuses on predominantly White Christian Organizations (PWCOs) because they are most likely to reproduce the racial status quo in the U.S. (Edwards, Christerson, & Emerson, 2013; Emerson & Smith, 2000). The second purpose of this paper is to theorize how PWCOs can move from sites of learning that reproduce racism to spaces that resist societal racism. I end with an exploratory case study of a conference hosted by a university campus ministry organization, University Student Missionaries (USM). Although it is a parachurch organization, in many ways, USM functions similarly to a church, and therefore is useful as a theoretical model for future research in church settings as well as in other parachurch ministries.
Positionality
Before I discuss these ideas any further, it is helpful for the reader to know a little about me as my identity has shaped this work. I am a Christian, African American 2 person. I put these in order of the personal salience of my identities. My faith and relationship with Jesus define me at the deepest levels, and so that is the first lens through which I interpret the meanings of events in life. I am a Black 3 person living in a racist society, but as an African American I am also aware of the rich heritage I possess through my culture and the perseverance of my ancestors. My insights as a Christian Black person in a predominantly White space provide me with an outsider-within perspective (Collins, 2009), different than what would be told by a non-Christian or White Christian researcher.
Conceptual Frameworks
The conceptual framework for this paper is the hidden curriculum. Using the hidden curriculum, I conceptualize how PWCOs teach negative messages about race. I then theorize how these organizations can transition to sites of learning that teach against racism.
Hidden Curriculum
To effectively discuss the concept of the hidden curriculum, it is helpful to first distinguish between it and the formal curriculum. Formal curriculum can be defined as what is explicit, known, and officially recognized as being taught to students (Portelli, 1993). This is known by both the teachers and students, and anyone else, such as a parent, who inquires. In schools, an example of the formal curriculum could be the Common Core Standards; it is an officially recognized list of skills and topics children are expected to be taught by grade level.
The hidden curriculum, however, can take many forms. It can be hidden from the students, but known by the teacher, hidden from the teacher, but known by the students, or it can be hidden from both (Portelli, 1993). The hidden curriculum can be manifested in four ways: 1) unofficial expectations or implicit but expected messages, 2) unintended learning outcomes or messages, 3) implicit messages arising from the structure of schooling, and 4) created by the students (students and teachers have different ideas about what is necessary) (Portelli, 1993). In this paper, I focus on unintended learning outcomes or messages and implicit messages arising from the structure of schooling because they are the most relevant to the way that race is taught in PWCOs. An example of unintended learning outcomes can be found in the parable of the pot roast (Mikkelson, n.d.) where a woman cut off the ends of her pot roast because she had learned to do so from her mom. This family “tradition” had been passed down due to a great grandmother whose pan was too small to fit the roast. These generations had learned the unintended message that to cook a pot roast properly, the ends had to be cut off.
An example of implicit messages arising from the structure of schooling can be seen in the testing obsession that has taken control of most of the nation’s schools. To refer back to my example of the formal curriculum, although the common core standards are meant to be a guideline of what is being taught, the high stakes testing associated with it sends the implicit message that the test is more important than the learning, or that the purpose of learning is to pass a test. Therefore, if there is no test, there is no need to learn; intellectual curiosity is dimmed as a result.
All sites of learning have aspects of the hidden curriculum functioning within them. In the sections that follow, I discuss how Christian organizations teach about race, and some ways that PWCOs could transform into sites of learning that resist rather than reproduce racism in the U.S.
Literature Review
Christian organizations have a unique role in education because people voluntarily seek them out to attend. Unlike schools which require compulsory attendance that ends at a certain age, religious institution attendance is not government-mandated, and people can choose to attend them for a lifetime. As a result, they can experience a lifetime of learning in this one site. People willfully turn to religious institutions in the U.S. to “seek meaning in life, find direction, receive social support, and look for relief when crises arise” (Emerson, 2006, p. 7). Religious congregations also serve an essential role in immigrant adaptation and support “the production of culture…, social network formation, and the production of norms and worldviews” (Emerson, 2006, p. 8). Because religious congregations have such a depth of influence in the lives of some parishioners, they are worth looking at when studying the issue of race. This paper focuses on how PWCOs teach about race, but a brief explanation of Black churches is provided.
Race and the Black Church
Although Black churches teach about race, I do not discuss this site in depth because “historically, the Black church was a way in which African Americans preserved and maintained their African culture in slavery and emancipation” (Dubois as cited in Yang & Smith, 2009). This remains the case in many Black churches. In addition to preserving culture, Black churches also have historically played and continue to play a role in the resistance of racism (Barber, 2011). Barnes (2010) provides an in-depth discussion about how Black churches function as sites of learning and how social justice issues are addressed in these spaces. Therefore, I focus on how White congregations teach about race in this paper. While I recognize the history of and ongoing discrimination against all groups of color in the U.S., this paper focuses predominantly on Black and White. The reasons for this are that this is the focus of most of the historical literature I have found regarding race and churches, and these are the two groups for which the social distance in the U.S. remains the greatest by multiple measures of social distance (Michalikova & Yang, 2011; Wu, Schimmele, & Hou, 2015). Despite this social distance, there has been a recent surge in attendance of Blacks in predominantly White congregations (Dougherty & Emerson, 2018). Therefore, it is important for these congregations to be equipped to create racially inclusive climates in their organizations.
How PWCOs Teach about Race
In the predominantly White church I attend, race is rarely mentioned by anyone. This is very different from my experience growing up in a Black church where I heard mentions of race in sermons, discussions between parishioners, and annually during our cultural heritage celebration day. Race is essentially a taboo topic in my predominantly White church. This is common according to the literature on how race is addressed in churches. Historically, conservative Evangelicals avoided the topic of race relations as they viewed it as a part of a liberal agenda (Emerson & Smith, 2000). As violence decreased, and segregation was normalized by Jim Crow laws, race relations were largely no longer seen as an issue by many White Christians (Emerson & Smith, 2000). Contemporarily, many White and multiracial churches continue to avoid discussing the topic of race (Edwards, Christerson, & Emerson, 2013) which contributes to the propagation of the racial status quo of White normativity. The omission of the subject of race in our highly racialized society has the potential to send many messages about race that may be unintentional. Regarding the hidden curriculum of race in PWCOs, based on my research and experience, what is taught about race in many PWCOs falls into the categories of unintended learning outcomes or messages and implicit messages arising from structure. The lack of attention given to other cultures and the non-recognition of the racism endemic to our society reinforces White normativity (the idea that White culture defines what is normal and right in society. Everything else is aberrant) (Andersen, 2003) and teaches colorblind racism 4 (Bonilla-Silva, 2014). Additionally, by avoiding the topic of race, ignorance of the way White racists used Christian symbols and ideas to create and maintain structural inequality in the U.S. buttresses the idea of White innocence (Ross, 1997). Knowledge of how White people of the past intertwined racism with Christianity is important to understanding the current social divide between Blacks and Whites, especially if Christian congregations are to be a potential space where that divide can be overcome.
A Brief History
In the early 1700s, slaves were thought to have no souls, so in the minds of White colonists, slavery was a non-issue when weighed against their faith (Emerson & Smith, 2000). Additionally, the ruling class of the time used Christianity in the construction of race by separating Irish servants from Black slaves. To maintain the economic order that kept them on top, the elites of the time created laws that separated the Irish (Whites) from the Black slaves (Takaki, 2008). Such laws gave poor Whites privileges over Blacks such as one law that stated that Christians (poor Whites) could not be beaten by masters (Thandeka, 1999). Thus, poor Whites were given a higher social status while Christianity was enmeshed with the creation of Whiteness in the U.S.
By the middle of the eighteenth century, however, as the African population began to increase in the colonies, clergymen began feeling that it was their duty to “Christianize” the slaves (Emerson & Smith, 2000). As the Great Awakening occurred and Evangelical Christianity was birthed, some came to believe that “God allowed slavery for larger purposes, including Christianization and uplifting of the heathen Africans” (Emerson & Smith, 2000, p. 27). Although there was some initial resistance to this idea, due to the fear of many Whites that Christianization would lead to slaves becoming free or revolting, this was resolved by some churches refusing to allow Blacks to be baptized (Yang & Smith, 2009). Eventually laws were passed that did not allow slaves to gain freedom based on conversion to Christianity (Emerson & Smith, 2000).
Views about slavery did not change for White Evangelical Christians (the dominant religious group at the time) until after the Revolutionary war. A combination of changing theological interpretations about the morality of race-based slavery along with the ideals of the newly-won Revolution and differing economic systems led to a split between the North and the South. By the mid-nineteenth century, Evangelicals sought to make the United States a Christian nation, but the North and the South differed in their definitions of how that was defined (Emerson & Smith, 2000). Despite their complicity in and profits gained from slavery (Farrow, Lang, & Frank, 2005), many in the North believed that slavery was un-Christian and a stronger abolition movement resulted in a call for the immediate end to slavery. This abolition movement included free African Americans. Although they took a hard stand against slavery, there were prominent members in this movement, such as Charles Finney, who did not believe racial prejudice to be a sin. This movement called for an end to slavery but allowed for the maintenance of racial division (Emerson & Smith, 2000). Emerson and Smith (2000) go on to argue that “on the whole, northern Evangelicals did not differ from southern Evangelicals in their racial views, except that they tended to oppose slavery. This was easily done, in that slavery did not exist in the North” (p. 34).
Meanwhile in the South, pro-slavery advocates began using the Bible and Christian ideals among other reasonings to defend slavery (McKitrick, 1963). They not only provided what they believed to be Biblical support for the institution of slavery, but they also believed slavery to be charitable and evangelistic, as well as having social and political reasons (Emerson & Smith, 2000). This dispute between the North and the South eventually led to the Civil War and the emancipation of slaves. Because the emancipation of slaves was ultimately the goal for Northern abolitionists, and many did not believe racial prejudice to be a sin, the groundwork was laid for a more racially segregated society than had previously existed. Due to the unwillingness of Whites to worship with Blacks and unequal treatment of Blacks in White churches (Emerson & Smith, 2000), by the nineteenth and early twentieth century, racially separated worship had become a defining characteristic of Protestantism within the U.S., with a few exceptions 5 (Yi & Graziul, 2016).
By ignoring the topic of race in PWCOs, there is no room to discuss how Christianity was used as a tool in building the unequal racial structure present in our society. People are not given the opportunity to examine how their faith played a part (either positively or negatively) in their knowledge construction process (Banks, 2014) about other races. Additionally, the idea of the hidden curriculum of implicit messaging arising from the segregated structure of the Christian congregations themselves is supported by some research studies that have been done. A study on implicit association found that racially homogenous contexts led to a significant increase in pro-White/anti-Black bias (Soderberg & Sherman, 2013). If the result of this study is applied to Christian congregations, the hidden curriculum with regards to structure is revealed. Pro-white bias is reinforced by racially homogenous contexts. This means that pro-white/anti-black bias is being taught as an implicit message through the racial composition of White monoracial Christian congregations.
Other studies have used measures of social distance such as residential preference and attitudes toward interracial marriage to find the correlation between religious affiliation and racial attitudes. Evangelical and mainline Protestants were found to have the strongest preference for same-race neighbors when compared to Catholics, Jews, and other faiths (Merino, 2011), and Whites who attended multiracial churches were found to be far more likely to be comfortable with the idea of interracial marriage than those who attended monoracial churches (Perry, 2013). These findings, although not causal, show there is a contribution by monoracial churches to the social distance between races present in society today. Through the hidden curriculum, many PWCOs are teaching racism. This, however, does not have to be the case.
Challenging the Racial Status Quo
In the previous section, I argued that the unconscious manner in which racism is addressed in PWCOs is an indirect way of teaching racism. Rather than resisting the dominant social structure, PWCOs are reproducing it through the hidden curriculum of implicit messages arising from structure. My theory then, for transforming PWCOs into a site of anti-racism is intentionally to confront the topic of race by addressing the topics of race and racism directly. This could take the form of pastors (and other church leaders) addressing issues of racism (such as those that happen regularly in the news) to their congregations. These topics could be broached by being brought up in sermons, presented as topics for prayer, or incorporating conversations about race as a part of Bible study groups.
Another step that should be taken is to address issues of implicit bias. The most useful way for a PWCO to do this would be to strive to become multiracial, if it is located in an ethno-racially diverse area. Although there are some churches where becoming multiracial is not possible due to their locations, even if the area is not very racially diverse, this is still a goal for which Christian congregations can strive because multiracial congregations are usually more racially diverse than their neighborhoods (Emerson, 2006). I suggest multiracial congregations as a partial solution because one way in which implicit bias can be reduced is through interactions with other races (Soderberg & Sherman, 2013). In working to become more ethnically diverse, a church’s leadership will need to address their own implicit biases as well as encouraging their parishioners to do likewise. They will also need to cast a vision for their church members as to why this is important. Not only should they discuss the importance of combatting racism, but they also should help their congregants to understand the Biblical imperative they have, to do so. Taking these steps will help to disrupt colorblind racism that is present within our society.
Lastly, as PWCOs work to diversify, one framework that can be used to transform churches into sites of anti-racism is Banks’ five dimensions of multicultural education (Banks, 2014). These dimensions include: content integration, knowledge construction, prejudice reduction, equity pedagogy, and an empowering school culture and social structure (Banks, 2014). Although Banks’ framework was designed to be applied to schools, I tested the applicability of this framework within a Christian organization using a case study.
Methodology
I conducted an exploratory case study of a regional conference in the Midwest of a campus ministry organization called University Student Missionaries (USM). (All names are pseudonyms.) This study was approved by my university’s institutional review board. USM is a parachurch organization but was chosen for this study because it functions similarly to a local church. It is overseen by a national governing body, and many of the groups have a credentialed minister who serves as the lead pastor although some are student led. Some of the groups also have staff teams to accompany the lead pastor. The groups meet regularly for prayer, worship, fellowship, and study of the Bible, and there is accountability for the leadership at the state, regional, and national levels.
Case study was chosen as the methodology because it allows a researcher to investigate a bounded phenomenon in its real-world context (Yin, 2014) while allowing the researcher to gain insight into how participants understand their own context (Gillham, 2000). This site was chosen because it was a Christian conference focused on discussing the topics of race and racism, which is an uncommon practice in predominantly White and multiracial churches (Edwards, Christerson, & Emerson, 2003). Although this site is not a church, the conference was organized in a way that my findings could be applied to a church congregation in that a church could organize and host a similar event.
Participants and Sources of Data
As sources of data, I participated in the conference as a participant researcher and collected observational data. This observational data included notes I took on the content of the speakers’ presentations. Participants were chosen for this study using purposeful sampling (Patton, 2015). I conducted semi-structured interviews with four ministry leaders who are all a part of the church denomination of which USM is affiliated. Three of the ministry leaders interviewed were presenters at the conference, and the fourth oversees diversity initiatives with the national USM organization. These participants were selected because they were either involved with the organization of the conference and/or they presented at it. The demographics of the ministry leaders included one White woman, one African American woman, one African American male, and one Cuban American woman. Of the three presenters interviewed, two were pastors and one was a lay church leader. The two pastors were both women and were both pursuing higher degrees: one a master’s in intercultural studies at a seminary and the other a PhD in sociology of religion. The interviews included questions about their formative experiences with race, their ideas about the roles of Christian congregations in fighting for racial justice, and their work related to race relations. Lastly, I conducted a focus group interview with eight students who had attended the conference immediately after it ended to understand their experiences and what resonated most with them. Students who were registered for the conference were sent a Qualtrics survey prior to the conference to recruit participants for the focus group. Participants were selected based on their volunteering to participate. One student volunteered on site after the conference ended. The students were from a variety of universities in the Midwest. There were both male and female participants, and they varied in ethnicity. Most of the students either identified as African American or Caucasian, but there was one who identified as Filipino American. Both the focus group interview and the one-on-one interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Member checking of the focus group interview was done during the time of the focus group. A co-facilitator took notes during the focus group and read summaries of each topic to get the participants’ approval of the major themes that stood out to her from what they had discussed. The transcripts of the one-on-one interviews were sent to the ministry leader participants for member checking. I analyzed the observational data, focus group data, and the interview transcripts by using Banks’ five dimensions of multicultural education (Banks, 2014) as a map to code the data. I then compared the data from my observations and interviews with the ministry leaders to the data from my focus group with the students to determine what students were absorbing from what the ministry leaders were trying to convey. I used NVivo to assist in my analysis. Overall, including recruitment, the conference, the interviews, and data analysis, the study lasted approximately three months.
Five Dimensions of Multicultural Education
Banks’ five dimensions of multicultural education framework has existed for over forty years and has been used frequently within the field of multicultural educational research (Banks, 2004). Because these dimensions were created for the context of schools, I slightly modified some aspects of them for the study. In my findings, I discuss how student participants and ministry leader participants articulated these dimensions in their interviews or from my observations. Below are the operational definitions for each dimension I used within the study. Content integration: participants used or described logical “examples and content from a variety of cultures and groups to illustrate key concepts, principles, generalizations, and theories” (Banks, 2007b, p. 20). The knowledge construction process: participants discussed in their interviews or were observed helping learners discover how “implicit cultural assumptions, frames of reference, perspectives, and biases” (Banks, 2007b, p. 20) influence how they see and understand the world. Prejudice reduction: participants were observed or discussed in their interviews ways of helping learners develop positive attitudes toward different cultural groups (Banks, 2007b). This was expanded to also include lessons that were taught or actions taken for learners within marginalized groups to view their own group positively if they assumed an inward-attacking ego defense as a result of marginalization (Morris, 2014). Banks (2007b) also includes Allport’s contact hypothesis of improving intergroup relations when those different groups have equal status, cooperation rather than competition, interpersonal interactions, and the contact is sanctioned by authorities. Equity pedagogy: participants discussed or demonstrated the relationship between knowledge and reflective action. They discuss or demonstrate the importance of creating an environment for learners to acquire knowledge and “envision new possibilities for the use of that knowledge for societal change” (Banks, 2007a, p. 93). An empowering church culture and social structure: Participants discussed or demonstrated the importance of “restructuring the culture and organization” (Banks, 2014, p. 41) of the church so that parishioners from diverse racial and ethnic groups are represented, included, and empowered.
Findings
Equity Pedagogy
When looking at how Banks’ five dimensions were operationalized in this study, “equity pedagogy” was the most commonly referred to and coded the most. As described by Banks (2007a), “equity pedagogy” is when educators emphasize the importance of transforming knowledge to action and learners envision ways of using knowledge to change society. This dimension was articulated or demonstrated in some way by all the ministry leaders and was the biggest takeaway for all the students. Those who presented at the conference heavily focused on practical ways to learn about different cultures, and things to do such as being an ally and actively standing against injustice. When asked about what they took away from the conference, many students discussed stepping outside of their comfort zones, and making changes in their USM groups, their campuses, and society.
Prejudice Reduction
“Prejudice reduction” was the second dimension most commonly articulated as something that resonated with students, even though it was only discussed or demonstrated by two of the four ministry leaders. Students spoke of the importance of crossing racial boundaries being necessary (especially for White people) to understand their experiences and recognize the discrimination that still occurs in our society. One student also spoke of the importance of equality within relationships of people in different racial groups which was a point shared by one of the speakers at the conference who was not interviewed for this study.
Content Integration
“Content integration” was discussed or demonstrated by most of the presenters, but it was not very prevalent, and the students did not talk much about it as something that hugely resonated with them as a part of the conference. One student did talk about how learning about specific examples of injustices that occur was useful to him as a White male to be able to understand the perspectives of some of his friends who are minorities. Banks describes “content integration” as what most educators conceptualize multicultural education to be (Banks, 2007b).
Creating an Empowering Social Structure
One ministry leader interviewed discussed the need for structural changes to combat racism often, both in her presentation at the conference, during a question and answer session at the conference, and during her interview. Other ministry leader participants also discussed the need for structural changes within churches to increase cultural inclusion and level racial hierarchies. Yet, for one of the students, racism was conceptualized as a preference for one group over another, and others discussed the only solution to racism as the changing of individual hearts and minds. So, although the need for structural changes was discussed by the presenters, the student participants did not necessarily recall that as an important factor in combatting racism.
Knowledge Construction Process
The final dimension is the “knowledge construction process.” This was only discussed by one ministry leader that was interviewed for the study, but it was in relation to work she was doing apart from the conference. One of the speakers at the conference discussed the impact of unconscious bias and two of the students mentioned that as something important they learned. Although this was a new concept for some of the students, the speaker did not talk much about how those biases come to exist, and students were not given structured time to think through this, which would have been more effective in incorporating this dimension.
Discussion
This case study provides an example of how Banks’ five dimensions (2014) were able to be applied within a Christian context. The USM leaders demonstrated different ways of incorporating Banks’ five dimensions (2014) into their work with race relations in Christian congregations on varying levels. The degrees to which the students decoded what the ministry leaders were communicating also varied. Specifically, the two dimensions that were least present in the data collected were the “empowering church culture and structure” and the “knowledge construction process.”
The fact that “equity pedagogy” and “prejudice reduction” were more prevalent than “content integration” in this study is a point of interest. I suggest that part of the reason these two dimensions were salient is due to the nature of the conference (which was focused on racial unity). The idea of knowledge to action as essential to “equity pedagogy” has a Biblical precedent. The Bible instructs Christians to “not just listen to God’s word,” but to “do what it says. Otherwise you are only fooling yourselves” (James 1:22, New Living Translation). This finding also aligns with Hunter’s (2008) observations regarding an increased value on social justice among college students and supports his arguments for the importance of embracing a more holistic approach to the gospel.
The focus on “prejudice reduction” likely stems from the individualism found in Western evangelical Christianity (Edwards, 2008). Because the dominant view of racism is interpersonal, people look at reducing their own prejudices as the way to create racial unity in the U.S. This explanation also holds true for the lack of prevalence in discussion on the “empowering church structure” dimension. Additionally, regarding “prejudice reduction,” it is important to note that “prejudice reduction” relies heavily on contact theory. Therefore, if a church is diverse, for “prejudice reduction” to occur, it is important for leaders to work to facilitate cross-racial contact in an effort to avoid self-segregation within the congregation as observed in some of the cases studied by Dunlow (2017).
Structural discrimination was a topic that was highlighted during the conference, yet student participants maintained the idea that racism is primarily interpersonal. While interpersonal action is necessary for racial reconciliation, institutional or structural racism that can be found in systems in the U.S. such as mass incarceration (Alexander, 2010) are also necessary to address. This mismatch between what was being taught and what was being learned can be understood by a theory of cultural tools Emerson and Smith (2000) describe that pertains to White Evangelicals. These cultural tools include: accountable freewill individualism (“individuals exist independent of structures and institutions, have freewill, and are individually accountable for their own actions”, p. 76), relationalism (interpersonal relationships are the most important), and antistructuralism (the inability or unwillingness to perceive and accept social structural influences) (Emerson & Smith, 2000). Since this conference was only 1.5 days in length, the difficulty to override longstanding cultural programming for these students is understandable. Additionally, even though Emerson and Smith’s (2000) model was descriptive of White Evangelicals, it is applicable to my multiracial student group because multiracial congregations are more culturally similar to White churches than they are to Black churches (Edwards, 2008). Edwards (2008) demonstrated in her ethnographic study on a multiracial congregation that even in a numerical minority position, White people maintained power over how the church operated. Because racial differences are usually deemphasized in multiracial congregations (Edwards, Christerson, & Emerson, 2013), it is possible that the students of color in my study were assimilated to a similar frame of thinking about racial issues as the White students.
Although the conference did not address all of Banks’ five dimensions (2014) equally, it is important to recognize the length of the conference as a major factor. It is impossible to rewrite years of cultural programming in 1.5 days. Similarly, Banks’ (2014) model was not created to be implemented in a short period of time. Creating a culturally inclusive organization is a process. Yet, despite the short length of the conference, students acknowledged the impact of the inclusion of elements of “equity pedagogy,” “prejudice reduction,” and “content integration” on what they learned from the conference. This study highlights the potential of a Christian congregation, in this case a para-church organization, to act as a site of anti-racism. The ministry leaders challenged the racial status quo in multiracial congregations by bringing the topic of race to the forefront of conversation. With this action, they also challenged the racial status quo in society.
This case study was conducted at an event hosted by a campus ministry organization, but the findings are applicable to a church because USM functions in similar ways. Therefore, this study can be used as a model for Christian congregations that have a desire to address racial issues. The findings of this study are not meant to be generalized to populations, but rather can be used for analytic generalization. Yin (2014) describes this concept as the use of case studies for “corroborating, modifying, rejecting, or otherwise advancing theoretical concepts” (p. 41). This study serves to advance a theory, and future research should be conducted on the impact of employing a framework such as Banks’ five dimensions (2014) in a Christian congregation for a longer period of time.
It is worth acknowledging that although USM functions similarly to a church, there are some major differences; one important difference to be noted is USM is bounded by age. Most participants are between the ages of eighteen and twenty-two, and students are transient. A church congregation has multiple generations present and people are there longer term. Therefore, more research on how multicultural education frameworks can be integrated into both parachurch ministries and church congregations are warranted. Additionally, more research on how Christian organizations reproduce the social hierarchy rather than challenge it should be examined, as this is antithetical to the gospel. “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28, New International Version). The ways in which these sites can be transformed to spaces of anti-racist education should be explored.
Conclusion
Racism remains a complex social problem. Therefore, we must continue to look for various ways to combat this problem. As a site of learning for congregants, Christian congregations teach about race. In PWCOs, however, the topic of race is often unaddressed, and yet, through the hidden curriculum, racism is taught. Incorporating Banks’ five dimensions (2014) of multicultural education is one possible theory Christian educators can use to challenge the racial hierarchy present in society. I want to make it clear that the main function of any Christian organization should be to make disciples of Jesus. Teaching anti-racism is not the main goal, but rather is a necessary part of discipleship, especially since the default in U.S. society is to reproduce the racial status quo rather than to challenge it. It is important to remember that God is the ultimate source of justice, and therefore, to truly create equity, reconciliation to Him is first necessary. As researchers and educators, we should continue to explore ways to combat social inequities within Christian contexts. After all, as Christians, we are required to “do justice” (Mic. 6:8, English Standard Version).
