The Color of Compromise. By Jemar Tisby. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2019. 215 pp. $21.99. Hardcover.
**WARNING POSSIBLE SPOILERS** Effort has been made to minimize spoilers, but a critical analysis and review requires at least some interaction with the content of the book.
America’s history, though less than 300 years old, is a rather complex and polarizing subject. There are moments of admirable triumph as well as heart-breaking failures. After all, American history, like history in general, is complicated. This can create a divide when viewing America through its historical lens, with some people highlighting the bad and others highlighting the good. Despite this divide and America’s many triumphs, its most notorious failure, arguably, is the systematic use of chattel slavery.1 Strangely embedded into America’s greatest sin is the Christian church, a religious sect centered on the teachings of Jesus, which seeks to uphold the highest ethical principles. These two concepts, race-based slavery and the American church, collide in The Color of Compromise by Jamar Tisby. In this book, Tisby seeks to provide a survey of America’s African-based slave origins and showcase the American church’s complicity in upholding this reprehensible system.
The Good
As it is often the case, there are good, positive aspects of the book that warrant mentioning. Perhaps the most noteworthy component is Tisby’s use of historical facts. Standard academic teaching of American history concerning chattel slavery tends to be watered-down; The Color of Compromise is not, which makes it an interesting read and worthwhile investment of time. Having an abundance of historical facts is helpful, and Tisby’s use of selective but purposeful facts is compelling. Since each generation moves further away from the time of American slavery, segregation, and the civil rights era, having a solid historical framework becomes even more essential for one’s growth and understanding. Even in our modern era of substantial racial progress (though there is still more progress to be made), many have lost sight of the heinous and barbaric nature of America’s history. Tisby is quick to remind readers of the key historical reason for this pervasive and unrelenting use of Africans as slaves: economic dependence that devolves into sinister and systemic abuse. Moreover, he does not simply cite flippant or questionable facts from history. Instead, he masterfully weaves together the history in a way that immerses the reader, not merely in isolated events, but with the respective eras being addressed. He does this while providing end notes for further study, a virtual necessity in today’s meme culture filled with cries of “fake news.”
Another element to regard is the book’s boldness and tact. Tisby does an exceptional job of chronicling individuals—Crispus Attucks, John Newton, George Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards, Martin Luther King, Billy Graham, etc.—in a new way. For most of the individuals, Tisby delves into details that are relevant to the book’s purpose while maintaining balance about the historical context of each person. For example, he highlights Edwards’s denunciation of the slave trade but also cites his early use of slaves (he owned his first slave at roughly 28 years old). This is a known but often unmentioned detail in the great theologian’s life. Furthermore, in discussing the depth of racism in post-slavery America, Tisby boldly highlights “real estate redlining,” the formerly legal means of segregating real estate by discriminating against African-Americans in the early 20th century. Such an idea is rarely seen in high school textbooks yet warrants discussion, consideration, and investigation in order to grasp the effects of how a past evil pervades the present.
Additionally, Tisby displays some degree of awareness for his audience’s likely reluctance to accept some of his commentary. For instance, he preempts his readers saying, “[Some people] will voice strenuous and, typically, very public opposition to the claims that racism […] has shaped the church. [Those who] will reject this book will level several common objections” (Color of Compromise, 21). His awareness is telling and evidence of previous social interactions. His awareness also allows him to address things in a manner that will curb some of the potential objections. Tisby again preempts his readers when discussing his solutions, as he knows objections will be raised. These are good, winsome tactics to encourage his readers to continue reading despite the challenging material.
The Not-So-Good
The first not-so-good element depends on the critical eye of the reader since it’s subtle. Namely, Tisby’s liberal (or left-leaning) political bias bleeds through the book. For example, he references phrases like wealth gap, white privilege, inclusive equality, and social/economic justice, concepts that are embedded in American politics and carry more meaning than their dictionary definition might suggest. Some readers may find this acceptable simply because it aligns with their own political views. Others may be turned off simply because it’s the opposite of their views. Others still, being ambivalent of the two primary political views (this writer falls into this category) or simply objecting to imbalanced and slanted argumentation, may notice this shortcoming. Additionally, there’s a heavy emphasis on systemic problems and allusions to the past—like whites calling for literary tests to block black voters—that assume the same motivations are present today. It’s important to note that this type of political allusion to the current system is not isolated to the early chapters, but it instead saturates the overall text and is most evident in the latter portions of the book where recommendations are made (more on that in a moment).
The next shortcoming is the faulty logic and weak solutions for change. While it’s a good thing that Tisby offers practical solutions, they are still unlikely to garner support unless one already assents to his view of the problems regarding race…today. One solution he offers is for people to be bold and call out racists today. The problem here is that overt racism is rare and usually condemned by the majority. Even Tisby admits in chapter 9 that racism today is hard to detect (Ibid., 177). It therefore leads readers to ask, “How does one determine when someone is actually being racist?” and Tisby never makes this clear, probably because subversive racism of the heart is unknowable. In suggesting that people call out racists without having concrete evidence, he tacitly or unwittingly calls for Christians to make leaping accusations even if such accusations are wrong!
Finally, perhaps the biggest objection to Tisby’s solutions is not only that they are weak, but they are outright unbiblical. For example, Tisby submits reparations as a viable solution for reconciliation amongst blacks and whites. Yet, he goes further noting that reparations are a requirement because it’s the only proper response to injustice (Ibid., 198). In this way, he positions an ongoing financial repair (to which the plural “reparations” alludes) towards African-Americans as a necessity, yet he also argues this point (weakly) from the Bible, the Old Testament no less. While there’s truth to the concept of restitution found in the Old Testament (i.e. civil laws under Israel’s theocracy) and there are New Testament examples of such, there is no commandment for Christians. This is not to suggest that one who has been transformed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ would not or should not feel compelled to make restitution for past offenses committed, but rather, there is a significant distinction between the former and government-mandated reparations that will never reach the victims and continues into perpetuity. In the end, Tisby’s citations and exegetical interaction allows one to infer that either he lacked biblical support, or he elected to avoid presenting biblical arguments (for some reason) to his audience.2
At the root of these unbiblical solutions is, perhaps, a flawed worldview, one that comes out at various points in the book. Even on the reparations discussion, Tisby fails to demonstrate that white Christians (and whites in general) today are guilty of anything that warrants repairing to blacks today.3 It would seem that whites are guilty purely because they are white, since, as Tisby notes, “An honest assessment of racism should acknowledge that racism never fully goes away; it just adapts to changing times and concepts” (Ibid., 154).4 Based on this view of racism, if a person is white, they should be in a perpetual state of repentance, which again echoes the apparent position of left-leaning, liberal politics. Such a proposition is wholly unbiblical! It presupposes that white Christians possess an inherent form of racism, one that is present but of which they are unaware, and one that can never be eliminated. Again, this is unbiblical at its core, for the Gospel is able to overcome all sins, including the sin of racism.
Conclusion
This review is by no means exhaustive; far more could be said regarding the good and not-so-good elements of The Color of Compromise. Nevertheless, as a historical summary of American slavery, Tisby does an exceptional job in the book. Those seeking to gain more insight into the massively wicked version of American chattel slavery and the church’s complicity in it, would do well to read this book. Being a concise and well-documented entry should be encouraging to readers. Unfortunately, if seeking something more than a history book, The Color of Compromise leaves much to be desired. Political bias, weak/unbiblical solutions for unity, and (occasionally) faulty logic overshadow what is otherwise a helpful reading. This is especially true for the Christian. Since Tisby is a Reformed Christian,5 this writer assumed there would be more biblical exegesis as part of his remedy and more appeals to Scripture as the unifying foundation for his American church audience. However, in this arena, the book disappoints.
Despite its failures, The Color of Compromise still has something worthwhile to offer. It’s a needed, historical, Christian entry that analyzes the church’s ironic complicity in race-based sins. Tisby deserves credit for addressing an unpopular and uncomfortable subject. He also deserves credit for highlighting the oft-forgotten elements of our nation’s heinous past while interacting with the more subtle elements of racism that pervaded the 20th century. Prayerfully, Tisby’s entry, even if not ideal, can bring people to a starting place of genuine dialogue by helping to provide a solid and common understanding of the depths of wickedness of chattel slavery. In this way perhaps all people, starting with Christians, might grasp reasons for both animus and apathy in an understanding way that leads to greater peace and civility.
The author, Van Barrett, is an black Christian in his mid-thirties at the time of this writing. He has biblically conservative leanings though does not hold to political conservatism nor political liberalism. He resides in Woodbridge, VA, and serves in the local church with his wife and daughter.
1. Chattel slavery is the buying and selling of people like property. Using the word “chattel” to modify slavery distinguishes it from other forms of slavery that are the result of war captives or what’s become known as indentured servitude.
2. Overall, this writer counted roughly four biblical citations in the pertinent chapters, 11 and the Conclusion, that offered solutions. Even those citations presented limited interaction with the biblical text.
3. To be fair, Tisby provides clear support for the financial disparity between whites and blacks and notes Native Americans should have priority as it relates to reparations.
4. The idea that racism is perpetual is repeated throughout the book; it is not isolated.
5. At the time this writer read the book, he did not know Jemar Tisby held to a reformed view of Scripture. This writer purposely didn’t look into his background prior to reading the book; this writer was only familiar with his associations, like Dr. Eric Mason.