"White" Jesus Controversy

Pandemic. Demonstrations. Riots. BLM. Saint Serra statues. Now "White" Jesus. 

Let's discuss?

BLM activists are saying "all murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, his European mother, and all their white friends should also come down". They are a gross form of white supremacy. Tools of Oppression. Racist propaganda. 

They have a point. But have they gone too far? I agree that in a "perfect world", Jesus would look like the first century Galilean carpenter he was, not a Germanic, blue-eyed, marble white-skinned, straight-haired and bearded Jesus.

MLK wrote in 1957 that the color of Jesus' skin is of no consequence. His significance lay not in His color, but in His unique God-consciousness. Okay - that message is clear. But how did we get here? Let's look at history.

The Bible gives absolutely no clue as to what Jesus looked like - not how tall, not how big or small, no coloration or haircut clues - nothing. The first Christians did not depict Jesus in any way, honoring Judaism's ban on "graven images". They only cared about what He had done.

In the Christian world, the desire for images of Jesus and the Virgin Mary slowly grew as the centuries passed and Christianity spread to different cultures. These cultures tended to portray Jesus in their own likeness. The Greek's recreated Christ in the long-haired style of the Greek's sun god Apollo. Jesus is also seen as Romanesque in a classic beard and sitting on a throne, like Jupiter, king of the gods. Lacking any Biblical clues, these artists portrayed Him as they saw fit.

Above: gotta throw an image of me in there.

No, I'm not a Monk - but I portray a Franciscan for 

4th graders at Mission La Purisima in Lompoc.

However, the 7th century conquest of North Africa and the Middle East by Islam created a barrier between the Christian worlds, thus isolating Europe and it's Jesus artisans from its Christian brethren below. They were left to portray Him as a white European. So where did the "modern" mostly white image of Jesus come from?

It turns out that during the Middle Ages, a number of relics bearing the "true" likeness of Jesus miraculously appeared. They were claimed to be images created during His actual time on Earth. These relics, unsurprisingly enough, featured the long hair and straight beard that we associate with Jesus today. Also, throw in the famous "Shroud of Turin", believed by many to be His burial cloth, whose material retains an amazing likeness of the "bearded white Jesus" of day.

Above: Warner Sallman's 1940 "Head of Christ" 

In the late 1800's through early 1900's, white Jesus was indeed used by some as racist propaganda, and thus Jesus gained blue eyes and a lily white complexion - both rare in Christ's Middle East. Couple that with artist Warner Sallman's 1940 "Head of Christ" painting, which has been reprinted half a billion times, and you have turned Jesus into a glamorous and virile white man.

During the so-called "Age of Exploration" (roughly the 1500s to the 1700s), missionaries exported Jesus around the globe, and His likeness began to appear with the racial features of the local population. The most famous of those images is the "Virgin of Guadalupe" in Mexico, which depicts Mary with dark brown skin and straight black hair. As always, controversy over the depiction of Christ followed, wherever He went.

Above: Base of St. Serra statue at Mission SLO

Even the master Michelangelo was criticized during his lifetime for his depiction of beardless Jesus in the Sistine Chapel fresco of the last Judgment. Over in America, pictures of Jesus were rare well into the 1800's, as dominant Protestants were wary of promoting idolatry through Christ images. As more Catholics "crossed the pond", that began to change. The long conflict of the depiction of Jesus had finally come to America.

The controversy over "what should Jesus look like?" that has taken place over thousands of years continues today. In my opinion, that is a healthy debate that may be worth having for some folks, but not me. Destroying white Jesus images? I do not recommend it. Taking down white Jesus and putting up historically accurate, or locally-centric images? Sounds like a worthwhile undertaking, if there is a budget for it.

Peace and Love in these "weird" times.

Above: probably closer to what Jesus looked like.

Race and appearance of Jesus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_appearance_of_Jesus

Head of Christ:
https://medium.com/@mock/warner-sallman-and-the-branding-of-jesus-christ-4b711e5226b5

Another take on the "White Jesus" debate:
https://usagag.com/the-fallacy-that-christian-art-generally-portrays-christ-as-a-northern-european-man/

Mission La Purisima State Historic Park in Lompoc (where I am a docent):
http://www.lapurisimamission.org

Various visual depictions of Jesus through the ages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depiction_of_Jesus

Virgin of Guadalupe:
https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/our-lady-guadalupe-anti-pachamama-53487

SLO: Why Wait Until the Homeless Show Covid-19 Symptoms before Housing Them?

Note: All of our volunteers, including myself, are following the strictest Covid-19 exposure guidelines, despite reports to the contrary.

Our safety net is facing its biggest test in decades as a flood of people have flocked to homeless shelters, slammed suicide hotlines and packed food pantries. The economic shutdown is hitting the poor and working class with the most force, especially in cities like SLO with high homeless populations.

Before the virus was first detected, homeless shelters were already filled to capacity. In a typical week, numerous volunteers help run the shelters. But because of the coronavirus, few volunteers are coming. The demand on the paid staff is greater than ever, with surfaces needing to be disinfected regularly and people needing to be screened for symptoms. Beds now have to be spaced at least 6 feet apart to protect against the spreading of the virus.

Most of the chronically homeless (who do not stay in shelters) are in their 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, and their physical health is often more in line with people 25 years older. To make matters worse, showers trailers and restaurant / gas station restrooms have closed. As far as I can tell, the announced hand washing / sanitation stations have largely not appeared. In all my wanderings in the last week, I only saw 1 hand sanitation station, and that was outside the restroom at Mission Plaza. How does that help? The restroom was already open. With personall hygiene among the homeless so important right now, there is very little available.

Recently, homeless have been asking for masks and gloves, and we have none to give them. Eventually, when the Covid-19 spreads throughout our homeless camps, the homeless will swamp our medical systems, and will die at rates 2 or 3 times the average for their age. Then we’ll wish we had put them in hotels / trailers BEFORE they showed symptoms.

Final thoughts: There is a survey used by the "70 Now" (Housing First) program called the "Vulnerability Index: Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool" (VI-SPDAT), which is used to "rate" the homeless on their medical vulnerability, and thus their admission to the program. Basically, VI-SPDAT determines a rating for the relative likelihood that a particular homeless is most likely to die prematurely due to living on the streets. This survey could be used to determine who are also most vulnerable to the novel coronavirus / Covid-19, and house them before they get this virus and require hospitalization. Think about it.