The Dispatch: More from CWR...

A Jesus who looks like each of us

If we tear down white Jesus, then, by extension, we have to tear down all images of Jesus.

“Tear them down.” So ranted a liberal activist recently about “the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus.” Depicting Jesus in this way, he continued, is “a form of white supremacy.” The Archbishop of Canterbury agreed that “white Jesus” should be reconsidered.

Are they right? Are we wrong to depict Jesus as white, or as any race other than Judean or Syrian?

No. The reason lies in the mystery of the Incarnation, and, ironically, is confirmed by the tenets of identity politics that liberal activists espouse.

In the Incarnation the eternal Word entered history, whereby he willingly subjected himself to the limits of space and time. Like all other men, Jesus of Nazareth was of a particular ethnicity and genetic make-up. With only one human parent, he must have born a striking resemblance to his virgin mother, of whom no portrait exists. Of Jesus himself, two mystical images survive: the one imprinted on Veronica’s veil, and the other on the burial shroud of Turin, though the latter’s presence remained undetected until the negative photographs in the 19th-century exposed the face of a Middle Eastern bearded man. Neither cloth captures Jesus’ face as a modern photograph would; we have only indirect, glancing impressions, and they were not widely circulated for the first 1800 years of Christianity. After the apostles and first disciples died, Jesus’ appearance became a feast for the imagination.

From the beginning, Jesus’ appearance in sacred art and icons depended on who painted him and where. In Rome’s catacombs, we find the earliest depictions of Jesus as a Roman without a beard, especially in the famous Good Shepherd mosaic. In Egypt, the Coptic Museum of Cairo houses an icon of Jesus flanked by his apostles; Jesus and the disciples to his right are black men, while the five to His left are brown. In St. Catherine’s Monastery in the Sinai Peninsula, the oldest icon of Jesus the Pantocrator, painted in the 6th century, portrays a light-skinned Egyptian man. As the gospel spread over time, we can find Jesus depicted differently in every land, from Chinese, as is found in the art of the Xishiku Cathedral in Beijing, to, yes, a white European. And this illustration itself is not monolithic: Jesus can be drawn as a western European or a Slavic European, depending on who is doing the painting.

What unites these varying depictions of Jesus across cultures and centuries is not a hatred of every race except one’s own. Quite the opposite. In desiring ourselves to become more like him, we unwittingly imagine him like us—as our brother, which includes his physical resemblance to us.

Gaudium et Spes teaches that “Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear” (no. 22). In addition to revealing our supernatural destiny, Christ enables us to know ourselves better and to realize, by divine grace, our human potential in and through him. This includes accepting the vocation he has given us, as well as accepting our natural gifts and shortcomings. Our physical make-up—size, shape, health, heritage, and ethnicity—forms part of who we are and how we encounter Christ. With grace, we integrate all the aspects of ourselves into our singular personality, which is vivified by knowing that God has made us his own.

Race is an important part of our being. Polling data suggests that people are more apt to respond to advertisements and films if those portrayed are of the same race as the spectators. In other words, the motivation for modern cinematic casting and for depicting Jesus as a member of one’s own race is the same. As our creator, God knows this better than we do. So, to name just one example, when the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared in 1531 to St. Juan Diego, a member of the Nahua people in Mexico, she spoke his Nahuatl language and appeared with brown skin, as she miraculously appears on his tilma that survives to this day.

Depicting Jesus as a member of one’s own race, then, is natural, not racist. Racism requires us to denigrate other races willingly in the false belief that they are inferior. Sadly, in history a few have convinced themselves that Jesus’ race was like their own, because he could not have been, they asserted, some “lesser” race. The reality of the Incarnation, again, immediately refutes such a facile and, frankly, stupid claim that need never be taken seriously. On the other hand, today’s identity politics movement, in transforming race from part of a person’s life to the constitutive factor of one’s being, has chosen to perceive race only in terms of power; differing races, in this view, are perpetually at war with each other as oppressor and victim. With a mindset of perpetual warfare, such advocates can insinuate racial conflict where there is none. And there is none when one projects Jesus, in longing to imitate him, as an image of oneself, be he European, African, Asian, or of any other ancestry.

If we tear down white Jesus, then, by extension, we have to tear down all images of Jesus, because to do so would be to impale faith and deny the Incarnation. This would also inhibit our natural longing for God that is stamped into our human nature. In our limited horizons, we picture God as we are. But God became man not so we could make him more like us, but so that we could become like him—”conformed to the image of his Son,” as Paul puts it, “in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren” (Rom 8:29)—who is perfectly just, perfectly mercifully, and loves all men and woman indiscriminately as his own.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About David G. Bonagura, Jr. 28 Articles
David G. Bonagura, Jr. is an adjunct professor at St. Joseph’s Seminary, New York. He is the author of Steadfast in Faith: Catholicism and the Challenges of Secularism. and Staying with the Catholic Church: Trusting God's Plan of Salvation.


  1. We read: “From the beginning, Jesus’ appearance in sacred art and icons depended on who painted him and where.” Agreeing fully with the article about identity politics, here’s (first) a different view on early depictions of Christ, and (second) the current risk of mutating the two nature(s) of the unified person of Christ.

    FIRST, Ian Wilson (The Shroud of Turin) makes the case that EARLY DEPICTIONS typically key off of some or nearly all of key markers on the then-available and venerated Shroud image: e.g., the transverse streak across the forehead, three-sided square between the eyebrows, large eyes (the two coins on the closed eyes under the Shroud), V shape in bridge of the nose, two strands of hair at the middle of the forehead, etc. (14 markers in all).

    SECOND, by mixing identity politics and theology, are we becoming ARIANS again? St. John Henry Newman and St. Augustine are explained (below) as showing that Christ is NOT a hybrid person who might belong to any of us. Instead, we worship a TRINITY, not such a possible “QUATERNARY.” What is meant by Christ as falsely a quaternary?

    “The union between the two natures in Christ is a personal union. It takes place IN the Person of the Son of God….They [the two natures] are NOT MIXED or fused with one another to form a third thing distinct from both [a “quaternary” versus the intact Trinity]. Rather they are united to one another indirectly IN the Second Person of the Trinity [….] in the Incarnation, the person pre-exists the union of the two NATURES [not like a new person from body and soul], because it IS the Person of the Eternal Son of God.

    “In the Incarnation the Son of God, Who is eternal, assumes to Himself a complete human nature, a body and soul [both!]. By this union the human nature BECOMES the human nature of the Son of God. He IS the Person existing IN this human nature, the Person responsible for all its actions, the responsible Agent acting in and through the human nature in the world of men [….] If we were to look at the human nature of Christ and ask, ‘WHAT is it?’ the answer would have to be, ‘It is a human nature’.

    “But if we were to inquire, ‘WHO is he?’ then we could NOT give in reply the name of any human or created person [or group?], because there is NO created personality present in Christ. We SHOULD HAVE TO SAY, ‘He is Christ, the Son of God’” (Walter Farrell and Martin Healy, STD, My Way of Life, Confraternity of the Precious Blood, 1952, CAPS added).

    • Jesus was born of Mary who was of the Lineage of David, who was Both King and Priest of the jewish people. To make Him out to be any thing else is heresy. Those who deny this, deny Jesus and the cross .

  2. ” he must have born a striking resemblance to his virgin mother, of whom no portrait exists”

    Are we to believe then that the Tilma that is claimed to bear the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is not true? I think we do have a portrait o her. Just saying…..

  3. About fifty years ago my public school class took a field trip to Chicago’s Chinatown. One of our stops was in a Catholic Church. I sat in the front pew near a statue of our Blessed Mother holding the infant Jesus. Both Mary and her Son were Chinese. I felt absolutely nothing negative about this-no shock, anger or ridicule. Even as a 12 year-old child, I knew that all lives matter to God. I still know that to be the case. So the race of the two individuals did not bother me.

  4. The bobble-headed agreement to these absurd demands will not end well. The Archbishop of Canterbury should look for another job if he is incapable of leading. People will envision Jesus in whatever way they need. Those unhappy with the typical Catholic church are free to worship elsewhere. They are NOT free to demand we change our beliefs or art to suit them. The reality is though that Jews are a Mediterranean people, and mostly look that way.They will typically not look Danish but they sure do not look black. I have Jewish friends here and have also traveled to Israel. The Jews look European in general. They are NOT black no matter what the mob is demanding today.Church leaders better grow a spine, and quickly.

  5. IT would be a different world if all spent their time on HIS message with as much interest as they are spending on His color. HIS beloved person is what matters. When He speaks through me, He is a white woman. All the attention among the mob is on the exterior appearance. to the neglect of His message. I think it is time for us all to be comfortable in our own skin and stop transferring our own angst on someone else. Just sayin….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.