種族主義與華人教會

作者：江慕理(Andrew Chiang) 牧師

中國哲學家嚴復（1854-1921年）曾寫道：「地球上主要有四大人種：黃種人、白種人、棕種人和黑種人。最低等的是黑種人……他們就是所謂的黑奴。」（引自Pusey，《中國與查爾斯·達爾文》(China and Charles Darwin)，第69頁）

嚴復影響了許多中國知識分子，其中之一是改革家梁啓超。梁啓超認為：「在二十世紀的某一天，我們中國人將成為世界上最強大的種族……白種人傲慢不堪，不耐疾苦。黑種人和棕種人懶惰而缺乏智慧。因此，除了我們黃種人外，沒有任何種族能夠承擔這樣的任務。」（引自Pusey，《中國與查爾斯·達爾文》，第313頁）

◎個人成長的經歷

我在台灣長大，童年時期對我的英國血統感到無比自豪。記得小學時學習鴉片戰爭，一位同學對我說：「你們大英帝國超厲害的！」我完全同意。但當我回到英國上中學時，兩件事讓我感到驚訝。首先，我因為有華人血統被視為「低人一等」。其次，我的老師們並不特別為大英帝國及其征服半個世界的歷史感到驕傲。直到很久以後，我才開始理解種族主義、白人至上主義和後殖民主義在西方心態中的複雜性。

八年前，我和妻子返回台灣，在一間雙語教會服事。從那時起，我記得和美國的牧師和傳教士就種族主義問題，特別是在美國背景下的種族主義進行了無數次對話。我不記得與本地台灣信徒就這個主題進行過任何對話。或許種族主義只是歐洲和美國基督徒的問題？或者，除非他們成為受害者，否則華人基督徒根本不知道種族主義的存在？

◎種族主義的各種呈現面貌

我的中學老師對英國殖民歷史缺乏自豪感並不令人意外。正是歐洲的殖民主義為種族優越觀念的發展提供了背景。跨大西洋奴隸貿易，將數百萬非洲人強行帶到美洲並置於殘酷條件下，強化了白人至上的觀念。

但歐洲殖民主義和跨大西洋奴隸貿易與人類歷史上常見的奴隸制和帝國建設有何不同？白人至上主義難道不只是古希臘人對他們認為的「野蠻人」優越感的延伸嗎？一個關鍵區別是白人至上主義基於膚色，而早期的種族主義基於語言和文化。這種新形式的種族主義聲稱，由於生物學原因，某些種族天生不如其他種族。

德國人類學家約翰·布盧門巴赫(Johann Blumenbach)是生物種族主義發展中的關鍵人物。布盧門巴赫根據顱骨測量將人類分為五個種族類別，他認為這與智力和道德品質有關。這些類別是高加索人（白種人）、蒙古人（亞洲人）、埃塞俄比亞人（黑種人）、美洲原住民（土著美洲人）和馬來人（太平洋島民）。

在英語世界內，布盧門巴赫的觀點得到了查爾斯·達爾文(Charles Darwin)的表弟法蘭西斯·高爾頓(Francis Galton)的熱烈支持。高爾頓認為某些種族天生優於其他種族，鼓勵具有理想特質的人種繁衍後代。高爾頓的觀點影響了美國和納粹德國推行種族隔離和強制絕育政策的發展。他的觀點也影響了嚴復和梁啓超。

◎西方基督教脈絡下的《發現權宣言》與其影響

然而，這條論證線存在一個問題，即白人至上主義早於布盧門巴赫和高爾頓。在社會達爾文主義之前幾個世紀，歐洲的特定背景促進了生物種族概念的發展。原因，弔詭地，是一個肯定所有人類不分種族，都按照上帝的形象平等創造的基督教世界觀。這種世界觀與奴隸制和殖民主義明顯矛盾。為了解決這種矛盾，聖經被曲解，教會的權力也被濫用，《發現權宣言》就是其中最明顯的例子。

《發現權宣言》(The Doctrine of Discovery)最初由教皇亞歷山大六世(Pope Alexander VI)於1493年在一項教皇詔書中提出[1]，該詔書授予西班牙權利在新世界宣稱土地所有權。詔書宣稱，非基督徒民族不是其土地的合法擁有者，基督教國家有權以上帝的名義宣稱這些土地。這一學說後來被其他歐洲大國，包括英格蘭和法國採用，用以證明對美洲、非洲、亞洲和太平洋地區的殖民。

對該學說的神學辯護基於《馬太福音》28:18-20中的大使命，耶穌命令他的門徒「去，使萬民作我的門徒」。歐洲殖民者將此解釋為他們有權利和義務去殖民和基督教化他們遇到的所有非基督徒民族。

後來，《以弗所書》6:5和《歌羅西書》3:22等經文（指示奴隸順從他們的主人）被用來證明對非洲奴隸的征服。長老會牧師撒母耳·斯坦霍普·史密斯(Samuel Stanhope Smith)甚至辯稱，在基督教主人的照顧下的奴隸比在非洲自由的狀態要好。他還聲稱白人和黑人之間的身體和智力差異是上帝為不同種族設計的證據。

《發現權宣言》有助於創造了一種持續至今的白人至上主義敘事。它促成了許多社會普遍存在的系統性和制度化種族主義。它還持續地加劇了對非歐洲民族的刻板印象和偏見，並且促成了文化歧視和不平等持續存在的問題。

◎種族主義在華人教會的隱微展現

但這些議題與華人教會有何關聯？大部分華人信徒或許從未聽說過《發現權宣言》，無法理解像懷特‧菲爾德(英文)和愛德華茲(英文)這樣的基督教領袖如何會支持跨大西洋奴隸貿易。對很多華人基督徒來說，種族主義似乎並非他們需要關注的問題。但是，不討論並不等同於不存在。

《創世記》9:20-25描述了諾亞醉酒後裸身躺在帳篷里的情形。他的小兒子含見到了這一幕並告訴了他的兩個兄弟。得知後，諾亞對含的兒子迦南發出了詛咒，這就是所謂的「含的詛咒」。在華人教會中，將其作為非洲後裔特徵的解讀並不少見，用以說明黑人的奴役和不發達狀態。然而，廣大聖經學者已經對此類解讀表示反對，而且我未曾聽到任何講英語的牧師採納這一觀點。鑒於在西方背景下，這樣的解釋會立即被貼上「種族主義」的標籤，這並不奇怪，但值得關注的是，華人信徒很少將其視為種族主義。

華人教會內的種族主義往往是隱性的而非顯性的。小時候在台灣時，我的母親（英國人）經常感到被排斥，我的姑丈（台灣原住民）也有同感。我的祖父母是非常虔誠的基督徒（在台灣東海岸開拓了七間教會），但他們對我叔叔去非洲當傳教士並不太興奮。我的父親很得意娶了一位白人傳教士，但他肯定不希望有一位黑人兒媳。

羅德尼·吳博士（Rodney Woo）在他的書《教會的顏色：多種族教會的聖經和實踐範式》中寫道，華人教會在北美背景下可以非常孤立和封閉，不願意接觸其他種族或民族群體。他們更傾向於滿足華人社區的需求，而不是向其他群體伸出援手。華人教會往往擁有主要是華人的領導層，這可能導致對其他族群經歷的缺乏認知。例如，華人基督徒很少知道如何同情非裔美國人或拉丁裔基督徒所面臨的挑戰。

◎種族主義與福音核心意義的關係

但這些不過是影響偶爾出現在華人教會的少數非華人信徒的次要問題嗎？不，它影響到作為耶穌基督門徒的核心意義。大使命是耶穌賜給他的追隨者們去使萬民作門徒。種族主義對實現這一使命構成了重大障礙，如果華人教會想要對全球福音的進展做出有意義的貢獻，解決這個問題是必要的。

種族主義可能阻礙華人教會履行大使命的主要方式之一，是通過限制其對不同種族背景人群的外展。如果華人教會對其他種族的人不友好，它將難以使萬民作門徒。此外，如果華人教會不瞭解不同種族群體的文化和習俗，它將無法有效地向不同種族群體傳福音。

種族主義還可能通過在教會內部製造分裂來阻礙華人教會履行大使命。如果華人教會內的其他人因為他們的種族而受到歧視，這將在教會內部製造衝突。這會破壞教會的團結與合作，影響福音有效的傳播。

◎幾個改善種族主義影響的方式

為了解決華人教會內的種族主義問題，可以採取幾個步驟。首先，教會領導必須承認種族主義的存在，並且是違背上帝愛鄰舍的誡命。他們必須認識到種族主義對教會的使命和增長有害。

其次，華人教會領袖必須採取具體措施解決教會內的種族主義問題。這可能涉及教育成員了解種族主義的危害、促進教會多樣性和包容性，並對任何種族主義行為或態度負責。

第三，華人教會必須有意識地尋求並歡迎不同種族的人。基督徒應該通過了解他們的文化和習俗，積極地與不同種族的人交往。這可以通過組織文化活動並邀請不同種族背景的人參與教會活動來實現。

第四，華人教會可以通過創造一個寬恕和種族和解的文化，促進教會內部的團結與合作。這可以通過促進不同種族群體之間的對話，為人們分享他們的觀點和經歷創造一個安全且尊重的空間。

幾年前，我的一位好友得到我們台灣的教會支持在美國就讀神學院。四年後，他覺得自己被呼召在香港的一間本地教會服事。我最近問他，他的長期計劃是什麼，他告訴我他想回到美國，致力於華裔與非裔之間的和解。在親身經歷種族主義後，他想盡其所能結束種族主義。

[1] 編註：可參考維基百科條目「Discovery Doctrine」，參考網址： https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_doctrine。

### 感謝江牧師願意接受道維邀請，提供其大作於此部落格發表。此文原文為英文撰寫如後。中文翻譯由江牧師提供，道維僅作簡單編輯並增加小標題以利閱讀。讀者若想聯繫江牧師與之討論相關議題，可尋找其臉書：https://www.facebook.com/andrew.chiang.716。

Racism & the Chinese church

                                                                                       by Rev. Andrew Chiang

The Chinese philosopher Yan Fu (1854-1921) once wrote, “there are four main races on the earth: the yellow, the white, the brown and the black. The lowest is the black race...they are the so-called black slaves.” (quoted in Pusey, China and Charles Darwin, p. 69)

Yan Fu influenced many Chinese intellectuals, one of them was the reformer Liang Qichao. According to Liang, “Someday in the twentieth century, we Chinese will be the most powerful race in the world....The whites are arrogant and not up to the hardship. The blacks and browns are lazy and unintelligent. Therefore, except for us yellows, there is no race that could undertake such a task.” (Quoted in Pusey, China and Charles Darwin, p. 313)

I grew up in Taiwan and during my childhood was undeniably proud of my British heritage. I remember studying about the Opium Wars in elementary school, and one of my classmates saying to me: “your British Empire was great!” I heartily agreed. But when I went back to the UK for secondary (high) school two things surprised me. First, I was regarded as being “inferior” for having Chinese ancestry. Second, none of my teachers were particularly proud of the British Empire and its history of subduing half the world. Only much later did I come to understand the complexity of racism, white supremacy and post-colonialism within the western mind.

Eight years ago my wife and I returned to Taiwan to serve at an international church. Since then I recall having numerous conversations with American pastors and missionaries about racism, especially in the American context. I don’t recall having a single conversation on this subject with local Taiwanese believers. Perhaps racism is only an issue for Christians in Europe and America? Or perhaps racism is something Chinese Christians are simply unaware of, unless they happen to be the victim of it?

The lack of pride my secondary school teachers exhibited towards Britain’s colonial past is hardly surprising. It was European colonialism that provided the context for the development of ideas about racial superiority. The transatlantic slave trade, which saw millions of Africans forcibly brought to the Americas and subjected to brutal conditions, reinforced the idea of white supremacy.

But was European colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade any different from the slavery and empire building common throughout human history? And isn’t white supremacy simply an extension of the sense of superiority the ancient Greeks had towards those they considered “barbarians”? One key difference is that white supremacy is based on skin color, whereas earlier forms of racism was based on language and culture. This new form of racism argued that certain races, due to their biology, were naturally inferior to others.

One of the key figures in the development of biological racism was the German anthropologist Johann Blumenbach. Blumenbach classified human beings into five racial categories based on skull measurements, which he believed correlated with intelligence and moral character. These categories were the Caucasian (white), Mongolian (Asian), Ethiopian (black), American (indigenous American), and Malay (Pacific Islander).

Within the English speaking world Blumenbach‘s ideas were heartily endorsed by Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton argued that certain races were inherently superior to others and that it was important to encourage the reproduction of those with desirable traits. Galtons ideas were influential in the development of policies promoting racial segregation and forced sterilization in the United States and Nazi Germany. His ideas also influenced Yan Fu and Liang Qichao.

However, there is a problem with this line of argument, namely that white supremacy predates Blumenbach and Galton. There was something unique about the European context that facilitated the development of the biological concept of race centuries before social Darwinism. The answer, paradoxically, is a Christian worldview that affirms all human beings to be created equal in the image of God, regardless of race or ethnicity. Such a worldview creates an obvious tension with slavery and colonialism. In an effort to resolve this tension we see the misinterpretation of scripture and the abuse of ecclesiastical power. The Doctrine of Discovery is a particular grievous example of this.

The Doctrine of Discovery was first articulated by Pope Alexander VI in 1493, in a papal bull that granted Spain the right to claim lands in the New World. The bull asserted that non-Christian peoples were not the rightful owners of their lands and that Christian nations had the right to claim these lands in the name of God. This doctrine was later adopted by other European powers, including England and France, and was used to justify the colonization of the Americas, Africa, Asia, and the Pacific.

Theological justifications for the doctrine were often based on misinterpretations of biblical texts, particularly the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20, where Jesus commands his disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations." European colonizers interpreted this to mean that they had the right and duty to colonize and Christianize all non-Christian peoples they encountered.

Later on, passages such as Ephesians 6:5 and Colossians 3:22, which instruct slaves to obey their masters, were used to justify the subjugation of enslaved Africans. Presbyterian minister Samuel Stanhope Smith even argued that slaves were better off under the care of Christian masters than free in Africa. He also claimed that the physical and intellectual distinctions between whites and blacks were evidence of Gods design for different races.

The Doctrine of Discovery helped to create a narrative of white supremacy which has persisted to this day. It contributed to the systemic and institutionalized racism prevalent in many societies, including the United States. It has also perpetuated stereotypes and prejudices about non-European peoples, and has contributed to ongoing issues such as cultural appropriation, discrimination, and inequality.

But what has all this got to do with the Chinese church? Most Chinese believers have never heard of The Doctrine of Discovery and find it incomprehensible how Christian leaders such as George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards could have supported the transatlantic slave trade. Racism is not really an issue for Chinese Christians, is the underlying mentality. But then unaddressed is different from non-existent.

Genesis 9:20-25 has an interesting account of Noah getting drunk on wine and lying naked in his tent. His youngest son, Ham, sees him naked and tells his brothers. When Noah hears about this he pronounces a curse on Ham’s son Canaan. This has been called “The curse of Ham” and it is not unusual to hear Chinese pastors interpret this curse as a mark of African descent, thereby explaining the enslavement and backwardness of black people. However, this interpretation has been widely discredited by biblical scholars, and never have I heard it used by an English speaking pastor. This is hardly surprising, given that such an interpretation will immediately be labeled “racist” within a western context, but interestingly Chinese believers seldom perceive it as such.

Racism within the Chinese church tends to be more implicit than explicit. Within my extended Chinese family, my mother (who is caucasian) often felt excluded, along with my aunt’s husband (who was aboriginal Taiwanese). My grandparents were wonderful Christians (planting seven churches on the east coast of Taiwan), but they weren’t too excited with my uncle going to Africa as a missionary. My dad was happy to marry a white missionary, but he would certainly prefer not having a black daughter-in-law.

Writing within the North American context, Dr. Rodney Woo (in his book, “The Color of Church: A Biblical and Practical Paradigm for Multiracial Churches”) observes that Chinese churches can be very insular and closed off from other racial and ethnic groups. They prefer to cater to the needs of the Chinese community, rather than reaching out to other groups. Chinese churches tend to have predominantly Chinese leadership, which can lead to a lack of awareness of the experiences of other ethnic groups. For example, Chinese Christians seldom know how to empathize with the struggles of African American or Latino Christians.

But aren’t these minor issues that only affect the very few non-Chinese believers who inadvertently turn up a Chinese church? No, it affects the very core of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. The Great Commission was given by Jesus to his followers to go and make disciples of all nations. Racism poses a significant obstacle to fulfilling this mandate, and it is imperative to address this problem if the Chinese church is to make a meaningful contribution to the advancement of the gospel worldwide.

One of the main ways that racism can hinder the Chinese church from fulfilling the Great Commission is by limiting its outreach to people of different ethnic backgrounds. If the Chinese church is not welcoming to people of other ethnicities, it will be challenging for it to make disciples of all nations. Furthermore, the Chinese church will not be able to effectively reach out to different ethnic groups if it does not understand their cultures and customs.

Another way that racism can impede the Chinese church from fulfilling the Great Commission is by creating divisions within the church itself. If other people within the Chinese church are discriminated against based on their ethnicity, it will create tension and conflict within the church. This can lead to a lack of unity and cooperation, which is essential for effective evangelism.

To address the problem of racism within the Chinese church, several steps can be taken. First, the church leadership must acknowledge that racism exists and is a sin that goes against Gods commandment to love our neighbors. They must also recognize that racism is harmful to the churchs mission and growth.

Second, the leadership must take concrete steps to address racism within the church. This may involve educating members on the harms of racism, promoting diversity and inclusivity, and holding members accountable for any racist behavior or attitudes.

Third, the Chinese church must intentionally seek out and welcome people of different races. Christians should actively engage with people of different ethnicities by learning about their cultures and customs. This can be achieved by organizing cultural events and inviting people from different ethnic backgrounds to participate in church activities.

Fourth, the Chinese church can work towards promoting unity and cooperation within the church by creating a culture of forgiveness and ethnic reconciliation. This can be achieved by facilitating dialogue between different ethnic groups, creating a safe and respectful space for people to share their perspectives and experiences.

Several years ago a good friend of mine was sent out by our church in Taiwan to pursue theological studies in the US. After four years he felt called to serve at a local church in Hong Kong. I asked him recently what his long term plans were, he told me he wanted to return to the US to work towards reconciliation between Chinese and African Americans. After experiencing racism first hand, he wanted to do what he could to bring an end to racism.