I confess: whenever I attend a church, one of the first things I do is to determine if and or how black people and their culture are represented. Black representation (or the lack thereof), as far as I see it, particularly in our context, is neither coincidental nor insignificant. It isn’t coincidental, as our experience of Christianity, since the transatlantic slave trade, has been dominated by a violent, racist white Christianity, along with its efforts to whitewash the faith and bleach it of its blackness. It isn’t insignificant, as black (non)representation, in light of the damaging effects of racism, influences our sense of identity, self-concept and what Azizi Bahauddin et al describe as one’s “sense of place” – a sense of belonging and attachment to a space.
[B]lack (non)representation, in light of the damaging effects of racism, influences our sense of identity, self-concept and what Azizi Bahauddin et al describe as one’s “sense of place” – a positive sense of belonging and attachment to a space.
In terms of Christian iconography in our churches, my colleague, Rev. Hilda Vaughan has demonstrated there are a fair number of black representations in our church spaces. It goes without saying, however, that, with very few exceptions, the most prominently placed icons in our churches represent bible characters as Caucasians.
Some Christians (black and white) have maintained a colour-doesn’t-matter argument, along with a stubborn refusal to consider having more inclusive (and accurate, even) colour representations in the most prominent locations in the worship space. In his song “Love Created I”, Tarrus Riley offers a stinging critique of the disingenuous character of the posture,
You tell me it’s not about colour, still you refuse to take the picture off the wall.
The people depicted in the most prominently placed icons in the church to which I am assigned, the St. Andrew Parish Church, are overwhelmingly (pale) Caucasian, with one notable exception – one of the three main characters in the north window!
The characters are the three Marys. Facing the north, from left to right, they are: St. Mary Magdalene, St. Mary the Virgin and St. Mary Cleopas. The Marys are usually depicted together in art and reflect the canonical gospels’ suggestion they (along with other women) witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion and burial (eg Jn 19:25, Mk 16:1).
To the casual onlooker, the icon of the three Marys reflects the 19th-century values of those who colonised Jamaica, as well as their ideals of the female body – young, Caucasian, slim, able-bodied with fair hair. Close inspection, however, reveals three striking differences between Mary Magdalene and the other Marys. I was made aware of the first when I asked one of the Church’s historians, Mr. Tony Patel, about what I had assumed was an unrelated topic! The second and third observations I made, having learnt the first.
I had visited the graves of George Stiebel and his wife. George is mainly known as Jamaica’s first black millionaire who bought a plot of land and built what is now known as Devon House. His was the son of a German Jew and his Afro-Jamaican housekeeper. He was born thirteen years before Afro-Jamaicans were emancipated from enslavement (1834). He died in 1896, sixty-eight years after full emancipation (1838).
George, though a wealthy and privileged black man, lived at a time when racism was rife. Blacks, unfortunately, were not emancipated from colour prejudice when slavery ended. One wonders how George navigated the racialized world in which he lived.
It is with this world in mind that the popular, though unconfirmed, narrative developed
around the construction of the Lady Musgrave Road – a road that bypasses the main thoroughfare that runs by George’s home. According to the National Library of Jamaica in a May 25 2017 Facebook post, it is said that Lady Musgrave, the wife of the Governor of Jamaica from 1877-1883, “took offence to having to pass Stiebel’s ‘Devon House’ and was shocked that a black man had managed to build such a prominent house in close proximity to the Governor's residence." Consequently, she requested her husband build the bypass that now bears her name.
George’s wealth would have shielded him from the fate of Jamaica’s majority poor blacks. One could argue it was with his wealth that he engaged in one of his most subtle and subversive acts. After the death of his wife in 1892, he commissioned a work in her memory - the north window! His wife’s name was Magdalene, named in honour of the first of the three Marys depicted in the window!
My question to Tony was: “What colour was George’s wife, Magdalene?” His response was, “She was a black woman. That’s is why the Magdalene in the north window is represented as a black woman.” The bright colours used for her clothing help to make her dark skin tone stand out. This is the first distinctive feature of how Mary Magdalene is depicted. Another church historian, Mr. John Aarons, highlighted the distinguishing colour of Magdalene in his guide to the Parish church. I am yet to identify the documentation of George’s requirements for the window. It is clear, however, that the Mary whose name his wife bore is of dark complexion, in striking contrast to her pale white companions.
The second contrasting feature is that only Magdalene’s hair is completely covered! Mrs. Elsie Aarons told me in a telephone conversation she had also made this observation. One wonders why this is so. Is it because black women at that time covered their hair? But so were first-century Ancient Near Eastern women. Is it because the iconographer was unable to represent black hair?! And if s/he was able, why wouldn’t s/he show her hair at a time when it was commonly assumed Mary Magdalene was identical to the woman who pours expensive perfume on Jesus’ feet and wipes them with her hair (Lk 7:36-50, Jn 12:1-8; Mk 14:3-9; Matt 26:6-13).
The third contrasting feature is that Mary Magdalene is markedly older in her facial features compared to the youthful representation of her companions. Magdalene Stiebel was 75 years old when she died. On the assumption that the iconographer gave Mary Magdalene the physical features of George’s wife, it follows that Mary of Magdalene would have been represented as an aged woman.
The St. Andrew Parish Church began in 1664 as a sacred place for British colonists. The adorning of the church space with stained-glass windows began late in its history. The most prominent of these, the east window, is possibly the first of such works. It was installed during the major remodelling project of 1879-1880. By this time, the Jamaica Church (Anglican) was officially no longer controlled by the colonial state, and black and coloured people, like Stiebel, were allowed to attend and contribute to the life of the church. The church, however, remained white-dominant, colour and class prejudice were still vibrant, and it had become normalized to represent biblical figures as Caucasian. It was not customary to have light shine through black bodies to illuminate, beautify and catechize white-dominated spaces.
It was not customary to have light shine through black bodies to illuminate, beautify and catechize white dominated spaces.
Stiebel’s north window skilfully and subtly challenged the status quo of his time, by introducing into Jesus’ passion narrative a black female presence. In so doing, he began the local process of making our church iconography inclusive of and relatable to the black majority, many of whom were now part of the Jamaica Church. Stiebel knew the value and power of conspicuous representation. His 19th-century work was chipping away at white supremacy, exerting black hermeneutical agency, and decolonizing the faith. Sure, we can argue about the extent to which he was conscious of this process. In any event, the work he began locally must continue in order to enhance our people's "sense of place" in our churches.
Stiebel’s north window skilfully and subtly challenged the status quo of his time, by introducing into Jesus’ passion narrative a black female presence. In so doing, he began the local process of making our church iconography inclusive of and relatable to the black majority, many of whom were now part of the Jamaica Church...His 19th century work was chipping away at white supremacy, exerting black hermeneutical agency, and decolonizing the faith.
References:
Aarons, John (2012) – A Guide to St. Andrew Parish Church
Aarons, Elsie (March 2022) – Telephone conversation
Bahauddin, Azizi et al (2022) – ‘Sense of Place’ on Sacred Cultural and Architectural Heritage: St. Peter’s Church of Melaka
Patel, Tony (March 2022) – Telephone conversation
Riley, Tarrus (2008) – Love Created I
This is a great piece and thank you so much for sharing this with us