Skip to content

The Eerie Evangelical Silence Over Trayvon Martin’s Murder

by Carson T. Clark on March 24, 2012

Speaking for no one but myself, I make a concerted effort to speak/write with something of a prophetic, i.e. forthtelling, voice into the church and public sphere.11.This blog evidences that on a regular basis. Yet I try to keep in tension passion with discernment, truth with civility. At the same time, having spent all of last week on the Baylor Civil Rights bus tour of the South, I presently have a heightened awareness about civil rights issues and cultural milieu surrounding the murder of Trayvon Martin.22.Which I hope will never wear off.

The reason I’ve largely been silent until now is that I don’t know, and can’t seem to find, the reliable facts. And it’s not for lack of looking. I simply don’t know enough to not speak out of my ass.33.I make a concerted effort not to shoot first and ask questions later, which seems an oddly appropriate approach and metaphor. This, I fear, is not the motivation behind the deafening silence of most American evangelicalism on this issue, though. At best it seems to be a case of out of sight, out of mind. At worst it’s an exhibition of the lingering institutional racism that pervades American society. Either way, our failure as evangelicals to stand up against injustice is antithetical to our faith. Shame on us.

Anyway, the best I can do at this time is make a concerted effort to promote those who know what they’re talking about. Here’s a few blog posts and articles I found to be worthwhile reads:44. If you’re a white evangelical like me, I’d encourage you to read and reflect on them for a while.

Hat tip to Jason Dye for pointing out my silence. Thanks for being the Holy Spirit’s instrument for bringing conviction.

Addendum: Since publishing this post I’ve been presented with a small band of evangelicals who are address Trayvon’s murder and been validly criticized for making generalizations that are far too broad. Although I think this post remains largely correct, I’m delighted to acknowledge that the problem is not as bad as I previously supposed.

From: Uncategorized
  • Zac
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      Hey, that’s encouraging.

    • http://www.facebook.com/doulos05 Jonathan Bennett

      Wow, that’s a really good practical outworking of theology.

  • Katie Wozniak

    This is somewhat off-topic, but this reminds me of a startling and intense book I recently finished for my history course about a Belgian king in the 19th century who made his own private slave colony in the Congo. Its called “King Leopold’s Ghost” by Adam Hochschild. It presents many insights into underlying Western and colonial thought regarding the slavery that existed in Africa and how people went on justifying their actions though an estimate of around 8 million Africans died just in the Congo alone.
    I had no idea this went on and neither do many historians, because it has somehow been kept quiet. So you may have heard of it, but I thought you might find it interesting to check out

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      Huh. Hadn’t heard about that. It seems much of the events in Africa are still hidden. Will have to look into this.

  • http://nailtothedoor.blogspot.com Dan Martin

    I’m afraid a lot of that silence stems from the fact that so many Evangelicals are deeply committed to their reading of the Second Amendment and are afraid of having their words used against them in situations that may not be as clear. Face it, there is no punitive or legal response to Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin that doesn’t lend itself pretty quickly to some form of gun licensure or control. Perhaps requiring concealed-carry permit holders to have regular continuing education (including shoot/no shoot exercises like law enforcement has to undergo) as a condition of maintaining their permit…

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      When I read your comments here I was brought back to a quote I saw at the Nationalism Civil Rights Museum where MLK was shot. After the assassination of Dr. King, MLK asked people to question what had *truly* killed President Kennedy. He contended that it was not guns, but hatred. It struck me as one of the few times MLK would’ve agreed with the conservative right. They probably wouldn’t have even agreed on what the legal response should or shoudn’t be, but both are intent upon seeing behind the guns to the real, underlying problem: the human heart.

    • http://nailtothedoor.blogspot.com Dan Martin

      I hear ya, Carson, but I’m not so sure in this case. Obviously I’m projecting here, but I’m guessing that while Zimmerman may indeed have some anti-Black prejudice that influenced his decision to chase Martin down and go after him, I suspect the actual killing is a response not so much of hate but of the combination of heat of the moment and gun in the hand. Brandishing the weapon in the first place likely escalated the situation, increasing the adrenaline and blood pressure (and emotional attitude) of both parties; from there to pulling the trigger is a very short leap and may not have involved deliberate malice or hatred.

      I am not a true gun-control liberal any more than I’m a second-amendment conservative. I think both “sides” are largely political grandstanders. But police–at least in responsible departments–are required to train with their weapons not only how to hit their target, but simulations and discussions of when to shoot and when not to. Civilians with concealed-carry permits aren’t required to qualify with their sidearms at all. This makes a difference. Knowing *how* to shoot and deciding *when* to shoot are very different skills.

      But my point above is that conservative Evangelicals often use “seeing behind the guns” rhetoric to mask an ugly truth, that they actually are all for violent action to protect what is theirs. This is true on a personal, second-amendment basis and on a proclivity to war basis. Either way, Evangelicals are rarely a voice for peace and reason over against violence in our country, and this is a tragedy.

    • http://nailtothedoor.blogspot.com Dan Martin

      Further, there is something inherently un-Christ-like about the Florida “Stand Your Ground” law, that I also think most conservative Christians likely support. “Stand Your Ground” is the personal equivalent of the “These Colors Don’t Run” bumper stickers with the American flag. Both embody the cowboy swagger that says in effect, that no threat is going to cause *me* to turn and run like a coward. As I understand it, the law was passed as a counter to self-defense claims that were losing on the basis that the defender could have escaped, but chose to use deadly force instead. “Stand Your Ground” made it possible for them to kill rather than look (in their own minds) like cowards.

      This could not be further from the mind of Christ, but it’s very close to the mind of many Evangelicals.

    • Elizabeth

      I live in MN and our governor, thankfully, just vetoed a bill that would have made Stand Your Ground a part of MN law. Amazing how many of my Christian (Conservative Baptist/Evangelical/Pentacostal) were gung-ho for it.

  • Pingback: The Shooting of Trayvon Martin « James’ Ramblings

  • http://www.riseofthecenter.com/ Solomon Kleinsmith

    This is the only way to go for someone who isn’t riddled with prejudice. This really has become quite the rorschach test, showing who will just presume innocence or guilt just because of skin color, gun ownership and whatnot.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      “This is the only way to go for someone who isn’t riddled with prejudice.”

      Sorry. Can you clarify what you mean?

    • http://www.riseofthecenter.com/ Solomon Kleinsmith

      Nobody but the guy that was there, and potentially police and witnesses know anything near enough to make any sort of judgement about the case what so ever. People assuming that the guy who shot the kid is lying about it being self defense don’t have anywhere near enough evidence to know that, yet they say it anyway. And the people who defend him, even though they don’t know if he really instigated it or not and it really was or wasn’t self defense, are just as much blowing hot air.

      The only reasonable position to take on this has some aspect of “we’ll have to wait and see what evidence comes out on this… it’s way to early to say with any sort of confidence what really happened.”

  • Elizabeth

    Just dealt with this on my lunch break. Unfortunately, some of my co-workers (at a Christian school) assume that the kid was a juvenile delinquent. When pressed as to whether these assumptions are valid, they clam up and get defensive. Also, like Dan Martin, I find they are far more interested in gun rights than in what actually happened. This is something I’ve been struggling with. I cannot for the life of me understand why so many of my Christian friends and peers are so desirous of gun and “right to self-defense.” The last thing I feel compelled to do is kill someone in order to “save” myself or my property (which I don’t regard as mine, ultimately, but God’s!) :(

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      I have no response but to sigh in empathy.

  • Carl

    If you are armed and no crime is in progress and you are not an official law enforcement officer, you “MUST” AVOID CONFRONTATION!” You cannot follow someone and claim self defense, according to the law. Police dispatch: “Are you following him?”
    Zimmerman: “Yes.” Mr. Zimmerman broke the law when he got out of his vehicle, with his firearm and no crime was in progress, to follow Trayvon Martin. Mr. Zimmerman cannot claim immunity under the self defense law, because he failed to “AVOID CONFRONTATION” when he exited the vehicle with a handgun.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=163800401 Carson T. Clark

      Agreed.

%d bloggers like this: