Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
‘But if it takes effort to understand: three’

‘But if it takes effort to understand: three’

Last updated on: July 22, 2021 at 8:06 pm by Fred Clark

‘But if it takes effort to understand: three’ 2021-07-22T20:06:14-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

One of my favorite poems from Wislawa Szymborska is “A Word on Statistics,” which reads almost like a short stand-up comedy set. She establishes a premise in the first line and then riffs on it rat-a-tat for 18 sharp, grimly funny stanzas.

Out of every hundred people

those who always know better:
fifty-two.

Unsure of every step:
almost all the rest.

Ready to help,
if it doesn’t take long:
forty-nine.

Always good,
because they cannot be otherwise:
four—well, maybe five.

Able to admire without envy:
eighteen.

Led to error
by youth (which passes):
sixty, plus or minus.

Those not to be messed with:
forty and four.

Living in constant fear
of someone or something:
seventy-seven.

Capable of happiness:
twenty-some-odd at most.

Harmless alone,
turning savage in crowds:
more than half, for sure.

Cruel
when forced by circumstances:
it’s better not to know,
not even approximately.

Wise in hindsight:
not many more
than wise in foresight.

Getting nothing out of life except things:
thirty
(though I would like to be wrong).

Doubled over in pain
and without a flashlight in the dark:
eighty-three, sooner or later.

Those who are just:
quite a few at thirty-five.

But if it takes effort to understand:
three.

Worthy of empathy:
ninety-nine.

Mortal:
one hundred out of one hundred—
a figure that has never varied yet.

The tongue-in-cheek concreteness of Szymborska’s made-up “statistics” is a kind of mocking challenge to take her assertions and observations seriously even though they lack the reductive measurability we sometimes mistakenly think is the only basis for authority. The arbitrary precision of these “statistics” is presented with a twinkle in the eye that says, “No, of course I haven’t quantified this, but do you really want to tell me I’m wrong?” She toys with this pretense of precision, sometimes openly admitting this “data” is pure approximation, before suddenly, in that final stanza and punchline, offering one actual, measurable, verified statistic.

The bit from that poem I’m thinking about today is this one-two punch here:

Those who are just:
quite a few at thirty-five.

But if it takes effort to understand:
three.

There’s a lot going on there with “quite a few.” In what way does 35 out of 100 — barely more than a third — amount to “quite a few”? Well, look around at what we accept and abide as the status quo. You might not guess that in such a world the unjust only enjoy a 2-to-1 advantage over the just. So there’s a brief glimmer there of something like optimism from Szymborska — a hint that 35% is “quite a few” and perhaps even enough to make a difference.

But then there’s a “but”: “But if it takes effort to understand: three.” There’s an echo there of the earlier line about not-quite half of us being “Ready to help” provided “it doesn’t take long.” And perhaps, too, an echo of the Beatitudes and that bit about “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after justice.” Hungering and thirsting for justice might do the trick, but only if we’re committed to putting in the effort to understand what it means.

Those lines are sitting with me now because I’d just re-read this poem yesterday when I came across Andre E. Key’s exploration of Promise Keepers 2.0: “Promise Keepers Are Back and Looking to End Racism Via ‘Trickle-Down Racial Reconciliation.’”

I closely followed the original rise of Promise Keepers back in the ’90s, viewing it with great hope. It seemed like a sign of a nascent, but growing consensus in evangelicalism that Racism Is Bad. Yeah, that’s the babiest of baby steps, but it still seemed like a big improvement over the earlier consensus in white evangelicalism, which was that saying “Racism Is Bad” was “controversial.”

The group was founded by Bill McCartney, the white evangelical former coach of the University of Colorado’s football team. He seemed genuinely in earnest about making “racial reconciliation” a non-negotiable pillar and priority of this manly men’s movement. McCartney’s apparently heartfelt passion seemed to come not from the church, but from his years in sports — from a life shared with Black friends and colleagues and students he had cared enough about to have listened to, investing and intertwining his life with theirs.

McCartney wasn’t just repeating the all-too-familiar motions of a white evangelical leader defensively posing for a photograph with John Perkins to prove that he had a Black friend and thereby hoping to prove that he was One Of The Good Ones, inoculated from the taint of racism. For most white Christian leaders in the ’90s, that was seen as sufficient and effective, because back then most white evangelicals were only dimly aware of the massive taint of their long, immoral history of Being Wrong. Racism was then, for the white church, still primarily perceived as a problem of perception that could be overcome with a bit of aspirational rhetoric about unity and repeated reminders that white Christians, whatever their past missteps, are still morally superior to Satanic baby-killers. But McCartney didn’t seem to be playing that pointless game. (See this 1996 piece from Adelle M. Banks: “Promise Keepers focusing on racial reconciliation.”)

Alas, McCartney also did not seem able to provide any meaningful alternative. He grew frustrated at the pushback he encountered for emphasizing racial reconciliation and seemed unable to respond to that pushback with anything more than the same misleading individualistic, sentimental, nominally “color-blind” ideology that motivated it.

After McCartney withdrew from the group to care for his ailing wife (and his own failing health), Promise Keepers shrank to the sidelines in the early 2000s, leaving little in the way of a legacy or long-term impact regarding “racial reconciliation.” The headline for a recent Christianity Today piece — “Promise Keepers Tried to End Racism 25 Years Ago. It Almost Worked” — is hilariously overstated. Both sentences there are, objectively, false.

Out of 100 Promise Keepers 25 years ago, quite a few, about 35, sincerely wanted “to end racism.”

But after they realized it would take effort to understand: three.

And it didn’t “almost work.” It didn’t work at all.

It was, rather, a repeat of the futility Reinhold Niebuhr described more than 25 years before that in an interview with Commonweal:

Along comes Billy Graham for his great evangelistic meeting. His manner is bland and he’s a great biblicist. He speaks in a convincing way and, while the choir sings softly, he tells the people to pray and to give their heart to Christ and sign the decision card. He tells them in the words of St. Paul that “if any man be in Christ, he will be a new creature.”

This is fantastic, because it shows the weakness of Protestantism: individualism. It deals with collective sin, particularly the race question, in purely individualistic terms. You can’t overcome race prejudice by simply signing a decision card. Yet Billy Graham tells them that if they sign the decision card they will become “color-blind.” Why is it that we see no evidence of the color-blindness when these people leave the evangelistic meetings?

But beyond this flaccid individualism, another reason Promise Keepers utterly failed 25 years ago was the very framework and language of its goal: “racial reconciliation.”

This framework of mutual reconciliation is the only form of racial equality that white evangelicalism is prepared to consider: Equal guilt, equal blame, a perfectly balanced equal need for repentance and re-education on “both sides.”

“I sit on a man’s back, choking him” and pleading with him to apologize, repent, and be reconciled to me, all the while assuring him that I, too, will be willing to meet him half way, once he demonstrates his willingness to concede that our situation is wholly the same.

Feh.

Imagine a recovering addict who decides to replace the Ninth Step with “reconciliation.” Instead of seeking to make amends, he approaches those he has previously wronged with talk of “unity” and mutual forgiveness. “Let’s not get bogged down in who-stiffed-who on the rent or who-pawned-whose-stuff. We were roommates! Let’s hug it out!”

“Racial reconciliation” is, I think, a barrier to whatever it is people are hoping for when they talk about “racial reconciliation.”

And in the case of the revived Promise Keepers, it doesn’t seem like they’re hoping for much at all.

There were plenty of red flags early on, as seen in this RNS piece from last summer, “Promise Keepers stages a comeback on screens instead of in a stadium.” Adelle Banks (still at it!) reported then that PK’s new rallies include promotion of the Trump Republican “My Faith Votes” agenda. And when she asks the group’s new CEO, Ken Harrison, if PK will maintain McCartney’s commitment to “justice,” he responds with an Anti Kitten-Burning Coalition rant on “sex trafficking.”

Yes, sex trafficking, like burning kittens, is wrong. But no, expressing indignation about sex trafficking and/or the burning of kittens does not make you exceptional or heroic or morally exemplary. And if you feel the need to identify yourself as exceptional and heroic and morally exemplary because you’re emotionally horrified by sex trafficking, then it suggests you may be otherwise unwilling to address your complicity in other injustices other than that by repeatedly reminding us that you’re relatively moral if compared against the kind of people who sexually traffic children.

And, again, I’m pleased to see white evangelicals in America now nearly unanimously opposed to selling children for sexual exploitation. That’s a positive development compared to what most white evangelicals in America had to say about the matter prior to 1865. But Harrison, like most white evangelicals, expresses his opposition to “sex trafficking” in the same breath as he expresses his opposition to legal abortion, thereby declaring his support for a judiciary that refuses to recognizes the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments which, among other things, finally made it illegal to sell children in this country. So.

There’s more grounds for concern about the Promise Keepers reboot from Roxanne Stone’s RNS article last week, “Promise Keepers says it has changed. The times have changed more.” Stone details a multitude of links between the new PK and a host of MAGA culture-war figures. And Harrison — a “former Los Angeles street cop” (ahem) — demonstrates a disturbing native fluency in the right-wing white-nationalist jargon of Fox News.

As to whether any good can come from such an organization, I think the conclusion of the article is devastatingly conclusive:

When asked to comment on Jan. 6 and the number of men sporting Christian symbols among the rioters, Harrison said he wanted to stay out of it. “I wasn’t there. I don’t want to run around condemning anybody.”

“Condemn is such a strong word,” he added.

Yikes.

The conclusion of Andre Henry’s essay isn’t much more hopeful:

Finally, consider the friends and associates of the rebooted Promise Keepers. Since its inception Promise Keepers have presented themselves as apolitical, despite the fact that the group’s featured podcast, “On the Edge with Ken Harrison,” has featured such decidedly right-wing guests as Oliver North, Eric Metaxas, and Rod Dreher. It also maintains close relationships with James Dobson and the Dobson Family Institute as well as white nationalist Steve Bannon. Simply put, these are not the names that come to mind when considering an organization committed to improved race relations.

Ultimately, I don’t envision Promise Keepers’ right-wing racial reconciliation relaunch getting too far. They may once again fill sports stadiums with energized worship and moments of interracial joy and exuberance for those gathered. But just as with their ‘90s forebear they will fall short on fulfilling their promise of unity and meaningful racial reconciliation. Instead, the intoxicating and self-serving belief in racism as personal sin will not age well and will once again not be fit for consumption.

My guess is that some future version of Christianity Today will be able to publish a headline summarizing this that says “Promise Keepers Tried to Dismiss Racism 25 Years Ago. It almost worked.”

Harmless alone,
turning savage in crowds:
more than half, for sure.

Previous Post

July 21, 2021

'For you were [redacted] in Egypt' (part 4, a slight tangent)

Next Post

July 24, 2021 Jesus on the mainline

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did the disciples do when Jesus asked them to stay awake in the garden?

Select your answer to see how you score.

They left They sang They prayed They fell asleep