More Black Americans are choosing nonbelief as their "religion" and Humanism as their new identification, says Anthony Pinn, author of The Black Practice of Disbelief: An Introduction to the Principles, History, and Communities of Black Nonbelievers (Beacon, May 22). In his book, Pinn, a professor of humanities and religious studies at Rice University, melds social and political history with commentary by Black people who flipped the old cliche of relying on the almighty "Let go and let God" by letting go of God instead. Pinn argues that Humanism as religion, a system of meaning-making, is offering these nonbelievers a safer, sounder, home base for them than the Black church.
PW talked with Pinn about his case for Humanism.
You went from being an AME minister's son who preached a sermon at age 12 and became a youth minister at Black Boson church to becoming an outspoken Humanist. What prompted your about-face on theism?
Despite my best efforts, there was nothing about my belief system that really addressed the issues I encountered in the world. My faith tended to answer the questions no one was asking and to belittle the questions that people actually did ask. When I first left the church, I had to kind of define myself by negation: I knew what I wasn't. It was only with time that I was able to define myself in terms of what I was, and Humanism captured it.
How do you define religion?
Religion is really the human struggle to make life meaningful. It's a tool of investigation that doesn't have anything to do with gods or God or church services or the mosque or the synagogue. It is simply a tool that folks use to explore life's meaning.
You make the case in your book that Humanism does function as a religion by offering community, non-theist rituals and celebrations, and ideals and support for social action. Why is this critical?
The Humanist Movement currently may be the best home for Blacks who choose disbelief, because it is rooted in the present and it offers community, which can be hard to find. When I first started hanging out with Humanists, so much of the conversation simply revolved around belittling the religious right, as if there was some sort of "win" in that. They were forgetting that for a whole lot of folks, this move into Humanism was traumatic, and they needed a soft place to land. Simply telling them how horrible were the places they left was not enough. Organizations are finally getting that they need to offer what is compelling about Humanism. They have to be a soft place to land.
Your book rebukes the Black church, saying, for example, that Black Humanism should be "untangled from the stranglehold of church-based praxis." Why so rough?
It's justified. If you look at the Black church, in terms of issues of race, the overall narrative that Black churches have been involved in issues of race holds. But look at the harm that Black churches have done with respect to issues of gender and sexuality. They have done deep damage. And they've justified it through a theology of exclusion. It seems to me that kind of harm has to be acknowledged and critiqued with harsh language.
Within the context of the Humanist community, there is a greater appreciation for differences. There isn't an explicit denouncement of people because their sexuality moves in a different or their gender is fluid. But try being trans in the typical Black church. When we're talking about the destruction of people, there is no reason that we need to try to explain that in terms that are comforting and comfortable.
These are uncomfortable times for everyone right now. Publishers tell PW this atmosphere of angst is driving more people to read the Bible looking for hope. Does Black Humanism offer hope?
"Hope" is the wrong language, and the Bible is not the place to look. Words like "hope," "liberation," and "freedom" are not borne out in the historical experience of Black people. Everything about the relationship of blackness to the United States suggests ongoing misery. A better way to address the future is to think in terms of the persistence of possibility.
Your book lists the key principles of Humanism, beyond simply rejecting God. There's a focus on human accountability, logic, reason, and "perpetual improvement as necessary." Isn't that exhausting?
It is! It Is! The saying, "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice" isn't something I can say. What I can say is this: The arc of the moral universe is long and we must be continuously involved.
If there is something we can call victory, it might simply be our ability to say with increased volume and persistence, "No" to injustice. "No"! to normalizing and justifying the misery of the marginalized. Maybe the best we can do is to be aware of what we are up against and push on anyway.
