Six years ago this month I stood in the pulpit of St. Barnabas Church in Wilmington, Delaware and preached a sermon on the troubles besetting our country. I have posted this sermon, unchanged, on the blog page of my website here https://davidberesford.net/blog/national-day-of-repentance-26

 If you recall, Covid was sweeping the country while the government introduced lockdowns and self-isolation measures. In the streets there were riots following the death of George Floyd. A national survey had revealed that 80% of the population felt the country was “out of control.” 

My sermon was a “state of the nation” report from an outsider, as someone who looked at the problem with fresh eyes and could offer an alternative way forward. George Floyd’s death raised questions about the nature of our policing. Were the police actively targeting unarmed blacks and killing them? While the truth struggled to be heard - across the entire country, a total of 9 unarmed black people had been killed by the police the previous year - a narrative surged that police were institutionally racist. How many of the country’s problems were the result of this racism, and was there a way to escape the injustices of the past and build a more equitable future for the nation? 

A number of institutions stepped forward with answers to these questions. One of them was Black Lives Matter (BLM), which championed the rights of black people in the face of discrimination. Until then, few people had heard of BLM, yet the genius of their name propelled them into the public arena, and they became the de facto spokespeople for their cause. Few people cared that their underlying message was a Marxist one. When I visited their website I learned that they advocated for the destruction of the traditional family unit and for socialist government. 

Soon colleges and universities, which had been developing an approach to race relations known as Critical Race Theory, began to voice their support. Books such as White Fragility and How to be an Anti-Racist were promoted by everyone from big business to the Church. Congregations and company employees were invited to take part in “anti-racism” training in order to raise awareness of the inherent racism within them. 

I attended one of these courses in the Diocese of Delaware. The training was designed primarily to reveal bias and discrimination by white people toward black people. However, the course I attended didn’t go quite according the script. Asked to describe their interactions with other races when growing up, one white colleague remembered being regularly beaten up by groups of local black kids. 

I looked at the reading list for those wishing to learn more about the black experience. When I asked why books by important black intellectuals such as Thomas Sowell, Robert Woodson, Jason Riley and Shelby Steele were absent from the list, no one could give an answer. The reason, of course, is that these are all conservative black writers. “Anti-racism” is essentially a left wing project, with an underlying political agenda that excludes dialogue with those who offer an alternative viewpoint.

In any case, there was a ready answer for those who dissented - it was your “white fragility” that caused you to question the new training. “White fragility” was a clever ruse that enabled all debate and disagreement to be closed down, since any disagreement was simply evidence of internalized and unconscious racism. The dogma was clear: society’s problems were attributable to the toxicity of “white supremacy” and “whiteness.” In one letter from the Diocese of Delaware I was asked to give up my “whiteness.” I wrote back saying that I would be happy to do that if the writers of the letter would give up their “blackness.” 

In those days I was very much an outlier. On a Zoom call with colleagues, I was questioned about my whiteness and whether I would repudiate it. I said I was fine with it, because that was how God made me. My white colleagues, who had internalized the training more than me, looked at me as though I had just confessed to killing my grandmother and cutting her up into little pieces. I was unrepentant, however. 

I did read White Fragility, or at least some of it, along with the book by Ibram X Kendi How to be an Anti-Racist. Kendi’s book is a mixture of autobiography and polemic, that posits that “the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Kendi wanted a reversal or payback for the history of white racism, which purportedly has its roots in capitalism. This is the “systemic” or “structural” element of much anti-racism training. To defeat racism, one must change the system that has allowed racism to flourish.

Kendi’s analysis draws deeply from Critical Theory, the Marxist-inspired system that groups individuals into categories in order to identify them as opponents of right-think. According to historian Giles Udy, “The goal of CRT (Critical Race Theory) is the deconstruction of racism, and the dismantling of the systems of hegemonic power that normalize it. The tool it uses is Social Justice activism. Liberal values such as the equality of treatment for all are rejected: equality of opportunity is replaced by ‘equity,’ the engineered equality of outcome. It is considered valid to discriminate in college entry, exams or employment selection in favor of minorities to achieve equity.”

Over a century ago the Bolsheviks in Russia used a similar plan to destroy their enemies. Any individual, even if they had done nothing wrong, were guilty by association with the group and could be sent to the gulag or executed. Today, the group that stands “guilty” and perceived as an enemy of racial justice is white people.

Do most people share this view? Ask the person in the pew if they are for or against racism, and the chances are that they would, without hesitation, claim to be against it. This opposition is based on the principle that discriminating against a person due to the color of their skin is morally wrong. Christians see every person as being made in the image of God. Learning to live peacefully and respectfully with one another is one of our goals on earth.

Racism per se is therefore understood as something undesirable. It can be legally mandated or simply an expression of personal prejudice, and it strikes at the heart of a society that champions equality. Therefore, any attempt to promote a racist society is bad. 

Like “Black Lives Matter”, the genius of “anti-racism” is in the name. We all agree, don’t we, that being anti-racist is a good thing and that fighting racism is our goal? But at the core of “anti-racism” is a fundamentally racist and, it can be added, anti-Christian principle. It is that all white people are guilty of the sin of racism without hope of forgiveness or redemption. Furthermore, black people are never guilty of racism. 

On the surface, this proposition seems absolute and unbelievable. Yet, for some, even to question it is firm proof that you are a racist. Have white people been guilty of racism in the past? Of course. White racism, we are told, persists through the structures that white people have built. It’s impossible to deny that a majority group will, in every country, create the laws and systems that reflect its history and culture. Compare the United States with say, China or Egypt. Nowhere does a perfect country exist. Yet, in 2026, the United States remains a place of aspiration for many people, regardless of their race or color. For a supposedly evil and racist country, there appears to be no limit to the number of people around the world wanting to live here.

Anti-Racist activists have sought to seek redress for historic wrongs through schemes such as DEI and racial quotas. They do not seek a level playing field for all the citizens of the United States, but wish to tilt the field in favor of one ethnic group. While these policies have recently been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, “anti-racists” continue to seek “racial justice” through the promotion of racial discrimination.

The Church has incorporated much of this ideology without sufficient theological scrutiny. The irredeemable nature of white racism - a sin that can never be forgiven - sits at odds with Christian teachings of forgiveness and redemption. There are also questions of accountability and agency. If a person believes that they are oppressed by another, they are more likely to blame their “oppressor” for their own failures. Why aspire to be better when the “system” is against you?

Attorney and former teacher Dana Stangel-Plowe describes what happens when Anti-Racism and Critical Theory are taught in the classroom.

“The school’s ideology requires students to see themselves not as individuals, but as representatives of a group, forcing them to adopt the status of privilege or victimhood….In my classroom, I see up close how this orthodoxy hinders students’ ability to read, write, and think. I teach students who recoil from a poem because it was written by a man. I teach students who approach texts in search of the oppressor. I teach students who see inequities in texts that have nothing to do with power. Students have internalized the message that this is the way we read and think about the world, and as a result, they fixate on power and group identity. This fixation has stunted their ability to observe and engage with the full fabric of human experience in our literature.”

When African-Americans were discriminated against on the basis of their skin color, it bred a justified resentment. In the same way, when the discrimination is reversed, it is not surprising to discover that resentment goes the other way. Businesses and organizations that operate openly racist “anti-racist” policies have seen an increase in staff dissatisfaction. That is simply human nature. Imagine if participation in all areas of human life and endeavor were determined not by merit but instead by some intrinsic, unearned quality? 

Anti-racism believes that past injustices must be addressed by adopting present injustices. This includes reparations for the sin of slavery. Thomas Sowell once asked, “Have we reached the ultimate stage of absurdity where some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born, while other people are not held responsible for what they themselves are doing today?” The argument of favoring a guilt-free group over a guilty one is weakened when it is reduced to the particular. Should I, a white immigrant with no connection to slavery, pay reparations to Kamala Harris, a black woman who is descended from a Jamaican slaveowner?

Former president Barack Obama stipulated that half of the businesses that built his new library in Chicago had to be owned by female, black and Latino Chicagoans. He is applying anti-racism by restricting a certain category of builder - the white builder - from taking part in the construction of his library. The current acceptance of this kind of racism is also reflected in other areas of public life. On television recently, I heard an interviewee say that “all white people are dumb.” This kind of casually racist comment passes without comment, yet if it were reversed, there would be an outcry. 

This double standard is not really a sign of racial justice but of societal sickness. I think this matters, because there is a principle at stake: do we believe racism to be morally wrong, or not? In effect, anti-racists are saying that racism is, in fact, morally right. Therefore, do we wish to live in a such a society, which foments disrespect and resentment, or one based on forgiveness, respect and love?

That is also a question for the Church to consider. Weekly emails from the Diocese of Pennsylvania routinely advertise courses and events that reflect its deep investment in anti-racism. Last week the Episcopal Church's Executive Council lamented that “The racism and the legacy of white supremacy is so deeply rooted in the U.S. that this situation most likely won’t change any time soon.” Sadly there is no end in sight, no forecast time when someone says, “we’ve got what we want.” Perhaps that is the point. Anti-Racism is a perpetual engine for grievance, running against Christ’s teachings on forgiveness and reconciliation. 

Because it is inherently racist, anti-racism also condemns black people to consider themselves as never the equal of white people. They are always needing a “helping hand,” whether through quotas or favored status admission procedures. Rather than asserting the true equality of black people, it tells them, in the words of pastor Dr John MacArthur, that “they are hapless victims of other people’s misdeeds.”

Anti-Racism has an obvious political agenda. Ostensibly it claims to challenge white supremacy, but its goal of an “equity” based society sounds similar to, if not the same as, communism. “Equity” is the notion that, regardless of whether one individual works harder or achieves more than another individual, the government will intervene to ensure that all receive the same reward. Paradoxically, to achieve this “equal” outcome, the government must treat people unequally. It will legislate to raise up some groups while bringing others down. Its defining movement is not love, but power.

As we approach the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the famous words of the Preamble to the Declaration offer a timeless reminder of what it was that made America so distinct as a nation: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” The Church needs to decide how it wants to honor those words inspired by Holy Scripture. Continuing to advocate for racial discrimination via anti-racism ideology is a betrayal not only of the founders’ intentions but also of the gospel of Christ. 

When I read my letter from the Diocese of Delaware, penned by two senior black female clergy, I noticed that they called on me to fight “whiteness” and “white privilege.” Did it never occur to them that they were using the privilege of their position to lecture me and others? I remained unconvinced. They weren’t interested in me as a person anyway, but only as an “ally,” a foot soldier in their campaign to remake the world. The problem is, I’ve never been a joiner of other people’s causes, except for one. I follow Christ, in whom, as St. Paul reminds us, there is “no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free: there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

Father David