As 2011 drew to a close, a number of articles surfaced about Black atheists in the US – being Black and a scholar of religion, they caught my interest. Though the amount of recent attention belies the small numbers and this article on Essence magazine’s website suggests that Black atheism may be “on the rise,” according to the Pew Research Institute, only about half of one percent of African Americans identify as atheist as compared with a little less than two percent of Americans as a whole.
Still, despite their small numbers, Black atheists do exist and have voices that deserve to be heard. I have read the articles in the mainstream press and on alternative media outlets like The Root, and watched the videos on YouTube with growing curiosity. And, unfortunately, growing discomfort.
Why?
It’s not the fact that there are Black atheists – or atheists of any color, for that matter – I respect the rights of all people to believe or disbelieve, practice or not practice as they see fit. What gives me pause is that the discourse around Black atheism, perhaps inadvertently, tends to re-inscribe Christianity as the only system through which one can connect with the Divine. This tendency sets reason in opposition to spiritual experience, and fortifies Western paradigms of value and reality. In so doing, it serves to marginalize those Blacks like myself who are in the non-Christian religious minority and to reify the very systems that many of those Black atheists profiled seem to oppose.
It’s a fact: in the American context – and particularly the African American context – “religious” tends to be synonymous with “Christian” so much so that, as noted by my colleague, Linda Chavers, in this New York Times article on Black atheism, the question “what church do you go to?” often comes soon after “what’s your name?”
Though increasingly incorrect, the assumption that African Americans are Christian isn’t entirely without merit as the vast majority are, or were at some point. Indeed, as I read the articles above and watched YouTube videos like this one, the recurring theme amongst those Black atheists whose voices are heard is that they were raised Christian and at some point rejected (or, like one of my professors, realized that they never accepted to begin with) Biblical doctrine and thus declared themselves atheists.
I understand this process intimately, as quite early on I went through a similar course of realizing that Christianity and Biblical doctrine were not for me, much to my parents’ chagrin. Unlike my atheist brothers and sisters however, my rejection of Christianity did not lead me to completely reject the idea of a higher power. Who or what it was, I didn’t know, but I knew there was something. Did I believe in or want to worship God as described in the Bible? No. Did I believe in heaven, hell and eternal damnation for wrongdoing? Not at all. Did I support what I saw as hypocrisy in the church with regard to issues of sexuality, among others? No way. Did I feel comfortable worshiping within a system that, in my view, had been used to enslave, demonize and oppress my people? Absolutely not.
But I realized then, as I realize now, that Christianity does not have a monopoly on Divinity and that my rejection of that system did not necessitate my rejection of everything having to do with God or spirit. I realized that I didn’t even necessarily have to call the something that I feel “God,” that there are other names like Brahma, Mawu, the Great Spirit, and Olodumare, to name a few – or no name at all – that might more fully represent it. Most importantly for me, I realized that rather than focusing on rejecting Christianity and what I felt was wrong with the Bible, I could spend that energy exploring and finding something else that felt right.
It seems that many of the profiled African Americans who rejected Christianity turned immediately to atheism without ever considering that there are other possibilities for engagement with the Divine. While this isn’t, in itself, an issue and is a matter of personal choice, what I do find problematic is the conversation which condemns “religious people” or “theism” in general when people of one particular religion are its only point of reference. Several of those quoted in the above pieces, for example, implied that “religious people” (by which most actually meant Christians who take the Bible as literal truth and use it to refute science) are dogmatic and intellectually lazy and…
Well, it’s true, some are.
But the same can be said of some atheists. Being religious doesn’t make someone intellectually lazy any more than being atheist makes someone intellectually astute: rejection without examination is just as indolent as blind acceptance. The sacred orature of Ifá teaches that “no one knows the beginning and the end of all things” and encourages thoughtful examination of life’s processes, as do several other spiritual traditions. To negatively characterize all religions based on experience with one (or even two or three) is, well, intellectually lazy.
My point in this is not to try to convince atheists to find a religion (but, you know, if you’re in the market feel free to holla). I do, however, aim always to complicate dialogues that feel a little too absolute. Heaven or hell. Reason or religion. This or that. Life is much more complex than that, which is a part of what makes it so beautifully fascinating.
Christianity has long been touted as the only “true” religion by its practitioners and religious scholars alike. Though there has, thankfully, been some positive change toward more pluralistic viewpoints, the “Christianity or atheism” binary re-inscribes the hegemony of Western Christian-centric and reason-centric worldviews, effectively rendering those of us who worship the Divine in other ways – particularly African and indigenous ways which continued to be maligned by much Western discourse – invisible.
While I certainly understand the power and self-assurance that can come with spurning something you disagree with, for me, it wasn’t rejecting religion but rejecting the binary – realizing that Divinity exists in many forms and that reason and spirit are not mutually exclusive – that was truly radical and empowering.
Image courtesy of wikimedia, developed by Richard Dawkins and released into the public domain
Excellent article, Easter! Intelligent, open, well written. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks very much, Ms. P! I’m glad you enjoyed it and appreciate your energy.
The definition of religion is the belief in a higher, unseen force that dictates one existence (past, present and future). It make very little difference the ethnicity, history or origin of the belief system if it is a set standard of rules, laws and codes that are passed down to humans from this deity of worship. The operative word being “worship”. Most freethinkers, do not dismiss the existence of life and energy, perhaps beyond our current knowledge. They just don’t see a need to worship or perform rituals to an unseen, unsubstantiated and unknown deity..
Thank you for your commentary, Kwame. Actually, although the definition of religion you offer is the one that most people tend to invoke when they say “religion” there are many, many definitions of religion and many different religions; not all of them presume the existence — or worship — of a deity. Buddhism for example, does not confirm or deny the existence of a supreme being.
As well, not every religion sees the supreme being as one who “dictates” what happens in a person’s life. In the Yoruba conception, for example, we believe that each person chooses the path that s/he will take while on earth. We don’t see Olodumare or the Orisa (the names of our supreme being and divinities, respectively) as dictating the path we’re going to take or controlling our lives, as such.
This is a part of the point that I’m making which is that the concept of “religion” and the concept of the supreme being as commonly conceived are very much based on the Abrahamic (Judeo-Christian-Islamic) model and so when people reject “religion” they are often rejecting *that model*, not all religions.
I’m glad that you presented the idea that many freethinkers (I consider myself both a freethinker and a humanist despite being religious but that’s a conversation for another time *smile*) give credence to the idea that energies and things beyond our knowledge or comprehension may exist, if not warranting worship or devotion. That was another part of my point, that there is *so much * out there that to presume we know with certainty all there is to know seems like a big statement. Also, I’m sure there are people who didn’t know that about freethinkers so thanks for dropping that nugget of knowledge!
Thanks so much for your energy, brother.
Very well writeen you are to self expression through words what Ambroise is through paint. I whole heartedly concur with the fact that rejecting something without the examination of the various other options is foolish. It is the fault of western civilation that forces us to question and reject so many things because everything in this society becomes a binary because of closed mindedness and ultimately the fear of believing themselves as genetically and spiritually inferior. Moving away from the binary is a more positive and non judgmental way of life that forces us to think outside the box putting us in the shoes of others and potentially finding that we fit several pairs and become accepting of others. Life has too many layers for things to be so cut and dry.
Ayo, o seun pupo (thank you very much) for your words and your presence. I love your shoe analogy, indeed we may find that we fit several pairs, or none at all but it’s fun to try them on. And yes, life does have way too many layers to be so cut and dry. I pray that we’re able to peel some of those layers back during our brief stay here. Ase.