Discrimination Against Chinese in America & The Christian Response Part 2

This is the second of a two part series

May is Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, an essential opportunity to reflect not only on the historical discrimination faced by Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans but also on the complex roles Christianity played in these events. In Part I, we explored the systemic and institutional racism that shaped the Chinese American experience from the 19th century onward. In this second essay, we delve deeper into the religious dimensions of discrimination, examining how Christian communities responded—whether through active endorsement, passive complicity, or determined opposition. By investigating how biblical interpretations were selectively employed both to justify exclusionary policies and, later, to challenge them, we gain critical insights into the intersection of race, religion, and ethics in American history.

Throughout American history, Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans have faced severe discrimination rooted in racial prejudice, economic fears, and xenophobia. Yet one critical, though often overlooked, dimension of this discrimination is its religious justification—specifically, how Christian communities historically responded to the marginalization and exclusion of Chinese people. Christianity, as the dominant religion in America during these periods of heightened discrimination, played a complex and influential role, ranging from active support and passive complicity to determined opposition. Exploring this interplay reveals how biblical interpretations and Christian teachings were selectively used to rationalize injustice and, over time, also provided the moral foundation for opposing racial discrimination. This essay provides an overview of historic anti-Chinese discrimination in America, examines the varied Christian responses, and traces the evolution of biblical interpretations from justifying exclusion to advocating racial reconciliation and justice.

Overview of Discrimination Against Chinese Americans

Discrimination against Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans has a deep, troubling history in America. Beginning notably during the California Gold Rush in the mid-1800s, Chinese immigrants faced widespread hostility, systemic racism, and exclusionary policies.

Examples include:

• Foreign Miners’ Tax (1852), targeting Chinese specifically.

• Chinese Exclusion Act (1882), which prohibited Chinese immigration for decades.

• Violent attacks and massacres, such as the 1871 Los Angeles Massacre and the 1885 Rock Springs Massacre.

• Institutional segregation, such as forcing Chinese into “Chinatowns,” segregating education, and imposing anti-miscegenation laws.

Were Christians Responsible for the Majority of This Discrimination?

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the vast majority of Americans identified as Christian (primarily Protestant), so inevitably, most discriminatory actions involved people who identified with Christianity. However, it’s crucial to differentiate between active Christian justification, passive complicity through silence, and direct opposition based on religious principles:

• Active Support: Many mainstream Christians, particularly white Protestants, publicly endorsed discriminatory policies, often explicitly invoking Christian identity.

• Passive Complicity: A substantial portion of Christian Americans didn’t explicitly endorse discrimination but remained silent, effectively allowing unjust policies and social attitudes to persist.

• Active Opposition: A minority of Christian individuals and groups (notably Quakers and some progressive mainline clergy) actively opposed racism and discrimination, drawing from biblical teachings of justice and compassion.

Overall, while not all Christians explicitly justified anti-Chinese discrimination, the prevailing majority either supported discriminatory actions or silently accepted them, reflecting widespread cultural prejudice rather than a unified doctrinal stance.

Biblical Justifications Historically Used for Discrimination

Historically, discriminatory actions against Chinese Americans (and other minority groups) were often rationalized through selective biblical interpretations. Although these interpretations were widely critiqued later, they held considerable sway at the time:

1. Racial Separation (Genesis 11:1–9 – The Tower of Babel)

Some Christians interpreted the Tower of Babel story as divine endorsement of racial segregation. They argued that God intentionally separated humanity into different groups, justifying segregated communities and anti-miscegenation laws, which restricted marriages between whites and Chinese immigrants.

2. Chosen Nation Ideology (Old Testament Narratives)

Many white Christians in America believed the U.S. was a “chosen nation” analogous to biblical Israel, charged with protecting its religious and racial purity. Thus, Chinese immigration was framed as a threat to America’s divine mission and cultural identity, justifying exclusion and hostility.

3. Moral and Cultural Purity (Deuteronomy 7:3–4)

These verses forbade Israelites from intermarrying with foreign peoples. Christians cited these texts to justify anti-miscegenation laws, preventing interracial relationships and reinforcing cultural barriers between whites and Chinese immigrants.

4. “Curse of Ham” (Genesis 9:20–27)

Although traditionally invoked against African Americans, the broader principle of racial inferiority shaped attitudes toward all non-white groups, implicitly justifying racial hierarchies and discriminatory practices against Chinese immigrants as well.

Degrees of Christian Support, Complicity, and Opposition

A. Active Christian Supporters

Many prominent Christian clergy, writers, politicians, and community leaders openly supported anti-Chinese policies. They cited the Bible selectively to defend racial hierarchies, cultural purity, and national identity. Their influence was significant, particularly in influencing public opinion and legislation.

B. Passive Complicity

Arguably, this category included most mainstream Christian denominations during this period. Many churches and religious communities neither publicly challenged nor actively supported discrimination, implicitly endorsing racism through silence and inaction.

C. Active Christian Opposition

A minority of Christians actively opposed discrimination, drawing on biblical teachings advocating equality, compassion, and justice (e.g., Galatians 3:28, Matthew 25:35–36). Quakers and certain progressive Protestant ministers actively worked against racist legislation and provided direct support to persecuted Chinese communities. However, these voices were in the minority during the height of anti-Chinese sentiment.

How Biblical Interpretations Have Changed Over Time

Over subsequent decades, interpretations of scripture evolved significantly, influenced by shifting cultural attitudes, theological critique, and broader civil rights movements:

Mid-20th Century Reevaluation

Following World War II and the atrocities committed in its name, many Christian groups began reconsidering racist biblical interpretations. Increased international attention to human rights and equality challenged the previously dominant racial paradigms within American Christianity.

Civil Rights Movement Influence

During the civil rights movement of the 1950s–1970s, mainstream Protestant denominations increasingly embraced biblical teachings of universal equality (Galatians 3:28), love for neighbor (Matthew 22:39), and social justice (Micah 6:8). These interpretations were used explicitly to oppose previous racist justifications.

Modern Multicultural Theology

Current Christian theology predominantly emphasizes multiculturalism, inclusion, racial reconciliation, and social justice. Contemporary interpretations assert that all people bear the divine image (Genesis 1:27), rejecting older racial ideologies and explicitly condemning past uses of scripture to justify racism.

Critique of Christian Nationalism

Modern theological critiques also challenge notions of America as uniquely chosen, noting that selective biblical justification of nationalistic and racial exclusion fundamentally contradicts broader Christian teachings on universal human dignity, equality, and justice.

Contemporary Repudiation of Historical Racism in Christianity

Today, virtually all mainstream Christian denominations explicitly reject racist biblical interpretations once used against Chinese immigrants. Formal apologies and public repudiations of historical racism are common:

• Many denominations now advocate anti-racist education and policies.

• Leaders emphasize biblical teachings that stress equality, dignity, and compassion as core principles guiding modern Christian ethics.

• Scholarly reflection acknowledges past complicity as moral failure, actively promoting reconciliation, justice, and restorative actions.

This historical reflection provides essential lessons on the dangers of misusing sacred texts to justify cultural prejudices. It underscores the responsibility of faith communities to uphold ethical integrity, advocate justice, and ensure religious teachings serve as instruments for equality, compassion, and reconciliation.

Conclusion

Reflecting upon the historical discrimination against Chinese Americans and the varied Christian responses presents essential ethical lessons. It demonstrates how religious texts, when selectively interpreted, can dangerously reinforce prevailing prejudices and perpetuate systemic injustices. Yet, as societal understandings and theological perspectives evolved—particularly influenced by civil rights movements and multicultural awareness—these same sacred texts became powerful tools for advocating universal dignity, equality, and compassion. Today, mainstream Christian communities overwhelmingly reject past interpretations that justified racism, actively engaging in efforts toward reconciliation and justice. This historical examination is more than an academic pursuit; it serves as a crucial reminder of the ongoing ethical responsibility faith communities have to confront injustice, acknowledge past complicity, and ensure that religious teachings consistently promote inclusivity, healing, and social justice for all.