ybvdadminuser(RNS) — There’s not much we can say for sure about the political and cultural moment before us in the United States, but we can be fairly confident in saying that when it comes to matters of diversity, equity and inclusion we are not in Kansas anymore.
The dismantling of DEI came so quickly we hardly saw it. Donald Trump, who ended his first presidential term by trying to outlaw DEI programs, nonetheless gained significant and surprising support from the very people of color they are supposed to help, with even more surprising support from young Black and Brown voters. The unexpected support from these quarters, many argue, was decisive in his winning the popular vote by 2.3 million. Perhaps more oddly, Kamala Harris, selected for vice president in part because she would attract people of color and especially women of color, refused to emphasize this part of her identity on the campaign trail.
LGBTQ activists may also be asking what happened to DEI when it comes to matters of sex and gender. Harris spent the campaign defaulting to simply saying that she would “follow the law,” rather than giving a full-throated endorsement of gender ideology itself. Not unrelatedly, not long after the election, Democratic member of Congress and progressive leader Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took her preferred pronouns out of her Twitter/X bio. Meanwhile, The Washington Post editorial board has apparently reversed course on the question of whether science or ideology should guide the trans debate. Remarkable.
But suddenly, skepticism about all kinds of DEI abounds. Even The New York Times did a long and deeply reported piece on how DEI is failing in higher education, particularly at the University of Michigan, and a firm backlash from supporters of the old DEI guard could not save it. DEI appears to be in serious trouble at many other institutions of higher learning as well.
It would be a shame, however, if diversity, equity and inclusion became so completely tainted that they could never be employed in a positive way. Indeed, the concept of diversity in particular, properly understood, has a place in society, and Christian theology can help with this.
A central point must be acknowledged at the outset: A commitment to diversity only makes sense in the context of a larger and more foundational commitment to unity. The unity gives an explanation for the diversity. It tells us what it is for.
Consider an analogy from basketball: It is good to have diversity on one’s team — not random or neutral diversity, but a range of players: tall people who excel at rebounding and block shots, smaller, quicker ones who can shoot from long distance and handle the ball. Together, a diversity of types wins basketball games, which is the goal. It’s obvious that it doesn’t serve the unity with players who can’t run or who have poor hand-eye coordination.
But as Christians, who find our unity in making up the united body of Christ, we should not hide our unity, or grudgingly admit it, or speak about it only when pushed to the extremes. We can and should be clear and confident about it. The very notion of relationship, as Trinity-worshipping Christians believe, requires difference. We are many parts, baptized into the one body of Christ. We relate to each other for the good of the whole.
In fact, there really is no way of escaping our commitment to unity.
The problem with the understanding of diversity that is championed not only, but often intently, in higher education is that the unity, the reason for the commitment to diversity, is not openly acknowledged. “Every school has a statement of faith,” said a college president who had left the Ivy League to teach at a Christian institution. “Some just write them down.” (My thanks to Philip D. Bunn at Covenant College for this anecdote.)
In many academic contexts, in other words, there is an unspoken orthodoxy that gets dressed up as diversity. Candidates may meet hiring goals regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, religious preference or disability, but if they do not also meet an ideological litmus test, they are never hired. This happens in Christian contexts and secular ones, but as Christians we should explicitly and publicly embrace being united in our diversity. We should be forthright about our foundational commitments and how diversity is related to those commitments.
If we do so, we don’t need to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to diversity. Christians can help the broader culture understand that there’s no neutral view from nowhere — we must acknowledge our commitment to a particular unity prior to diversity. We should all be upfront and clear about the particular unity that is driving our commitment to diversity. If we do, academia and the world will be in a better and more authentic place.
And the current moment may be one in which such a message could actually be heard.
(This column is based on a presentation at Beyond the Impasse: Theological Perspectives on DEI, a conference hosted by Princeton University’s Aquinas Institute.)
