Majority/Minority Relations
Sometimes members of a majority forget that their majority is not a unanimity. The following electronic bulletin board exchanges, from 1993, offer some advice to the majority. The students' remarks are set off by the ">".
The first of these exchanges follows:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I've just read several intelligent and well-intended posts on the topics of racial relations, brotherhood, etc., including the post from which the following is quoted:
> .... We are all brothers and
> sisters through Christ our Lord so lets be a big happy family.
It should be noted by all that our society and our campus include many who are not Christian, so that the above is not the best way to appeal for brotherhood.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
That exchange provoked several other comments. Some people seemed unhappy with me, and responded rather critically. My final words on the subject appear in the following exchange with a different student.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Dr. Boxer:
>
> When I wrote my "Deeper Thoughts" and poked fun at the Catholic religion,
> I was reminded that we were writing on a VAX at a Catholic university...
> keeping this in mind, I chose to sign my letter (several posts ago) in
> the following manner: "Brother in Christ." I believe that it had been
> done before I did it, and it has certainly been done since. Since then
> it has been debated. I am curious as to whether or not you have
> seriously a problem with this... or whether you are just trying to kick
> up some debate.
I have no problem with this, nor was I trying to stir up debate. My remarks were directed at a specific usage of this phrase, which, in its context, was inappropriate. The author had appealed for unity (a laudable goal) on the grounds, STATED AS FACT, that all shared such brother/sister-hood. He did not state HE BELIEVED all shared such brother/sister-hood -- such a statement would have been a factual presentation of his belief, to which I would not object, even though I don't share that belief.
There are several reasons why this should be an important distinction to you, one of which is that educated people should be capable of making such distinctions. Perhaps more important are the following.
It is easy to lose sight of the status of Niagara University as an island of Catholicism and Christianity in a larger world. Students should also remember that a university is a training ground for the educated elite, who will, upon leaving the university, disperse into a professional elite among whom neither Catholicism nor Christianity should be presumed to be the universal culture. America, today, is a magnet for the educated elite all over the world; you may find yourselves among Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, etc., none of whom are Christian; all of whom are happy to be included in appeals to fellowship, but none of whom wish to be included in any appeal to Christian fellowship; because, just as you (I presume) are rightly proud of your own Christian tradition (part of which rejects other religions), members of other faiths are rightly proud of their own traditions (part of which also reject other religions, including Christianity).
Although a small minority, there are Niagarans who are not Christian. If you're smart, you'll keep their presence in mind, if only to prepare yourself for life after Niagara. If you learn to be more sensitive to those different from yourselves -- this can be done without violating your own integrity -- you'll be much better off.
Again, my entry into this thread was in response to a claimed universality of something that is not universal. I pointed out that the author might have expressed his sentiment differently. His wording was such that his appeal to fellowship was exclusionary, and that just doesn't make a lot of sense. That's ALL that I intended in my original post in this thread.
> I personally do not believe that it is any one person's responsibility to
> try to keep from offending people. Somebody can (and probably will) be
> offended every time you turn around, so what is the point?
Well, I think everyone should take reasonable measures to avoid offense. Of course, people will disagree on what's reasonable. The point, as you put it, is to get along with people.
> The truth is that we ARE at a Catholic university, and we should respect
> the right of somebody to say "Brothers and Sisters in Christ" ....
I respect the right of Christians to refer to themselves in this phrase. But I ask you to consider how you would feel were you to be addressed as a "fellow Jew," "fellow Muslim," etc.
In my case, it's not an issue of taking offense. Niagara is what it is, and I wouldn't be here if I couldn't accept that. But I interpret my responsibility as a teacher broadly. I hope that this thread contributes to understanding between the (local) Christian majority and the non-Christian minority.