God's Politics - Jim Wallis blog, faith blog, religion, christian, christianity, politics, values


	Tuesday, November 27, 2007 Diversity as Christian Practice—Not Just a Church Program (by Diana Butler Bass) A week before Thanksgiving, I spoke in Lake Tahoe for the clergy convocation of the California-Nevada Conference of the United Methodist Church, a sprawling geography that comprises a wide array of congregations in big cities and small rural towns. The wide variety of clergy reflected that of the churches—the group included many women, persons of color, younger pastors, folks with a spectrum of theological views, and ordained and non-ordained leaders. It was obvious that this group of Methodists was working hard on issues of diversity. But the most stunning diversity was in the presence of people from around the world, not as mission guests or visiting Methodist dignitaries. Rather, the group included local congregational leaders who hailed from the all the "souths": the South Pacific, South Africa, South Asia, South Korea, South America, and even south Jersey, South Carolina, and southern California. There, on the shores of an alpine lake in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, gathered the Global South and the emerging community of world Christianity in the form of Methodist clergy. We spent the day talking about postmodern Christianity and cultural change as related to mainline churches. Early in the conversation, an Indian pastor graciously raised the relevance of postmodern analysis in relation to his community and worldview asking, "Isn't this a western phenomenon?" His questions and their implicit challenges to a western worldview drew the group into a new conversational space. We began to think about cultural change globally—looking at postmodernism and its effects through a prism of worldviews. We did not argue about issues of sexuality; we did not get into a theological fight; we never resorted to ignoring others. We ruminated on God's work in history. We talked about something important—about how the world is changing and why. We listened to and affirmed each other, hospitably opening ourselves to understand and integrate perspectives different from our own. What resulted was, for me, one of the most stimulating intellectual and spiritual days I have experienced in a long time. I grew up United Methodist in Baltimore in the 1960s. In those years, my childhood church was nearly ripped in two by the Civil Rights Movement. Even the thought of sharing "our" church with African-American Methodists frightened much of my neighborhood to the point of fleeing both the congregation and the city. It would have been impossible to imagine that, some 40 years hence, I would participate in a Methodist community encompassing such a rainbow of ethnicities. I am sure that good Methodists of the California-Nevada Conference will demur, saying how far they have to go and how imperfectly they practice diversity. But 40 years is a pretty short time to go from a fractured community fearful of race toward the room I experienced at Lake Tahoe. And it demonstrated to me the power of diversity as a Christian practice. If their diversity was merely a "program" of the denomination, it would breed resentment and suspicion. But the level of trust in the room (we even talked about trust) indicated that their diversity went far beyond program—that it is a genuine attempt to enact Christian community in bringing together humankind through Jesus Christ. Their diversity was a practice of faith, an action that Christian people do for the sake of God in the world. Frankly, the world has never needed the Christian practice of diversity more than it does today. By creating global community in a room on the shores of Lake Tahoe, the Methodists of the California-Nevada Conference provided a hopeful example of what may be possible for the rest of us on a larger scale. It may not be perfect, but I can testify that for one day, we did it. We really acted like Christians—Christians of every imaginable stripe—in the same room, doing important work together. We proved—or maybe discovered—that the only limit to diversity is the love of God. Diana Butler Bass (www.dianabutlerbass.com) is the author of six books including Christianity for the Rest of Us (Harper One, 2006), just released in paperback. She says she lives in Alexandria, Virginia. But, from her speaking engagement schedule, we think she lives on United Airlines. posted by God's Politics @ 10:08 AM \| Permalink \| Add to: Add to Del.icio.us Add to Technorati Add to Digg Add to Newsvine Category: Mainline Protestants, Race Voice of the Day: To Be With God Home What Evangelicals Need to Know: More Thoughts on the Beliefnet Roundtable (by Brian McLaren)

Comments

While I lean toward mainline moderate-to-liberal theology, I have to give credit to many conservative churches for making strides toward racial diversity in the pews, particularly those with a more charismatic bent. Now if more churches could strive for gender diversity in the pulpit...

Posted by: I and I | November 27, 2007 12:42 PM

I am officially jealous. I wish I could have been there. You were witness to a little slice of heaven on earth... Beautiful. I would live to hear more about the discussion. It shounds fascinating.

Posted by: payshun | November 27, 2007 3:57 PM

You sound like a conservative talk show host in my area: "Diversity is a fact."

Frankly, diversity occurs when persons with differences have a commonality. The live in the same place, have a common great-grandfather, go to school together, fly the same airplane, whatever.

The one commonality that does not seem to work very well is "Diversity."

My sad heart over the matter is that I would think the most powerful commonality would be the worship of the endlessly creative Creator--whom is most powerfully expressed in our love for each other.

The best route to creating diversity in the pew is not by recruiting someone with a different shade of skin next to me; but to actually love the person in the pew that is next to me; through which I do discover diversity is a fact; and through which my life actually becomes attractive to persons from very different walks of life.

I pray God continue to transform my heart and life so as to express an incomprehesibly wonderful God.

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 28, 2007 11:20 AM

Unfortunately, the Scripture does not share that view; in fact, our LORD Himself said that anyone can "love" someone similar to him/her. The reality is that over 95 percent of churches are, in practice, racially segregated; many others are by culture and others by economics. Remember, the Ku Klux Klan was a "Christian" organization.

My own church is one of the few evangelical churches anywhere committed to diversity of all kinds, and do you know what? Today I find other, monochromatic churches frankly boring. Now, we need to work on building intimate relationships across racial lines; once that happens ... well, watch out!

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 12:22 PM

I'm with "payshun," I am thoroughly jealous of you Diana. I would have probably sawed off an arm to be able to be at the Lake Tahoe event. You comment "we didn't argue about issues of sexuality." That is good - not to argue. I hope it didn't mean you didn't acknowledge one area where us Methodists still have a long way to go to achieve true diversity by welcoming our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters into full and open participation in our church.

Posted by: Conrad Steinhoff | November 28, 2007 12:58 PM

Rick is right about segregated congregations.

A Lutheran church here in Columbus recently voted to remove themselves from their neighborhood that had racially changed over the 40+ years of the congregation's existence. I talked with one of the Church Council members who was vehemently opposed to the move. He told the Council that instead of moving out to the mostly white 'burbs, they ought to start reaching out to their newer neighbors. Sadly, his plea fell on deaf ears. The church building is for sale, and the congregation is scouting the hinterlands for a new location. I'm sure this kind of thing has repeated itself in other locations.

Peace,

Posted by: Don | November 28, 2007 2:29 PM

Don -- About two decades ago, long before I came there, my church was contemplating the same kind of move for the very same reasons. However, we chose to stay and tear those barriers down, adjusting our ministry without compromising our basic message -- and, in a generation, attendance octupled. Today Sunday morning always means a traffic jam, inside and just outside the church; I always park two or three blocks away.

Most churches that do move (or, in one case I'm personally familiar with, close), however, don't want to change their basic culture. They're used to doing things in a certain way precisely because it's familiar, going through the same rituals, seeing the same kind of people ... and because of that they become spiritually soft. I pity that church that decided to move -- what blessings it will miss because it decided to leave.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 2:51 PM

I really wonder how vast a problem this is. I have worshiped and worked in several churches in different denominations and have rarely wittnessed what DBB is writing about. The congregations were very accepting of all who walked through their doors. They came to assistance of those in need never asking their race.

I know that the 11:00 AM hours on Sundays is very 'segragated' all around the US. But is it because we want it that way or is it because of 'preference' in style of worship? I believe that it is preference. I would not mind going to another church that is quite different than mine. I would even enjoy attending a church and experiencing 'hip-hop' worship. Listening to the pastor deliver the message and have it punctuated by the organistist playing on the Hammond B3. But if you want me to be there 52 weeks out of the year - I can't. I like the hymns, I even enjoy the bells and smells on occasion.

I love the diversity of our faith. I believe that our strength is in the variety of expression in worship. I believe that there is a time to gather the stones together and a time for them to be apart.

Yes - I know that there are churches out there that do not allow our brothers and sisters of color to worship with them - it is their loss. Let us celebrate those of us that do enjoy all the colors of God's Kingdom here on earth. Then let us pray for those who do not but not make them the issue so that we put them in the spot light where they should not be.

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 28, 2007 4:32 PM

Mod I believe it is both the preference for worship styles and a racial and comfort factor. The problem is that people don't want to take the call to reconcile seriously. That's the problem.

Posted by: payshun | November 28, 2007 4:51 PM

Trust me -- it's a HUGE problem. I'm African-American but Presbyterian by nurture and have always worshipped in white congregations, but my black Baptist mother never got used to that. Besides, when I was in college in the early 1980s one campus ministry that didn't want blacks in it created a separate black fellowship -- two staff said it was because of "cultural differences" -- and they suggested I join it. (I told them to take a hike.)

Besides, so many white folks have so little understanding of racism they can make racist remarks without realizing how people of color are offended -- they just assume that people are "just like them." Well, underneath, perhaps, but they express themselves in different ways.

That said and considering my worship background, when I joined my present church it took a while for me to get used to the worship style, which is "contemporary." However, it's sufficiently elastic that we can and do do traditional Anglo hymns as well as black gospel -- I eventually learned that the mixture of styles was done deliberately so that each culture can be represented. (It makes for some interesting times in the music ministry, I'll tell you that!)

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 5:21 PM

I am puzzled by talk of "creating diversity" in some of the above comments. Since the "creation of Adam and Eve", diversity has been a fact of human life. No two people have ever had an identical relationship with God despite times in the past when there have been brutal attempts to create such uniformity. What is happening is that we are being forced to accept and welcome that diversity in all sorts of ways. Inter-denominational and inter-faith movements are in the vanguard of the direction we are all having to go. What is so encouraging is that this is being recognised and willingly embraced today. This is Jesus' work finally coming to fruition. God be praised.
JF

Posted by: Anonymous | November 28, 2007 6:51 PM

Hmmmm. Is the purpose to worship God? Or is it to impose a racial composite of each church that directly matches that of the community as a whole? Come on, can't we talk about something that matters?

Posted by: Bradley | November 28, 2007 7:34 PM

As someone who has practiced and lived diversity long before it became a buzzword, I'm glad that evangelicalism is finally getting on board. The reality, however, is that even the Body has been divided over racial, class, culture, economic and ideological lines and it's way past time for that to end.

Hmmmm. Is the purpose to worship God? Or is it to impose a racial composite of each church that directly matches that of the community as a whole? Come on, can't we talk about something that matters?

This does matter, more than you want to believe, because our witness for Christ depends largely on how we regard each other. I was told back in 2000 that Mohandas Gandhi, disillusioned with Hinduism, tried to walk into a South African church but was turned away because he wasn't white. He never considered Christianity again. (Now, can you imagine the impact he might have had in India had he been welcomed?)

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 7:54 PM

The issue of diversity in the church community and building a multiracial democracy in America is a critical aspect of our witness as Christians. It has long been said that Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America. The Church needs to be ahead of the curve, demonstrating how all of us of all races are brothers and sisters together in Christ. The fact that racism in the United States has separated the races so severely in terms of housing & neighborhoods should not be just passively accepted; rather the status quo should be challenged by building multi-ethnic faith communities that go beyond the current realities of racial separation in the US. I would like to mention the United Church of Christ as a leader in this area at the level of national leadership. If not the church, who? will understand how important it is to find ways to bring all human beings together into a spirit of family unity.

Posted by: Nancy Rogene | November 28, 2007 8:49 PM

Rick,
Are we discussing South Africa? Or America? Clearly, most other countries are far behind America in terms of race relations. How many churches have you been turned away from because of your race? I am white, but grew up in a predominantly black community. I've never been asked to leave a black church, nor have I ever seen any black parishoners barred from a church. Besides, you have changed the

Posted by: Bradley | November 28, 2007 10:11 PM

Are we discussing South Africa? Or America? Clearly, most other countries are far behind America in terms of race relations. How many churches have you been turned away from because of your race?

It doesn't matter what country we're talking about -- whatever even one church does or may do affects all of us, especially since many, many Christians gave their de facto support to apartheid during the Reagan years. For the record, I personally have never been told to leave a specific church, but only because where I live people are more "polite." Until fairly recently, truth be told, that happened all the time in the South (and when I mean "recently," I'm talking about the 1990s).

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 10:35 PM

"Diversity as fact" is intended to communicate that "diversity as an ultimate goal" typically fails and that diversity already exists. How we deal with the diversity is a valuable question.

The reason it fails as a goal is that there must be some reason to bring persons with differences together. The nature of the reason is very important. Large numbers of persons have a very negative attitude towards diversity because they have experienced twisted/confused/unclear/artificial motivations in the promotion of 'diversity' (not necessarily because they don't have an interest in diverse persons).

Rick, I don't dispute your points at all. I do not believe the American church can begin to walk in integrity without profound racial reconciliation and justice. My sweet little girls are a beautiful mix of my caucasion genes and my African-American wife (now deceased).

It is critical to pay attention to that which unites us to others and divides us from others. Every social 'community' has boundaries of who is 'In' or 'Out.' These boundaries are windows through which we see the true values which animate our lives. I understand, for instance, that Whiteness was/is placed above the worship of God. Racism is idolatry and so is systemic racism.

But it is in the pursuit of God that we discover the true value of diversity. We need the myriad of 'cultures' to begin to apprehend a God that is more than a projection of our own culture. And it is in the love manifested across 'lines of division' that allows the world to catch a glimpse of a loving God.

When I brought my African American fiance' home the first time to my mother in a 100% white town (where at that time she had lived 77 years), she did not 'blink an eye' before embracing and accepting my fiance'. This is not because she had pursued diversity but because she had learned how to actually love her neighbor and the person that was already next to her in the pew.

No it is not easy to love the person next to us. In fact we are naturally more inclined to see their faults, gossip, divide, etc.; than walk towards anything like a beloved community. Some of the alledged unity with 'persons who are like us' is not a Godly unity. It is sometimes a unity defined by the 'external other.' e.g. "We are not like the heathen Lutherans who smoke; or emotional charismatics, or right-wingers, or lazy whoevers."

Humility before God will carry a profound byproduct of a diverse unity. The lack of that result likely indicates something about our level of humility before God.

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 28, 2007 11:22 PM

Were this so -- unfortunately, we still tend to make God in our own image. About 20 years ago one of the Catholic groups in my city put up a billboard with a blond, blue-eyed image of Jesus, and a wiseacre spray-painted the message, "Jesus wasn't a European!" (Which, of course, is true.)

Some of the alledged unity with 'persons who are like us' is not a Godly unity. It is sometimes a unity defined by the 'external other.' e.g. "We are not like the heathen Lutherans who smoke; or emotional charismatics, or right-wingers, or lazy whoevers."

That's basically what I'm talking about. I'm such a rare breed -- a black evangelical Presbyterian -- that if I'm going to find fellowship I have to diversify. And I love it. In 1998 and 1999 our city held worship services at the hockey hall -- I was in the orchestra -- and seeing all those people from every walk of life, every race, most denominations etc. just thrilled me to death.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 12:18 AM

Defenders of the status quo can talk all they want about black folks not being turned away at the white churches' doors in 21st century America. But the point remains, as others have said, that so many white churches have moved out of urban areas as the racial composition of those neighborhoods has changed. There may be a point about worship styles--that issue itself has driven internal divisions within white churches, after all-- but a church is more than just a place to worship on Sunday morning. Even a church that remains predominantly white in the pews during worship services can interact with and do outreach in the neighborhood and bring people in in other ways. Think about it: girls' and boys' clubs, neighborhood events, community justice activism--there are so many ways that white churches can become "diverse." Unfortunately, the "white flight" away from low-income and racially diverse areas allows little of that to happen.

Posted by: I and I | November 29, 2007 10:24 AM

Rick--what was the source of the thrill? Are you equally thrilled, say if you get on a city bus and there is equivalent diversity?

(I am just seeking clarity)

I too find a range of pleasure and thrill in such situations. In my depths I believe it to be the heart of God (John 17).

But there are many deceptions. Do you think the builders of the tower of Babel were thrilled?? There is diversity in the streets of Mardi Gras celebrations. I was with a very diverse crowd on a city bus that was mocking and deriding a bus driver for his mistakes. I was on a Boston bus a few weeks ago when Red Sox won American League Championship (i.e. great divesity, unity and celebration). And of course crises tend to bring folks together.

That which causes us to unite, or causes us divide, is so helpful in discerning the content of our hearts.

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 29, 2007 11:46 AM

Are you equally thrilled, say if you get on a city bus and there is equivalent diversity?

Not particularly -- I ride the bus regularly. My thrill with that worship service then, and later the church I attend now, was seeing the people of God come together, breaking the normal barriers to approach Him as one Body. My thought was, This is what heaven will look like.

Do you think the builders of the tower of Babel were thrilled??

The difference was they were blatantly disobeying God.

Speaking of celebrations, the only one I remember being involved in was when the Penguins won their first Stanley Cup in 1991 -- I remember giving high-fives to strangers driving by downtown while I was waiting for a bus. That was certainly a unifying moment.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 12:12 PM

This issue is about seeing the face of God. God being infinite means we must bring all people into the tent and actually do the hard work of reconciling. That means some will have issues. That means the body has issues and we have to deal w/ them if we are ever going to see God's face in our worship. That means some people are going to feel uncomfortable when others dance in worship or when it get's loud. That means some of us are going to get bored or not understand the need for silent meditation but if the church is going to be healthy and whole we all must get used to the different ways we worship see God's face through all the different faces that come through the door.

Posted by: payshun | November 29, 2007 1:26 PM

Correction:
We must learn to see God's face through all the different faces and communities that come through the door. I actually like riding the bus sometimes. I see the beauty of God's creation in the faces of those that ride w/ me. It's great to share a smile w/ someone. But there are days where I could not be bothered.

Posted by: payshun | November 29, 2007 1:29 PM

Posted by: payshun | November 28, 2007 4:51 PM

'...is that people don't want to take the call to reconcile seriously.'

Some people, some, not all. I worship in a denomination that for the most part is conservative. We have several chuches in our metro area and have a bible camp in the northern section of our state. Our styles of worship in our congregations varies from Very formal or extream contempoary. Our bible camp reflects that mix. We are reaching our to our communities not based on 'we have 37% African American in our community so we need to find 21% increase in our AA membership so that we reflect our community. We are looking for people who do not know the Savior. 1/32 of an inch under the skin - we are all the same. They are brother and sisters - and the pigmentation is a little different than mine. I'm a 6' 3" Swede that loves 'soul food' and 'curried chicken'. Why did the Swedes develope 'potatoe sausage' - oh yeah, thats a winner in everyones book - NOT! (I love it but face it - if I had to handle only Swedish cooking - I would be a lot thinner than I am now)

I have never worked or worshipped in a church where the Elders intentionally put together a program to keep 'those people' out. Yes there are some churches that do - how sad, how poor they must be. But the way DBB writes - you would think that 90% of the evangelical churches do programming to exclude other races. I think it is under 20% and I believe that figure is too high. Now - as good as I believe we are...we can do better.

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 29, 2007 4:03 PM

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 28, 2007 5:21 PM

Trust me -- it's a HUGE problem.

Define HUGE.

20% of the congregations in all denominations?
40%, 75%?

I believe that some denominations have a problem, personally believe that it is more on the congregational level. But I believe that the ones that have the problem get the most press and therefore a lot of other congregations get wrongly tainted by the few. I have worked in Lutheran, Free, Covenant and almost a Baptist church. Never have I wittnessed what DBB is talking about. I know that there were a few individuals that were a little 'insensitive' - but they were insensitive about many things across the board.

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 29, 2007 4:13 PM

That still does not change the statistics that less than one in 20 churches is racially integrated, even less so in evangelical churches. And as I have mentioned earlier, one group did try to keep me out. The right-wing rhetoric from many white evangelical churches in the 1980s effectively kept blacks out since few subscribe to that ideology.

On top of that, Philip Yancey, who grew up in suburban Atlanta during the 1960s, told the story in "What's So Amazing About Grace?" about his church's attempt to keep blacks, specifically demonstrators, out in those days. That kind of thing still happens, albeit with much less frequency than before.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 4:18 PM

'...statistics that less than one in 20 churches is racially integrated...'

Define 'racially integrated'.

Does that mean no minorities - only white/anglos in the pews. Or does it mean that it might be 10% minority but because the community is 35% minority this congregation fails. If that is the case - what about the Baptist church on the other side of town that is 85% black but again the community is 65% white - are they sacially challenged? There is a church that at this time is meeting in one of our school auditoriums and it is over 90% black. The community around it is only about 42% black. Should they be required to intentionally reach out to the white population in their community so that they are racally balanced?

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 29, 2007 4:46 PM

Does that mean no minorities - only white/anglos in the pews.

Segregated, for our purposes, means a church who attendence is fewer than 20 percent minority, and that figure also would include, say, whites in black churches. (Where I live there are plenty of black churches in white neighborhoods, so it's not an issue of neighborhood access.) However, it's not just an issue of how many faces are in the pews -- we're also talking about leadership, whether lay or in the pulpit, and other kinds of ministerial involvement. How many are deacons? How many lead small groups? That kind of thing.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 5:21 PM

'...means a church who attendence is fewer than 20 percent minority...'

So in Sweet Swam, MN where there is only one family in the community that is black. There are 225 in the community counting the 5 blacks. The churches there have to import minorities from somewhere so that they have 20% in their congregations?

'...about leadership, whether lay or in the pulpit, and other kinds of ministerial involvement. How many are deacons? How many lead small groups? That kind of thing.'

In my congregation any one can have a place of leadership as long as they meet the biblical standards that we have established from the Bible. Race is not one of the standards. We have various ethnic groups represented on any number of boards or committees. But they were chosen based on their testimony and where they believe God gave them a desire to work.

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Moderatelad | November 29, 2007 5:44 PM

So in Sweet Swam, MN where there is only one family in the community that is black. There are 225 in the community counting the 5 blacks.

You assume that these people go to church in or close to their neighborhoods. Most people (other than Catholics), however, do not, and I almost never have done so.

Good for your church -- that's the way it should be -- but that's not the case in others, perhaps even most. If I have my history correct, my church decades ago had to fight to put black elders on the board, even though they met the qualifications, because a number of folks in the congregation didn't even want blacks in the church. When my immediate former church, to this day almost all white, had a black man deliver the sermon it was considered a big deal.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 5:57 PM

How many churches do you know with an African-American senior pastor that is integrated??

The church I belong to in Montgomery AL (I live in MN and AL) was birthed out of a large church in Lagos, Nigeria. The church has a very evangelical view of scripture, charismatic view of the Holy Spirit and eclectic worship style. The pastor is likely the most uniting pastor in the city and there are a handful of whites in the congregation. However, the pastor is African American. Prior to his pastorate the leader was from Nigeria and the congregation was much more mixed. When leadership changed the white members mostly left. I have multiple reports of those persons just experiencing alot of subtle (or not-so-subtle flack) flack from family/friends as to their being part of such a ministry.

The African American church I worked for in Minneapolis was essentially an integrated church in the 1960's. But around 1970 they switched pastors. The new pastor was not anti-integrationist but had as stream of thought and tone that was much more "Black is beautiful". The idealism of the 60's passed and the white members left.

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 29, 2007 7:28 PM

How many churches do you know with an African-American senior pastor that is integrated??

Admittedly, not many. One of the mega-churches in my area is that way; however, I was advised not to go there because the "bishop" has too much power (and the fact that he's referred to as a bishop should be enough confirmation).

Two things about that. One, I don't think that pastor should have been so focused upon building up blacks to the point where white members were feeling slighted, at least not in a public or quasi-public forum -- based on what you said, I don't blame them for leaving. That said, white evangelicals in many cases do feel more uncomfortable with African-Americans than with native Africans -- I'm not sure why that is, however. (Perhaps it's because the Africans are a bit more deferential; perhaps there are more cultural similarities and a feeling that we "made" them. Then there's the reality that Africans who come over here represent the elite in their respective countries.)

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 9:15 PM

rick; if only we could all be like you and your church. nice play with the race card rick. ...i'm such a rare breed//blah, blah ;blah. comon rick, come up for air. if a church is located in a predominately white neighborhood would you expet to see the proper percentage of blacks, mexicans, orientals?

If they can get there, why not? Many of your independent mega-churches are such, and most of those are in white neighborhoods.

get real. you gonna drive 10 miles to find the politically, correctly diversified church?

There are people who drive a lot further than that -- in fact, a few from two other states -- to get to my church precisely because it's integrated. I can make it in 15 minutes if I push it. One of our former staff was called to a pastorate in Montana; he said the thing he misses most are African-Americans in the congregation.

get race out of your head and think about life as a christian. leave peoples churches alone. let christians do what they do. drive to your ideal integrated church and know that you are right.

jerry, people like you are what makes this "diversity" thing necessary in the church. You may resent having to address this issue; however, you will eventually benefit from it, as I have for the past nine years.

Below is our website:

http://www.acac.net

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 29, 2007 9:42 PM

Mod,

Thanks for sharing that. It's encouraging to hear. Now if only more churches could do that.

Posted by: payshun | November 29, 2007 11:38 PM

Jerry,

In my opinion, it would be a wise, wise move if you would consider that Rick might have something of value to say to you. Would you consider asking the Lord if He would like you to gain anything from Rick's words???????????

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 29, 2007 11:45 PM

'...gain anything from Rick's words???????????'

I have in the past. But the way Mr Rick talks - I feel like no matter what I do, say, believe, I am the bad guy or at least wrong. I am more a glass half full and the way he phrases his sentences - I think he is a glass half empty. Yes I understand - no matter how good we are, we can do and get better. I would like to celebrate the little victories knowing fully that 'little is much when God is in it'. Little victories lay the foundation for big victories. Rick makes you feel that 90% of evangelical pastors are just Jerry Fowell clones. I believe that it is like 10 to 20% at the most. My denomination ententionally hired a black pastor to develope a new congregation in the north metro area of our city. I our desire was for a 'culturally diverse congregation'. It started out that way but as the church grew - more blacks and a few other minorities joined and less whites. It is a wonderful congregation and when we are together at camp - I love being with them. I could worship with them every Sunday if they were the only church in the area. But TYL - there is a church in my area that worships in a style that I am more comfortable. Not that mine is better - no, it is just preference - period. (I am going to go to this church at least once if not twice when they do their 'hip-hop' Sunday)

If in fact the evangelical churches in the US were as bad as Rick and Sojo lead us to believe them to be. I believe that Christianity in the US and the world for that matter would be in full retreat from society. I don't believe that is the case - not from the churches that I know in my area. (dear gussie - I am depressed talking like this - I better leave and go to Dobson's site - LOL)

Blessings -
.

Posted by: Modertatelad | November 30, 2007 8:25 AM

Moderatelad--sometimes our critics are our best critics. Rick is smart and Rick is talking. I believe learning has a whole lot to do with my listening. There are things Sojo says, and things Rick says, which I believe miss the boat; but I really don't see a lack of regard/respect/love for Evangelicalism. I weary greatly of generalizations that just seem to fit the media narrative of Evangelicalism versus the reality on the ground. But the reason any people tend to yell louder and louder is because they do not believe they are being heard.

And I do not count Rick nor Jim Wallis as 'yellers.' There are big blind spots in Evangelicalism.

I am going to speak to the heart of the matter (in my thinking). What I am going to write may sound very minor, or 'off-point'--but it is fundamental.

Please consider, Moderatelad, submitting your viewpoint to Rick's, or to the African American pastor you speak of (and I do understand who you are referring to). Even when it seems wrong--just try wearing that perspective for a few years.

You can take four persons from your church and nurture an intimate connection with the new church plant; and serve in submission, doing what they determine of value.

In my mind, most African Americans have enough challenge in life to not want to bother even debating white Americans. That is why I highlighted above that Rick is talking.

This issue pervades global missions as well as the US church. The AA pastor you refer to writes a monthly column on reconciliation for the local Christian newspaper. He does that for a reason.

The Evangelical church did retreat from society in failing to deal with segregation and civil rights. I resist returning to Alabama from MN because my school options are a bad, underfunded public system serving African Americans, or an expensive private system. I believe Rick, for instance, has a deep sorrow over the actions of southern white Christians in the abandonment of the public system when the schools were ordered to integrate. In Alabama the 'dual system' is undergirded by a very unjust tax system which disallows the capacity to fund the public system adequately. And the Republican ascendency also depended on the movement of southern whites from the Democrat to Republican parties.

These kinds of dots do not get disconnected until a humble and obedient church disconnects them.

Govenor Riley (Democrat) came into office and moved on a tax reform package (partially stimulated by a paper on tax reform written by a seminary student). He promoted it from the pulpit in my church. His one miscalculation was that he thought it obvious the Evangelical church would back reform.

We have to hear, Moderatelad; through listening and humble submission.

I believe your heart is fully in the right place and you are asking the right questions. I am suggesting a step that will determine your ongoing growth. It is far more important we grow in grace and knowledge through obedience than it is that we win arguments. In that transformation, and submission, your life will continue to demonstrate a Gospel able to speak powerfully to the seemingly impossible questions.

There are Black pastors today in Minneapolis concerned about the police department's demotion of Black officers. Their questions are legitimate and deserve answers. I don't truly know the reality on the ground, but I can with great certainty define the numbers of white Evangelical clergy who would stand with the Black pastors and say, "If they want an answer; then we all want an answer." Zero.

Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 30, 2007 11:19 AM

moderatelad -- I applaud and appreciate your desire. But, to be truthful, in order to achieve a truly integrated church, we need to abandon the "religious right" posture you've shown on this blog; the vast majority of African-Americans, for some good historical reasons, don't subscribe to it and in fact consider it aiding and abetting racism in the church. This is not simply an issue of "differing opinions" because they do have impact. It is no accident, however, that many churches that are "diversifying" have moved "left" politically.

Here's how bad the right has it now in contemporary evangelicalism and will continue to be for a while: One of the women in my church who has for years been involved with anti-abortion and crisis pregnancy work for almost as long as I've known her wants to begin a "sanctity of human life" ministry at our church, and I'm all for that. That said, back in the 1980s abortion was separated -- deliberately -- from other life (read: "justice") issues, to the point that it became an obsession in evangelical churches to the point that practically nothing else mattered. The campaign against legal abortion consumed resources, monetary and otherwise, that could have gone to diaconal ministry, including crisis pregnancy centers. Operation Rescue was pretty big where I live; I know two people who went to jail participating in demonstrations. What's worse, if you actively oppose legal abortion you are considered a "conservative" regardless of party affiliation or personal ideology.

Did you notice, however, that very, very few (if any) "pro-life" leaders are anything but white? That's because, in the black community in particular, there is no separating abortion from racism, poverty, economics etc.; in fact, my own "pro-life" stance is directly related to those other issues. I told my friend -- and even bought her a gift membership to Evangelicals for Social Action to prove my point -- that such a separation is ultimately hypocritical. My white, conservative, Republican pastor understands this, which is why he has told her, "We need to be very careful" about how we go about this, and it looks as though I may be the one who shepherds this through the church.

To sum things up, "diversification" racially and culturally will also mean diversification ideologically. I wonder just how many conservatives, used to having their own way and not being challenged, can handle that.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 30, 2007 11:20 AM

I believe Rick, for instance, has a deep sorrow over the actions of southern white Christians in the abandonment of the public system when the schools were ordered to integrate.

In fact, that was the issue that jump-started the "religious right." But thanks for bringing this up -- except for my first year of college I never actually lived in the South, but my mother grew up there and endured a bad marriage to get out.

In Alabama the 'dual system' is undergirded by a very unjust tax system which disallows the capacity to fund the public system adequately.

A conservative, Republican governor and outspoken Christian actually tried to change that a few years ago by proposing an amendment to the state constitution. (It lost, 2-to-1, and he was vilified.)

That leads to a bigger issue -- once we worship together on a consistent basis we can then started to visit each other's homes, have our kids play together etc. to the point where color really won't matter. (I mean, we're all family, aren't we? The early church had the attitude that, quoting the motto of a major college baskeball team, "We All We Got.") But once we became "establishment" the divisions began creeping in.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 30, 2007 11:40 AM

We Unitarian Universalists have been working on racism and homophobia for around twenty years, and I can testify that this is not only important work, it can be deeply spiritual. It is really difficult for most white Protestant, straight people (me included) to own the pain we bring upon ourselves and others when we set ourselves apart. I don't believe for one moment that God (whatever that means to you) sanctions it. Jesus, after all, was a Jew, and there are plenty of congregations where he would feel unwelcome today.

On the other hand, we need to guard against looking for just enough people of color and sexual diversity to make us look good. We might seek humility that we have much to learn —like, for example, a healthy sense of humor— from people who are not in dominant social groups.

Posted by: Theoliberal | November 30, 2007 4:02 PM

"In Alabama the 'dual system' is undergirded by a very unjust tax system which disallows the capacity to fund the public system adequately.

A conservative, Republican governor and outspoken Christian actually tried to change that a few years ago by proposing an amendment to the state constitution. (It lost, 2-to-1, and he was vilified.)"

And just as an aside, guess who were among the groups that stenuously opposed Gov. Riley's proposal: The Alabama Christian Coalition and the American Family Association. But we have to remember, this is the same state where folks showed up en masse defy a federal court verdict by putting the Ten Commandments into a county courthouse, and then compared their campaign to that of George Wallace at the schoolhouse door.

Posted by: I and I | November 30, 2007 4:28 PM

rick; i firmly believe that you are not connected with the reality of the demographics of this country. your obsession with diversity will never be satisfied until you explain how you are going to equalize the diversity of the population. in the northwoods (upper mid west) you could drive for 100 miles and never find a diverse church. in teh northwest you could drive 100s of miles and never find your diverse church. in the midwest you will only find diversity in the cities. as mexicans move into these areas they congregate in their own places not wanting whites with them due to language etc. so get real and realize that your dream will never happen except in major metropolitan areas. but even there, ethnic preferences trump diversity desires.
and don't worry ' let justice roll down' i hear rick but i simply don't think he can see the whole picture because of his seemingly racist attitude toward whites. i still hear him saying that all the problems blacks have are because of whitey.
i agree with moderatlads statement re; gain anyathing from rick's words??????? rick is to eager to use words like conservative, evangelicals, republicans, racism, etc. and, by the way, where does rick think a totally diverse church will take us? unfortunately the people that have problems with drugs, guns, marriage, crime etc. etc. do not talk like we do so the poplulation as a whole will not change. what you see is what you get. i love the Lord and will continue to worship him in my church.oh, i also miss the diversity when i am up north in the northwoods but i don't cry about the lack of it.

Posted by: jerry | November 30, 2007 5:26 PM

rick; i firmly believe that you are not connected with the reality of the demographics of this country.

"Demographics" are highly irrelvant to this discussion, thank you.

and don't worry ' let justice roll down' i hear rick but i simply don't think he can see the whole picture because of his seemingly racist attitude toward whites. i still hear him saying that all the problems blacks have are because of whitey.

I have never said this on this blog -- in fact, I repented of that attitude over 30 years ago.

by the way, where does rick think a totally diverse church will take us? unfortunately the people that have problems with drugs, guns, marriage, crime etc. etc. do not talk like we do so the poplulation as a whole will not change.

Now, that is as close to a racist statement as I've ever heard here. FYI, some of those people who "do not talk like we do" attend my church today -- and guess what? They have changed their ways. They've stopped using drugs and alcohol. They take care of their families. They're not involved in crime. And so on, and so on. So I see every single week "where a totally diverse church will take us." You might as well stop posting before you make a much bigger fool of yourself than you have already.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | November 30, 2007 6:35 PM

okay. if we can't talk about crime, drugs, guns, marriage, etc. without being called racist then i'm out. sharpton and jackson would be proud of you.

Posted by: jerry | December 1, 2007 10:10 AM

okay. if we can't talk about crime, drugs, guns, marriage, etc. without being called racist then i'm out.

Good. Because, contrary to what you may believe, most black people (even in the 'hood) are not criminals, junkies or whores; on the other hand, not all white people are clean, upstanding citizens.

Here's something else: It is my experience that people who complain the most about the "other" being racist have issues of their own with racism. I dealt with mine in the early 1970s; I strongly suggest you deal with yours, which you have exposed for all of us to see. That said, I hope God calls you to a major metro area, to show you just how ignorant you really are.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | December 1, 2007 11:48 AM

"okay. if we can't talk about crime, drugs, guns, marriage, etc. without being called racist then i'm out. "

Jerry, don't let the door hit you on the way out--good riddance. This is a blog for people who genuinely care about the social problems in this country, racial and otherwise, and out of consideration commenters should put a little bit of thought into their posts rather than react knee-jerk style. I agree with Rick: As a white man, it has also been my experience that language like yours is usually used by people who don't really WANT to come to racial reconciliation. If a black person called you 'honky' one time, just let it go, and get out and meet and befriend some folks of other races and get your stereotypes shattered. (But you're not reading this anyway, are you?)

Posted by: I and I | December 3, 2007 5:09 PM

Diversity as Christian Practice—Not Just a Church Program (by Diana Butler Bass)

Comments

Post a Comment