Prejudice

There is cultural conflict that is rather constant among and between groups both in common boundaries and between boundaries, made important to individual lives.  Even so little is done to understand the belief/action, to adapt to variances, so to permit ourselves to function well in any culture – with respect and progress.  This is not to say that the problem is muffled.  There is much said about it, but little done to resolve cultural conflict.  This is to say that it gains little attention to solution for group and civic life.  The public appears to be stalled in some negative patterns that permit cultures to divide us to stall in our humanity and even permit unneeded barriers that form something of a battleground for persons and groups.  The cultures are most intense in their differentials as related to religions and values, genders and races, change and tradition, truth (knowledge) and fiction (myth).  What is said in fun by one is taken as insult by another.  What is done as normal by one is taken as abnormal by another.  What is done as grace by one may be interpreted as condescending.  The omission or addition of this or that by one is taken as deliberate disrespect by another.   

All this is further complicated by the feeling of tradition and change in the course of personal and corporate life.  Decades ago I served as pastor of a church during my years as professor at a college.  Two men (and there may have been others) were deeply troubled about me in that I was not from their national tradition, and that I was divided between two careers.  They were both good men, one muffling his objections a bit, but the other quite vocal.  The people functioned above the negatives and remarks were made to me about their appreciation that I did not take offense.  The period with that church was quite favorable for me and my family in the manner in which the matter was treated by the affirmative members.  They felt they had made the right call, and turned down my resignation on my first offer.  I later insisted on a second occasion, but the event was for a move to another college. That church has gone on to ever increasing effectiveness.

Jesus did not accept prejudice about the Samaritans.  Galilean Jews would go east, cross Jordan, travel south until they could cross directly west into Judea.  Jesus might go that way if travelling in a travel train avoiding Samaria.  When the choice was his, he chose the efficient way.  The disciples were surprised that he conferred with the woman, knowing well the prejudice about both Samaria and the recognition of women in public.  Even the woman wondered about it and tried to turn the conversation to prejudice.  Jesus was undeterred.  He would talk to her of salvation.  Even when the disciples noted the matter, Jesus seemed again to disregard the interest.  Jesus partly resisted prejudice by ignoring it.  He would speak against prejudice when he could be objective, and not a part of it either in his own conduct or the conduct of others.  Jesus would not dignify prejudice by observing in his own conduct or communication when the context for conversation was far more important than gossip, or folly, or manufactured hurt.  Jesus operated from a context of affirmation.  Prejudice is negative.  In the right place, Jesus would make affirmative statements about life so that the listener would know that God’s affirmation – that prejudice was not included in his culture.  That is an affirmation, one that persons may make affirming what they are – affirming life without negatives.  Jews have learned to manage well negative prejudices against them, asking only for the humanity and home that all others want as well for themselves.  Japanese persons prejudiced against, and some holding prejudice, have become models of managing their culture within the boundaries of a different majority culture.  We can learn from those who have suffered most from prejudice.  When Japanese were denied Christian mission appointments, they formed their own missionary movement.  I have spoken at their conferences and benefitted by their graces.  They even gave their children first names in the American culture, keeping their surnames – binding cultures.  They have gone far in erasing Asian prejudices.  Amish Americans have done even better by refusing to be made victims when they have been objects of prejudice.  We want to prove that true forgiveness is healing.