For Whites Only: Things to Consider When Entering the Race Conversation (by Sondra Shepley)
In response to the racially tinged controversial remarks made by his former pastor, Barack Obama's speech on the current state of race and politics in America is one that I believe every American should listen to and/or read. It is with this in mind that I wish to address the specific challenges and hindrances that white progressive Christians, like myself, may encounter in our discussions about this topic, and particularly those that occur across racial lines. It would be easy for progressives to smugly say "tisk, tisk" to the rightwing talk show hosts and pundits that have conflagrated Rev. Wright's most divisive remarks as a way to undermine the most viable black presidential candidate in our nation's history. However, I am not convinced that the Christian peace and justice movement has enough solid ground to stand on to convince America that they have moved much beyond the superficial and politically correct discussions that dominate the discourse. Many of our progressive churches are just as segregated as they were decades ago and our political protests and social activism, though well-intentioned, often fail to mirror the kingdom reality that we hope to see realized in the broader society. To be honest, I'm not sure if any of us white people will ever fully grasp what it means to be a person of color in America. However, this realization should not be a cause for discouragement from engaging in this dialogue, but a reason to pause and reassess our level of commitment and to retain a posture of humility.
Sometimes we've become too much like the eager know-it-all kid at the front of the classroom itching to regurgitate the textbook answers. When our teacher is not impressed by our lack of genuine perceptiveness, we scratch our heads and wonder what we said that was so inadequate. Our book knowledge somehow has made us lose sight that these discussions are not opportunities to reassert an ideology, but an exercise in confession and reconciliation that deals with the emotional and sometimes illogical human heart. Likewise, these discussions are opportunities to move forward in creating real systemic change that reflects the integrity and sincerity of our repentance.
Similarly, understanding the facts of racial injustice in our society does not naturally lend us knowledge of the felt experience of oppression. Unfortunately, I have seen too many white Christians walk away from difficult discussions about race discouraged because they wanted the cut-and-dry, "just the facts ma'am" answers, and instead their black or brown, brother or sister insisted on sharing the emotional scars and deep-seated wounds of their daily lived experience. It is right then for Obama to point out that, "…the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races."
It is important, as well, to point out that indignation from a biblical perspective is not in and of itself a sinful or wrong emotion. Jesus and the prophets had harsh words for the religious and political establishments of their day, and most notably, in a fit of rage Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers in the Jewish temple. His explanation: "My house should be called a house of prayer for all the nations? But you have made it a den of robbers." Our worship glorifies God, but our segregated worship hours often reflect a specific cultural expression.
The rhetorical style of the "jeremiad"—defined as sermons or prose characterized by lamentation and anger as a response to societal injustices—is considered by many historians as black civic religion's most significant contribution to the American rhetorical tradition. Of course, the word jeremiad has its roots in the name Jeremiah, referring to the biblical prophet. The jeremiad, as a form of both religious and political communication, highlights the role, born out of necessity, that the black church has historically played as a surrogate political institution for the disenfranchised. It may be difficult for white Americans, even progressive white Christians, to recognize or validate a rhetorical style and tradition that has its roots outside of their cultural experience, but has always been a traditional and mainstream expression of the black church. It's a gross stereotype of white progressive Christians, but those who trend toward the organic-buying-acoustic-guitar-playing-bohemian-dressed-new-monastic-urban-missional-emergent-yuppie-with-dark-rimmed-glasses should be aware that even their cultural choices made out of social consciousness are not racially neutral and are certainly not one-size-fits-all.
Finally, we white progressive Christians should realize that this conversation will continue regardless if we choose to participate in it or not. As Obama pointed out, this is a conversation that happens with regularity around the kitchen tables of those who live outside the mainstream of white culture. If our friends who live this reality invite us into this conversation we should make it a priority. To table this discussion for another day, when we have more time or energy is to exercise the white privilege that requires us to only think about race when it convenient. Inviting you to the table to talk about these most difficult and painful experiences is not your right, but a privilege that is sacrificially offered to you for your benefit. We should all be so honored to be invited into the conversation.
Sondra Shepley is the speaking events manager for Sojourners.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
This is, by far, the most sensible thing that has been said about this issue here.
Posted by: kevin s. | March 20, 2008 12:50 PM
Sondra are you saying table this conversation for another day ? Since you have to be a progressive Christian to even hope to be invited to the conversation I guess leaves many more out completly .
I am glad Obama wants to be President for all of us though . Left to the most of the consistent liberal voices we are despised and condemned who have a conservative slant on life . But reverend Wright has some strong reasons fro not trusting government , or even those in the democratic party which appears to a denomination to some .
Can not imagin being a minority , this has taught me something though about taking for granted the dominant culture I live in . But it is harder to understand the constant demonization and hatred that spews from some of the left here that is never confronted by the same left that wants like me to understand . Because at heart , we are all individuals . We don't hate or love as a group or race , we do so one person at a time .
Make things better I hope is what I believe most of us want . Hence I know somewhat like it is to be totally left out of the conversation and dictated to what is important and what is not .
Thank You Jesus for this day , be with those here in Spirit , and may their day have you as part of it .
Posted by: Mick | March 20, 2008 12:57 PM
AMEN, sista! i appreciate you saying every bit of that. i've particularly enjoyed hanging out with my organic-buying-acoustic-guitar-playing-bohemian-dressed-new-monastic-urban-missional-emergent-yuppie-with-dark-rimmed-glasses (and let's not forget "fair-trade-latte-drinking" ;-) brothas and sistas for the past few years for the very reason that they are open to this kind of self-critique. the vulnerability has been reciprocal as we've shared life as equals "across the tracks," as it were. i thoroughly enjoy partaking by choice in another's experience as Langston Hughes talks about in "The Negro Speaks of Rivers" (although when we sing Kum By Yah, i'm still partial to the old Hawkins Family version ;-)
it's in that space of mutual respect and vulnerability that i believe new possibilities make themselves apparent.
Posted by: melvin bray | March 20, 2008 1:12 PM
Thanks, Sondra, for your thoughtful remarks. Here is a response to Wright and Obama from a Jewish perspective. (And an acquaintance of mine, well acquainted with oppression):
IT'S STILL A QUESTION OF WRIGHT AND WRONG
By Jeff Jacoby
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/03/19/its_still_a_question_of_wright_and_wrong/
.
My relationship with my rabbi, ..., is similar in many respects to Barack Obama's relationship with his longtime pastor, Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. ....
Were my rabbi to gloat that America got its just desserts on 9/11, or to claim that the US government invented AIDS as an instrument of genocide, or to urge his congregants to sing "God Damn America" instead of "God Bless America," I would know about it straightaway, ..... Either the rabbi would be gone, or I and scores of others would walk out, unwilling to remain in a house of worship that tolerated such poisonous teachings. I have no doubt that the same would be true for millions of worshipers in countless houses of worship nationwide....
But it wasn't true for Obama, whose long and admiring relationship with Wright, a man he describes as his "mentor," remained intact for more than 20 years, notwithstanding the incendiary and bigoted messages the minister used his pulpit to promote.
In Philadelphia yesterday, Obama gave a graceful speech .... There was an echo there of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who in his great "I Have a Dream" speech extolled "the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence" as "a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir."... The problem for Obama is that Wright, the spiritual leader he has so long embraced, is a devotee not of King -- who in that same speech warned against "drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred" -- but of the poisonous hatemonger Louis Farrakhan, whom the church's magazine honored with a lifetime achievement award. The problem for Obama, who campaigns on a message of racial reconciliation, is that the "mentor" whose church he joined and has generously supported with tens of thousands of dollars in donations is a disciple not of King but of James Cone, the expounder of a "black liberation" theology that teaches its adherents to "accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy."... Above all, the problem for Obama is that for two decades his spiritual home has been a church in which the minister damns America to the enthusiastic approval of the congregation, and not until it threatened to scuttle his political ambitions did Obama finally find the mettle to condemn the minister's odium.... When Don Imus uttered his infamous slur on the radio last year, Obama cut him no slack. Imus should be fired, he said. "There's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group."...
When it came to Wright, however, he wasn't nearly so categorical. Oh, he's "like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," Obama indulgently explained to one interviewer. He's just "trying to be provocative," he told another. "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial," he said. Far from severing his ties to Wright, Obama made him a member of his Religious Leadership Committee -- a tie he finally cut only four days ago[3/13/08]...
Such a clanging double standard raises doubts about Obama's character and judgment, and about his fitness for the role of race-transcending healer. ...
...
(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe.)
...
Posted by: Witness for Peace | March 20, 2008 1:17 PM
Thank you Melvin
Thank you Mick
Thank you Sondra
Thank you Kevin
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 1:30 PM
More to the point, if there is nothing wrong with all that Rev. Wright has to say, why has the junior Senator from Illinois removed him as an advisor to his Presidential Campaign?
Posted by: Witness for Peace | March 20, 2008 1:39 PM
in all sincerity, mick, i must sadly admit that i don't understand your feelings of exclusion and oppression. help me understand.
"Witness for Peace," the short answer is that otherwise you, and so many others, would not hear.
Posted by: melvin bray | March 20, 2008 1:45 PM
"Either the rabbi would be gone, or I and scores of others would walk out, "
So apparently the community of faith at Trinity UCC is not like the relationship of Jeff Jacoby to his Rabbi. And if Mr. Jacoby is truly interested in assessing the impact of that community on Obama then it might require a long journey of understanding that community. He does not cross that bridge by comparing his relationship to his rabbi to the Obama-Wright relationship. And the bridge is not crossed by saying Jacoby is well-acquainted with oppression.
My hunch--there are substantial unstated differences/issues at play either on the personal level--or more likely along the socio-religious divide. And I don't pretend to know those issues--let alone suggest one party is right or wrong.
I am clear Jacoby's overall characterization of Trinity is profoundly misleading; and when that is the basis of the argument, the argument collapses.
It is fine for Jacoby to oppose. It is fine to misunderstand Trinity. It is not fine, in my book, within this public conversation, in which educated people know the history of this nation, in which journalists have been in the midst of a 50-year conversation about not stopping to listen and understand cross-cultural issues, and when he knows there are a throng of voices that at the minimum are saying, "Stop, listen and understand before you judge;" to AGAIN plow ahead without understanding.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 1:49 PM
Melvin--I agree with your question to Mick; although I take his comment to be a little tongue-in-cheek.
Persons in Mick's camp often feel as welcome at the "progressive-liberal" table as liberals feel at Focus on the Family. So Mick figures if Sondra is going to talk like it is quite unlikely she and the "organic-buying-acoustic-guitar-playing-bohemian-dressed-new-monastic-urban-missional-emergent-yuppie-with-dark-rimmed-glasses" would get at invitation to the African American kitchen table then surely he is just excluded altogether. It's basically a loving slam at liberals (with the love level not too high).
But Mick, I think we are very responsible to not whine about getting beat up or excluded. First off--whining never leads to good stewardship of what we are responsible to do. Second, when whites become "offended" at this or that it appears very silly to people who have endured a profound evil. Third, it takes us away from walking in a spirit of power, of love and a sound mind--and into a spirit of fear.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 2:04 PM
Mick -- The reason you feel so put-upon is that the current discussion calls for a basic change in attitude toward people who come from different perspectives, which in my observation you have resisted. Reducing the whole discourse to a left/right, ideologically-based parameter does nothing to create understanding, let alone reconciliation. Put another way, we don't all come from the starting point that whatever is "conservative" must be automatically correct; in this discussion about race everything, including are personal agendas, should be on the table and critically examined. It is not that conservatives are specifically excluded from the debate; rather, by their stubborn adherence -- some might say addiction -- to their worldview they exclude themselves.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 3:16 PM
"we are despised and condemned who have a conservative slant on life."
I honestly can't imagine why those who are actually a majority of the country - those who consider themselves basically conservative make up a majority of the nation according to polls - can draw the mantle of being an aggrieved and persecuted minority about them. I guess it's part of our "victim culture" automatically generating sympathy permeating everything right into the outer limits of Jerry Springer.
"But reverend Wright has some strong reasons fro not trusting government , or even those in the democratic party which appears to a denomination to some."
Because until recently the Democratic Party has been seen as carefully and even pervasively secular, even anti-faith, it's hard to fairly characterize it as a religious denomination, even if some people take their politics that seriously. It is the Republican Party, often referred to by in-house religious conservatives as "God's Own Party - GOP" that has appeared as a denomination, and the conservative evangelical church as "the Republican Party at prayer."
"Can not imagin being a minority , this has taught me something though about taking for granted the dominant culture I live in."
I have tried to do so, answering you specifically, but I have felt the responses from you to be just about along the same lines that Wright was vilified with, though I never used such intemperate language that called for God's judgment.
I'm a firm believer that "the day of wrath" and "day of judgment" are not things that any human being ought to look forward to, for it will involve terrible loss for humanity, and who could wish that on another? Yet even though we must, I believe, answer, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" to our tormentors, there ought to be some sort of discourse that can shake oppression from its leisured comfort and tell the victims that they have not been forgotten by God, but that He shares their lashes of the injustice, and God's anger is against that injustice, as a terrible swift sword poised over those taking their ease.
"But it is harder to understand the constant demonization and hatred that spews from some of the left here that is never confronted by the same left that wants like me to understand."
I imagine that really is true - you say you are a second generation American. To come here, most immigrants have invested very much emotionally in the American myth - an inspiring half-truth, after all. It's neither wholly wrong not wholly right. But it means a lot to forsake the land of your birth and then stand up and take the oath pledging loyalty, so the process commands tremendous emotional loyalty, passed down no doubt only slightly diluted to a second generation. Moreover, that means that there are likely no direct ancestors who participated in either the slave trade, ownership or even Jim Crow. But if you are an anglo, nevertheless you stand on the shoulders of those who built the edifice they stand on, partly and significantly by exploitation. You stand to benefit from the structures of sin that built and maintain that ratio we live and act within.
"Because at heart , we are all individuals . We don't hate or love as a group or race , we do so one person at a time ."
That is a very western thought bias, a philosophical condensation of individuality as the overriding characteristic of our human nature. But I don't believe it's accurate to see that as a wholly good phenomenon. Our excessive focus on individuality is the consequence of the alienation from one another that has ensued from original sin - the separation and alienation from God
that has split us off from both others and even our true selves.
It leads us to value our "freedom" as the autonomous actions of "the self" without community restraint as the highest good, though it contains its own contradictions.
Rather, I think we can measure a society's "freedom" by how much scope there is for being able to express ourselves as individuals in doing the maximum good for others, without that society's laws and conventions acting in restraint.
Posted by: Sojourner Truth | March 20, 2008 3:56 PM
Sondra,
I think it important, given your discussion of the "black jeremiad," to note that the jeremiad has American roots that antedate the rise of slavery on these shores. The word earlier applied to a style of Puritan sermon, and its nature, I think, is instructive. At the heart of the Puritan jeremiad was the notion of a covenantal relationship between the Puritan settlements of New England and God, and the jeremiad proclaimed (1) that the People of the Covenant had broken that covenant, (2) that current tribulations were the result of their failure to keep to the covenant, and (3) the way to restore order was to restore the covenant. As the historian Sacvan Berkovich has pointed out, though, this call for "restoration" usually in some way *rewrote* the covenant--thus turning the jeremiad into a powerful advocacy for reform. Thus when people such as Abraham Lincoln or Frederick Douglass made use of the jeremiad, they contended that to restore the covenant one had to rid America of the sin of slavery--a sin that had hardly been acknowledged as such by the Puritan covenant, or indeed by most Americans prior to the Revolution. So the jeremiad has to be more than simply an expression of anger at injustice--it must be framed as well in terms of a community responsibility to put things right.
Posted by: David in Nashville | March 20, 2008 4:43 PM
I appreciate the content and, I hope, the intent of your text. I would make one suggestion: Read carefully the Book of Jeremiah in the First Testament.Be sure that to look at the prophetic comments on injust and not just from a community perspective. If possible find a commentary that will explain the Hebrew of the first text especially in regard to Jeremiah's accusations against God. Do not rely only on the cleaned-up English translation.
There is much reference to language and rhetoric in your work but please explain the word "conflagrated" in the first paragraph. Did you mean "conflate"? Did you mean something else? If so, the context of the argument is altered.
Posted by: Patricia | March 20, 2008 5:56 PM
I appreciate the content and, I hope, the intent of your text. I would make one suggestion: Read carefully the Book of Jeremiah in the First Testament.Be sure that to look at the prophetic comments on injust and not just from a community perspective. If possible find a commentary that will explain the Hebrew of the first text especially in regard to Jeremiah's accusations against God. Do not rely only on the cleaned-up English translation.
There is much reference to language and rhetoric in your work but please explain the word "conflagrated" in the first paragraph. Did you mean "conflate"? Did you mean something else? If so, the context of the argument is altered.
Posted by: Patricia | March 20, 2008 5:57 PM
my only problem here is that there is always the assumptions that whites are prejudiced against blacks. how bout if we start with the assumption that whites are NOT racists/prejudiced against blacks. where would that go? i see two types of blacks - those who are willing to accept that whites are not racist, until proven different,(cosby, oprah, etc.) and those that think that all whites are prejudiced against blacks;(jackson, sharpton, payshun, nowlin, etc). so if this nice lady's progressive christian ideology is to work what can whites do to "fit in"? so far on this blog i have not seen an answer for me (whitey). how can i become acceptable to rick and the reverand jackson?
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 6:09 PM
my only problem here is that there is always the assumptions that whites are prejudiced against blacks. how bout if we start with the assumption that whites are NOT racists/prejudiced against blacks. where would that go? i see two types of blacks - those who are willing to accept that whites are not racist, until proven different,(cosby, oprah, etc.) and those that think that all whites are prejudiced against blacks;(jackson, sharpton, payshun, nowlin, etc). so if this nice lady's progressive christian ideology is to work what can whites do to "fit in"? so far on this blog i have not seen an answer for me (whitey). how can i become acceptable to rick and the reverand jackson?
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 6:09 PM
This the most down to earth reasonable and non biased comment I have read so far so right on Sondra.
My comment is this - Mr. Obama has been criticized by someone saying if he has faith in Rev. Wright why is he no longer his adviser. Well, folks, what else could he have done? The media would have chewed him up and spit him out in little pieces if he had continued. Instead, he did what he probably felt forced to do but gave that wonderful speech and supported Rev. Wright as being a wonderful human being with faults like all the rest of us.
Assuming we are all church goers, how many times have sat in a pew be it Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish and listened to a pastor or priest or rabbi that has brought up issues that made us uncomfortable-perhaps also expressed strong opinions that we do not necessarily agree with. Did we stop going to that church or synagogue? Probably not - we probably continued there even though not agreeing because of our love for God, the church community and a myriad of other reasons. If we are real Christians, we are forgiving and can accept the fact that the pastor/rabbi is not always on the same page we are. I believe that is Mr. Obama's position, i.e, hate the sin but love the sinner. He does love Rev. Wright and why should he not? Listening to his speech he pointed out that Rev. Wright has many wonderful qualities and his church does much good work.
To criticize him for choosing a predominately black parish is ridiculous - he is a black man! He has made it clear that Trinity does not exclude whites. I have many black friends - they attend predominately black churches. Why would Mr. Obama not attend a black church.
I believe much of this is media hype so make him look bad. Many of us perhaps have attended old fashioned tent revivals and such services - very strong words and criticisms of many different issues. We all need to re-think our values and views on freedom of speech, race, religion - all of it. Judge not lest ye be judged. Listen to what Mr. Obama is offering - an opportunity for change and perhaps a better life for all of us here in the U.S.
I am white so have not experienced racial discrimination, but I am a senior citizen and female and poor so have experienced a different kind of discrimination. Thanks for reading.
Posted by: charlotte bloebaum | March 20, 2008 6:11 PM
jerry -- If you remember, payshun goes to a white church and I to an integrated one, so to believe that we "hate whitey" because of what we've said here is itself prejudiced. For that matter, I dealt with my own prejudices decades ago, so I challege you to deal with yours.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 6:21 PM
Jerry--Please don't act like a helpless white man who cannot listen, pray, learn and make decisions. Be filled with a spirit of love, power and a sound mind.
The operative assumption is not whites are prejudiced against blacks--but that there is a deep racial brokenness and misunderstanding we are all responsible for.
If someone calls you "mean" are you going to stop and get all offended?? The "White Schtick" is to go into this, "Well!! I'm offended. What do you want me to do? Don't point your finger in my face. I'm confused. Poor me. I wasn't even here when they killed Jesus or lynched Black people. I just want to be a Christian--why don't you?" routine.
If you work at loving 4 Black people for the next two months and find out you are helpless to establish a relationship you like--let's talk this summer.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 6:48 PM
rick; so we are alike. i too have dealt with my prejudices. you agree then, so you say that blacks do not see whitey as prejudiced until proven otherwise. when did i say you "hated whitey". why did you assume that? and what about jackson and sharpton and the rev. wright. all self proclaimed leaders speaking for blacks.. and what of my request for a way to be "prove" i'm not raacist/prejudiced? how did your white friends "prove" themselves?
do you assume whites are prejudiced until they "prove" themselves?
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 6:49 PM
nice play letjustice but no cigar. i have no problem establishing a relationship with people of color. it seems to me that some people on this blog are so out of touch with average joe, ( both christian and non christian) that they make statements like .....there is a deep brokenness and misunderstanding we are all responsible for. so?????? as a christian i can pray and work on that. but frankly that is just your idea that fits your world. myself and my friends of color don't know what that means. we operate on a friendship basis. we simply like each other.
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 7:01 PM
"what can whites do to "fit in"? Jerry
"i have no problem establishing a relationship with people of color." Jerry
Congratulations. Thank you for not being a helpless white man. I guess you didn't mean to ask the first question.
In a more generous mood----Jerry, I understand your sentiments. Just my personal experience, however, is that if you were being generous you wouldn't even be posing the question. The racial divide you cannot see is as far away as the posts on this blog. And on that count again, like it or not, you are acting like a helpless white man. Acting confused is acting helpless.
God has given a Spirt of love, power, and a sound mind and expects us to use it.
I do agree in many ways the issue is very simple--but the working out of it is a life-long journey. Analogy: In the long-term it is obvious the growing economy of the world will demand energy from more non-oil sources. We could all get in a room and decide that in 20 minutes. But changing the systems of production, technologies, economies, geo-politics, transportation, etc. etc. will take a couple generations.
The rate of change depends on many factors--but part of it is our willingness to adapt.
The experience of African Americans is that every inch of change has been won only with a battle. Including a simple little change like accepting that a different style of preaching in a Black church does not make a church member unfit to run for political office.
Change doesn't have to be slow, divisive and hard-fought.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 20, 2008 7:36 PM
i too have dealt with my prejudices.
No, you haven't, otherwise you wouldn't have painted all of us with two broad brushes. (Keep in mind that there are far more African-Americans than conservative ideologues -- but guess who has more institutional control?)
do you assume whites are prejudiced until they "prove" themselves?
I do not, in fact.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 7:55 PM
let justice' i ask it because you and others keep ttelling me i am soing something wrong with respect to blacks.please. you and politicians want the government to solve this age old problem. forget it. think non christian. it's all about one on one. you have fallen into your own self. enjoy it. i will continue living in this world AS IT IS. i will not try to right the wrongs of others past and present. you go for it. change does have to be slow and deliberate. many blacks have accepted this country and are doing very well. LJRO tell me about, germans, italians, irish, mexican, etc. etc. did they fight battles? rev wright is just another preacher as far as i am concerned but obama wants to be pres. different deal. he needs to deal with non christians to get elected and even his own people.
who said "i too have dealt with many prejudices?
change does have to be slow. otherwise someone will get crushed in a rush.
you two need to get into the real world, really. get to know some real american citizens/patriots, like maybe some military people, black and white.
or a non christian, like maybe a cop.o4r a guy picking up your traash and liking his job/paycheck. give him your big words on brokenness, misunderstanding, responsible. comon guys.
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 8:27 PM
you two need to get into the real world, really. get to know some real american citizens/patriots, like maybe some military people, black and white.
The more you talk the more ignorant you sound. I can't speak for the others, but I do know military people and blue-collar folks and it hasn't changed my views on the subject. This topic is just for you.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 8:46 PM
After reading the fine piece of Sondra Shepley, which Jeff Jacoby conceded was good, I am surprised that Mr. Jacoby took a different turn for the worst about the race issue that got us into this mess. If Mr. Jacoby has ever read about any classical Hebrew prophets, he would have understood that from Isaish to Malachi, not a single one of them pampered ancient Isrealites, when they deviated from the special status and divine relationship with Yahweh. It is pathetic for Mr. Jacoby to exhume all the names that served as sore thumb in American social dialogue on race and racism. Mr. Jacoby must allow many of to grow up and face much of the injustice many ancient Hebrew prophets did not shy away in their articulated condemnation. Moses was the first to condemn the idolatry of his brothers and sister, but he also pleaded with God to spare them from complete destruction in Exodus. By Mr. Jacoby's standard, every Hebrew prophet will fail a civic test for qualifying as a patriotic American. It was Isaiah the prophet who said that "Israel does not know, my people do not understand." I am not proof texting, but we can always to a text out of context. If you listen to all the messages of the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, all of them are not poisonous, nor are they all devisive. Any more that all the words of Jeremiah and Isaiah so critical of Israel. If you read Deteronomy in chapters 27 and 28, God stipulated conditions for blessing and cursing. As a pacifist, every violence is abhorent to me and those prophets who preach justice, righteousness, and peace. I preach every Sunday, but I cannot say that God will or does punish people, not even his enemies. Hebrew prophets warned Isreal that going into exile was the consequence of their broken relationship with God. God made every American and the rest of the global nations and their people inf God's image, therefore, every body deserves God's mercy and chastisement when necessary. Please Mr. Jacoby, do not take my comment out of context, read every word. If you want to dialogue with me,contact me. Chibu Ozor, Pastor, Mennonite Church, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Posted by: Rev. Dr. Chibu V. Ozor | March 20, 2008 8:48 PM
Jerry,
that was one of the stupidest things I have read in months and I read a lot. You believe I believe all whites are racist. Please take this kind of tongue in cheek. Do you ride the short bus?
If Sharpton and Jackson can go to dinner with O'reily and chill with him then they don't even believe all white people are racist. Honestly every time you post you reveal how big a fool you are.
Instead of asking exactly what we believe you assume you know. I just have one last comment. Grow up.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 20, 2008 8:51 PM
and i know you rick. a self pitying, self righteous victim. a man like sharpton, confident and correct. i'm so glad you know military people and blue collar people. if i am ignorant you must be all knowing. my friends of color would tell me to get my head out of my .... adio brother.
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 8:54 PM
jerry -- I seriouly doubt you have any friends of color, because based on what you've said here they would be telling you that. And I mean today. My numerous conservative friends don't talk like that.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 9:03 PM
Jerry said:
how can i become acceptable to rick and the reverand jackson?
I can answer that. You already are.
Everyone else,
I did want to say thank you for having the conversation. It's about time white progressives started to have it. But I like the fact that this blog includes all white folks. keep talking. It's a gift from God to be able to do so.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 20, 2008 9:12 PM
Patricia asks: There is much reference to language and rhetoric in your work but please explain the word "conflagrated" in the first paragraph. I take the word to be conflagrated, meaning that media are fanning the flames. If they fan them enough, people will, mainstream media assume, get all excited about the fire and therefore won't spend time thinking about what Obama actually said. It's really noticeable that tv hosts have made NO effort to understand what Obama was saying, nor the role played by the black church in America as the only place where African American people can express what is on their hearts and minds--in safety.
Those of us who have not experienced being treated as something less than human need to learn to listen to those who have had that experience--not so much to the words they use as to the profound pain. Listen and understand that it is true. Only when we can accept their experience as true and be with them in their pain and humiliation can we understand that their experience is both different than yours/mine--and authentic. No white man, for example, has had the experience of being stopped by the police simply because of his skin color--and has to take it because if he says anything, then for sure he'd be arrested. That happens--every night.
Long before we speak in dialogue, we must LISTEN, prayerfully--and take a long time in responding.
Posted by: bren | March 20, 2008 9:38 PM
P; thank you . i love you. i'm not very smart. i don't have a great knowledge of the bible. i love Jesus. i am a christian because i have accepted Jesus as my lord and savior. i hang out with mostly non christians because i want to tell them about Jesus. i like radio and t v preachers because that is who led me to Christ.
and a free church pastor. i have a problem with "schooled" experts like nowlin because they think they are "all knowing". i don't read where Jesus ever said that. and he was pretty hip. color means nothing. character is everything. hello rick.
Posted by: jerry | March 20, 2008 10:00 PM
color means nothing. character is everything.
It meant something even in the early church -- remember the situation with the Greek widows? And if differences mattered then -- but were successfully surmounted -- so much more is our responsibility today.
And as for my being a "'schooled' expert," I grew up in the Reformed tradition, which values learning; except for some situations in my life I might have more than a bachelor's degree today. But over the years I have read plenty and picked up some "street smarts" on the way, so you'll just have to understand that I see things working only a certain way.
But you know what? Even with all my "expertise" I'm still hungry for more knowledge. Lately I've been finding myself drawn to older men who know more than I do so that they can teach me, by example and with their experience.
Being "in love" with Jesus isn't enough -- we must know Him intimately and then serve Him. And in the process He wants us to break those barriers that we've built up to protect our artificial standing. That's why I'm so glad that this conversation is taking place; even though the white folks on this blog cannot truly know what it is to be black some of them are at least trying to learn. We will butt heads once in a while, but please, please consult us and don't think you can guess everything.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 20, 2008 11:16 PM
When did writing comments become a competition sport? What's going on here sounds like the primary campaign -- the point is to use, not understand.
What I mostly see is an absence of empathy and no ability for self-examination and insight.
What's the point of attempting to discuss the real issues of race when we can't even civilly and politely respond to one another?
Posted by: openeyes | March 21, 2008 12:13 AM
The real problem here is that ever since Bill Clinton disgraced the White House people in the USA have decided to say character does not matter. Well it does and especially in our leaders. The bible talks about choosing people to lead who have chacter. Barack Obama is a member of this mans church and has known him for 20 years. My point is he has to know this mans views and for him to stay in this church the only conclusion you can come to is is that he agrees with what the man said. Not a man who I want running to be the President of the USA. Everything now that he is doing is he is just doing it to save his political future. Barack Obama is lying through his teeth and unfortunately he can't lie like Bill and Hillary Clinton can. Without a teleprompter in front of him the man is a worse speaker then our current President.
If a white man were to have said what he said the man's future would have been over. I am sick of the double standards black people have. It is not biblical, it is not right. I was not around 50 years ago and I am sick of black people living in self pity. Racism will never end because blacks will not let it end. People like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and now Jerimiah Wright all make too much money off the race card. When will blacks quit being decieved and just grow up. GET OVER IT!
Posted by: Doug | March 21, 2008 1:33 AM
Thank you, Sondra, for this. I have just finished reading a number of the responses here and to previous posts on this issue. I'm saddened to see so many of my white sisters and brothers still can't move beyond what they think is right and attempt to see and hear the way Jesus would... I'm saddened to see so many who claim to be led by the Holy Spirit not be able to recall who Jesus was and his work on this earth.
Your words encourage me-- your decision to listen carefully embolden me. Thank you.
I'd also like to point out-- for all those who have previously requested background on the "AIDS" conspiracy referenced by Jeremiah Wright and believed by at least 20% of African-Americans in this country (that the US engineered AIDS and distributed it to Black people for the sake of control), there is a long history to that argument. However, if you want to REALLY understand the roots of Black medical paranoia towards the government, you really need to read about the Tuskeegee Experiments. The story about those broke in 1972-- the AIDS virus was discovered in the US only 11 years after that.
Posted by: k | March 21, 2008 1:40 AM
As for Blacks "getting over it" --- my brother was called a nigger for the first time when he was 6 (he's 9 now). I was called a coon for the first time when I was 15. Sorry that those are memories that stay with us, Doug-- we'll be sure to move past the self pity real soon for you.
(Sorry for the double post -- my internet's acting up!) :)
Posted by: khadijah | March 21, 2008 1:48 AM
The tenor of this discussion is very distressing to me. There are a few folks who clearly want to learn from one another, and some who are trying, but don't seem to be able to get over the hump. If we are the body of Christ who are supposed to love one another but aren't able to bring ourselves to really hear each other, how can there possibly be any meaningful dialog in the greater society?
I think that Reverend Wright and Trinity United Methodist Church have been grossly misrepresented by taking a few incendiary comments out of context. Try to look at the Trinity web site and look particularly at some of the video clips. You will notice that the church welcomes people of all colors. There is a testimonial by a white UCC minister who drives more than an hour every Sunday to attend, and reports that she always receives a warm welcome and leaves feeling blessed. Does that sound like a hate-filled church? Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times today (3/20/08) quotes Martin Marty, a well-known Lutheran theologian and pastor, about his long-term relationship with Trinity and Rev. Wright, and Marty also reports about the warm welcome that he always received there. Black liberation theology does not necessarily have to be exclusive. But if you lived in a community that has been under pressure for decades, wouldn't you find some comfort in a church that supported your community and attempted to develop community solidarity? You can build community without tearing down other people.
An early comment in this thread notes the similarity of Rev. Wright's jeremiad style to the Puritans. That is quite apropos, since the UCC is descended from the Congregationalists who look back to their Puritan Mayflower Compact as the basis of their church polity. Rev. Wright has said some things that conservative white evangelicals have said, but with a slightly different emphasis, that has caused calumny when the comments of his white counterparts have frequently been well-received by the same people who are complaining about Wright. I think that the "otherness" of Rev. Wright is a major factor in the outrage expressed at his remarks. Sometimes Wright accepts outrageously false information (America as the deliberate spreader of AIDS/HIV) as true, but I would also point out that I was informed by a conservative Lutheran pastor of a small congregation in a German village 20 years ago that this was indeed the case! A very large population around the world believes this lulu.
We should never assume that just because we don't feel or perceive things a certain way that nobody else has the right to feel that way either, particularly those of us born into the dominant culture. Some of the key assumptions that enable us to draw a conclusion are simply not accepted by other communities. Since we typically don't state our starting assumptions, much misunderstanding arises from the get-go.
Anybody who asserts that racism is completely absent from their thoughts in the United States of America is either a saint ready for canonization or completely delusional. We are drowning in racist thinking. We must constantly combat it, within ourselves. Many of the comments here smack of unconscious racism, not intentional, but due to blindness.
We are all sinners, and the battle between good and evil is not fought between "our" side, which is "good", and an "evil" opponent, but within ourselves, because we all have abundant capacity for evil. We can all learn from one another, regardless of our position on the political spectrum, if we try to listen before trying to refute one another.
Lord, grant us the eyes to see and the ears to hear one another.
Posted by: Jim | March 21, 2008 1:54 AM
Doug said:
"If a white man were to have said what he said the man's future would have been over. I am sick of the double standards black people have. It is not biblical, it is not right. I was not around 50 years ago and I am sick of black people living in self pity. Racism will never end because blacks will not let it end. People like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and now Jerimiah Wright all make too much money off the race card. When will blacks quit being decieved and just grow up. GET OVER IT!"
Me:
And the latest fool opens his big fat mouth.
I am going to try and explain this to you. I am not the one with the problem. The last time I heard a racist joke about black people (from my church no less) was 2 weeks ago. I was not telling racist jokes or even making race an issue. My white friends were.
Two When I show up to work and people tell racist jokes there I did not start it. I was not making fun of white people and then they retaliated. When I showed up and watched a Superbowl game my friends half white/ half Mexican girlfriend decided to attack me and say that I was only supporting a player because he was black and a whole host of other things. I am not the one with the problem here.
It's people like you that live in some isolated bubble that need to get over it. It's not like what Wright said was racist. He never put down white people in any of his statements. Not one, but he did make one incendiary mistake about aids but the United States has sponsored state terrorism against the Palestinians. The United States has committed genocide with many different nations and has used scientific sexual experimentation on black people. That's a historical fact. It's happened deal with it.
He did not mention Palestinian terrorism but then his point was looking at national power structures.
I wish you would grow up, grow out and actually meet more black people. Actually let's start with a little reeducation. Try reading Souls of Black Folk. Just start there and then when you are done with that we will have a discussion and go from there.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 21, 2008 2:13 AM
My white sons spent there early years on an island in the Torres Straits living in a very mixed community. They did not even recognise that some were black and some were brown and some were yellow and some were white and some were red.
I'd like to humbly suggest to Payshun and Rick that not all people of colour are the same and that not all communities (even in the US) are the same. I'd like to suggest that there will be places of relative racial harmony and that people living in those places may not get what everyone else is so upset about. So I'd suggest that Jerry's questions and commenst may have been genuine and sincere.
I'd also support Jerry in his commenst about the sophistication of language used. Much of what is written on Sojo is not readily accessible to those who are less well educated. I looked at some of their sample bible studies and most of my middle class church would struggle to follow them.
Finally I'd like to agree with Kevin that this was easily the clearest and best blog regarding the issue that I've seen. I'd add that the call to listen is not specifically race related, but is the common approach recommended anytime someone with more power is attempting to work with those who have less.
Be Blessed,
Posted by: Trent | March 21, 2008 8:30 AM
Once the term "progressive Christians" was used, that eliminated 99.9% of the Christian world from the conversation. No "progressive Christian" is ever going to have a problem with anything Barack Obama says or does or believes in.
Posted by: Todya's child | March 21, 2008 8:35 AM
"Racism will never end because blacks will not let it end. When will blacks quit being decieved and just grow up. GET OVER IT!" Doug
Doug, can you back off a couple minutes and consider what exactly is the deception you see; and then reflect on why it makes you angry (not why you think it is wrong, because we all see many wrong things that do not anger us; but what it is that violates you in a way to trigger anger). I am not telling you to not be angry. I just asking you notice it and reflect on it.
If you would be so generous in doing that--then would you join me in asking, "As a Jesus Follower who is a white man, is there a way I can lead my life and words in a way that brings healing? When I feel anger, can I use that as a window into my own spirit and allow God's precious Spirit to minister a healing peace?"
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 21, 2008 8:57 AM
Watching the comments in the columns on race and your election, has raised in my mind some aspects of the concept of original sin. Can cultures be plagued by "an original sin /sins"?
An attitude/belief system which is so deeply ingrained that members of that culture do not see it? I would suggest that they do exist.
Cultures derived from the North Western European Cultures have a problem in recognising who is family. They are based about an inheritance system where the eldest son gets the bulk of the inheritance. Sure this tends to preserve the family fortune, but does leave a lot of well educated sons with out much inheritance. This has been suggested as one of the drivers for the origin of the European empires as those sons with went to seek their fortunes and home was a bit crowded
The description and usually derisive abusive term – “Bastard” (hope that the use of this word in its correct meaning way does not trigger any censuring)indicates that just because a person was born of a coupling not recognised by the culture, that they are a 2ed or 3ed class person and certainly not worthy of any respect. This is even though the on or both biological parents of the child may be socially significant.
I can remember the discrimination of the children of single parents with either a never married parent (shock horror) or with single divorced parent in churches of my youth.
Second class person = product of a ‘wrong’ sexual act, judging the child not the parents, very just ??? Can lead to some very angry people.
A comment by David - see above, "…America of the sin of slavery--a sin that had hardly been acknowledged as such by the Puritan covenant, or indeed by most Americans prior to the Revolution…" may be consistent with this concept
Listening as I do the Australian Broadcasting Commission, I heard a discussion of the history of slavery in the middle east and the concept of family, A child sired by a slave owner from a slave should not be sold as a slave. Although that person would never have the same status as that of a child from a recognized wife, they were family. To sell such as person was considred to be selling famely. As I understand it, this was normally not the case in the British Empire nor the US where such persons could and often were sold.
Also look at the role in large Chinese family corporations where children from ‘mistress’ often become key executives/trusted employees in the core of the enterprise where non family and expats find it very difficult to be invited to participate.
I would suggest that much of the problems my culture has with ‘race’, as well as in causing the disasters of institutional abuse of children – “The Stolen Generation’, Children of the Empire etc, comes from this idea that unless a person is a proper and fit person, that they are a chattel and can be used, and abused, and discarded if necessary.
Interesting, variation in colour just recognises the latitude of where most of your ancestors resided, and is a biological adaptation for variations in UV light. Red headed persons of Scot heritage are reminded of that in Australia they need more sun block, than the originals do.
Do we suffer from significant ‘original cultural sins’?
Some of the discussions / comments seen in these columns and in the international media on race issues, suggest that the hypothesis is fairly strong.
And like the recipe for dealing with the ‘original sin’, do we require an understanding that repentance in needed, then a need to deal with it? Hopefully I will eventually be successful in dealing with this issue.
So who is my family (neighbour)?
Posted by: JohnH | March 21, 2008 9:03 AM
I'd like to suggest that there will be places of relative racial harmony and that people living in those places may not get what everyone else is so upset about.
The only place I've ever experienced what you're talking about was in school, before fifth grade, and only because children that young aren't yet conscious of the history and ramifications of race and racism. My own church is a "pocket of racial harmony"; however, before I came it actively discriminated against blacks; as a result it continually addresses the issue. Therefore, you have to commit to it, constantly, for the long haul.
Much of what is written on Sojo is not readily accessible to those who are less well educated. I looked at some of their sample bible studies and most of my middle class church would struggle to follow them.
That has less to do with Sojourners than with American evangelical Christian culture, much of which since the late 1800s has a developed a strong anti-intellectual impulse and focused on the "afterlife" rather than what God calls us to do here. Put another way, we're often not taught how to think critically and consider the long-term ramifications of the Christian faith. (I condede that my comment, to some, may come across as an insult.)
Once the term "progressive Christians" was used, that eliminated 99.9% of the Christian world from the conversation. No "progressive Christian" is ever going to have a problem with anything Barack Obama says or does or believes in.
Until the 1900s, "progressive" and "Christian" were virtually synonymous -- only with the rise of what we call fundamentalism then did there become a split. Most of the Christian schools, hospitals etc. that we know today were founded by those who could be only described as "evangelical" by our terms.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 21, 2008 10:34 AM
I have really appreciated this conversation. Much of it has made me weep.
It is very hard listening to Sean Hannity (and others) hammer away at Dr. Wright--yet I see the Spirit of Christ in him inviting him into relationship and listening. I pray for all of us, and ask all of us, to walk through the doors so graciously again offered to us in a loving gratitude towards God and each other.
I pray Dr. Wright reflect on his ministry and words. I appreciate his ministry and message. I do not hear in it what many of my brothers and siters do. I trust him, and those with whom he is in relationship with, to listen and receive anything that is his to hear. I am most concerned that the broader church hear and understand the perspective of Dr. Wright and pray the Lord grant us ears to hear.
There are things about Dr. Wright's style, ministry and theology that are really hard for many of my white Evangelical brothers and sisters to consider within the realm of reasonable possibilities. These are honest disagreements. But I feel we must be responsible for our status as part of a dominant culture with a history of oppression. Because what that means is that we have the privilege of moving through life thinking our ways are the standard. It becomes very insular, in-bred, and dangerous--because if we are deceived, we have the power (or think we do) to impose our perspective on the rest of the world.
The missions enterprise still struggles with centuries of activity that confused the good news of Jesus with western culture (and dominance).
We can't hear a minister saying "God damn America." It violates our cultural sensibilities. But the sense of violation is the same as if he used a 4-letter word equivalent to dung. It just creates a disgust in our mind/spirit: "How can that be Christian?" Reading his context and thinking Biblically backs us off a little; but then we are taken aback by the possibility America would be worthy of damnation. And we must then decide if we are willing for America to be critiqued or not. We may not like facing the level of temptation we have to elevate America to the status of idol.
We have trouble hearing that Jesus is African. How could that be? Why would someone demean the "love-for-all-Jesus" and make him into a cultural icon? And it does not occur to our dominant mindset that the white Jesus on the walls of our churches looks exactly like a cultural icon to much of the world. But not only a distant cultural icon--but a cultural idol that was used to enslave and mutilate a people.
So we hear a "Black Value System" as false idol. We hear "afrocentrism" as a false idol. And I believe we are right these can be false idols. Our sanctuaries, rituals, and theologies can become false idols. So it is certainly possible an Afrocentric Church could become a false idol. Or it could be syncretistic--unapologetically Christian and unapologetically Black.
But what our dominant white ears cannot hear is the critique that this is exactly what has happened to the white church. Not just the possibility of idolatry--but actual idolatry. And the name of that idol was "White." And what we have an even harder time hearing as a dominant culture is what idolatry looks like when it gets backed by cultural power; by the capacity to impose a view on the world; to demand all other views conform. And to even christianize a people to make them better slaves and bring them into conformity with the dominant culture.
We hear a pledge to Black Values as idolatrous and a degradation/rejection/opposition to white people. How could a Christian be so exclusive and mean?
The curse and blindness of a dominant culture is that our cultural idols are invisible to our framework of thinking. We call "White Values"--values. White history is just history. Someone teaches Black history and we ask, "Why can't we just teach history." Because when we did, we taught a history that made Black people invisible.
Teaching Black history might bring us to the point of just teaching history--and in a sense, that is the intent. Black history, is white history corrected (theoretically).
The Afrocentric Trinity Church is not closed to people who are white--it attempts to be closed to the idol named "White." As long as white Christians allow "White" to keep prowling around the streets--there will be a need for Dr. Wright's to erect a big wall named _____________ to exclued idol White.
And I believe what most opens our ears, my white Christian brothers and sisters, is greater sensitivity and sorrow to the real, on-the-ground, sin, mutilation, theft, destruction and death that the Enemy of the church continues to accomplish through idol White.
The purpose is not to become mired in guilt but to be moved to submission and love.
That sensitization would allow us to hear the message behind the AIDS comment rather than be so awfully offended by a pastor accepting a conspiracy theory.
But I am most responsible for my ears and listening to what God has for me. If no one else is changed by the conversation all have contributed to, it would be my pleasure if God chose to change me. If he would find pleasure in making me...
"...an instrument of thy peace.
Where there is hatred--let me sow love
Where there is injury--pardon
Where there is doubt--faith
Where there is despair--hope
Where there is darkness --light
Where there is sadness--joy
O, Divine Master,
Grant that I may not so much seek
To be consoled--as to console
To be understood--as to understand,
To be loved--as to love
For it is in giving--that we receive,
It is in pardoning, that we are pardoned,
It is in dying--that we are born to eternal life." Attributed to St. Francis of Assissi
Let justice roll down like a river
and righteiousness like a quiet stream.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | March 21, 2008 11:09 AM
"I'd like to humbly suggest to Payshun and Rick that not all people of colour are the same and that not all communities (even in the US) are the same. I'd like to suggest that there will be places of relative racial harmony and that people living in those places may not get what everyone else is so upset about. So I'd suggest that Jerry's questions and commenst may have been genuine and sincere."
Please understand I already know this but we don't live in those places where we get to enjoy that. I know Rick doesn't and I know I don't. Letjustice lives in an environment where he is in the struggle, Wayne and Don recognize that same struggle and Sondra wants to become more aware. Some of us are in the struggle and unfortunately that struggle, that spiritual battle is something we must fight in. I wish others would come and join us. It would make this a lot easier.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 21, 2008 12:43 PM
Doug and all,
Racism is real, and it is no less evil than when the Klan was hanging people of color in decades not too far past.
Many of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "jeremiad" sermons are squarely in the Biblical prophetic mainstream. Do you understand the Old Testament prophets'calls for justice? Most of us in white churches rarely hear prophetic sermons delivered at "full strength" that are appropriately critical of our misguided nation.
I'd like to share an experience that changed my life.
In high school, I was asked to join "A Voice in the Crowd," a presentation of black poetry and dance led by a teacher and his wife (both black), as one of the two "token" whites in a cast of about 12. As such, I read "Slow Down" ("Slow down, you're moving too fast....") and other poems representing white (and racist) views.
I will never forget reading that poem--to constant boos and jeers--during a show we did in the packed gym at Jefferson High in San Francisco one spring (it was 1968 or 1969). many members of the mostly-"minority" student body, rightfully incensed by the poem, swarmed angrily around me after our presentation. My fellow cast members (all black) came to my defense, physically shielding me from the crowd with their bodies, and made sure that I left the gym safely and in one piece.
I have always been deeply grateful for my friends' protective reaction, and for the insights I have carried with me from that experience to this day.
We all have a long, long way to go to realize God's dreams of justice and love, and until we get there, we all need to hear and listen to Jeremiah Wright's and others' prophetic condemnations of state-sponsored and state-sanctioned injustice, poverty, racism, and violence.
On this Good Friday, let us pray that we, too, may be resurrected into a New Life of justice, peace, and brother/sisterhood. Blessings,
Jon
Posted by: Jon Spangler | March 21, 2008 3:44 PM
Because I highly oppose the points of view that the person posting comments here as doug I will in the future sign my comments as d.e.sharp. I feel very sad for them and a real need to pray for those that voice the kind of intolerance of others as I just read from the other doug. I've spent a life time denouncing racism and discrimination and only want to separate myself from the possibily of mistaken identity. That being said; this subject has dictated the lion's share of conversation this week as maybe it should have, but hopefully it doesn't distract us from our rememberance of what the resurrection truly means for all of mankind. d.e.sharp formally known simply as doug.
Posted by: doug s | March 21, 2008 4:25 PM
"Many of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "jeremiad" sermons are squarely in the Biblical prophetic mainstream."
I disagree. They share vulgarity in common, but little else. Wright does not keep the law, for starters. The damnation foretold upon the nation of Israel by the prophets referred to God's chosen people. Wright believes it was brought upon a nation state.
Further, he predicts damnation based on sins the nation state has made a compelling effort to rectify. Why would God wait until now to judge us for sins that reached their zenith decades ago. At best, Wright is a hack theologian.
"I am most concerned that the broader church hear and understand the perspective of Dr. Wright and pray the Lord grant us ears to hear."
Is there any room at all in your mind for the possibility that we have ears to hear, and that those ears have revealed Wright to be in sin? Or have you simply made up your mind about it, and are asking others to simply acquiesce?
"We can't hear a minister saying "God damn America." It violates our cultural sensibilities."
Not mine, I find it predictable. I think the most powerful critique of Obama throughout this whole affair is that it has rendered him predictable. This is the same-old "America sucks" routine that is played out over and over and over, and Obama resorted to political doublespeak to extricate himself from it.
"We have trouble hearing that Jesus is African."
We do?
"So we hear a "Black Value System" as false idol."
Who said this?
"We call "White Values"--values."
Can you cite an example?
I'm inclined to agree that the church (the UCC first and foremost) has embraced the idol of self-acceptance that is a hallmark of baby boomer culture. You could call that white, and maybe that is part of the equation here.
Posted by: kevin s. | March 22, 2008 1:07 AM
Hi all,
I wasn't sure that I should comment (being an African) as Sondra has addressed herself to 'Whites Only', but other comments have already rendered that 'redundant', I guess.
So, here I am - and I quote one Sondra Shepley thus:
"Finally, we white progressive Christians should realize that this conversation will continue regardless if we choose to participate in it or not. As Obama pointed out, this is a conversation that happens with regularity around the kitchen tables of those who live outside the mainstream of white culture. If our friends who live this reality invite us into this conversation we should make it a priority. To table this discussion for another day, when we have more time or energy is to exercise the white privilege that requires us to only think about race when it convenient. Inviting you to the table to talk about these most difficult and painful experiences is not your right, but a privilege that is sacrificially offered to you for your benefit. We should all be so honored to be invited into the conversation."
I am sorry that I am so poor at following instructions, Sondra, but I do love that paragraph. It is interesting to note that you are reaching out specifically to 'white progressives'.
Well,
God bless you!
Alu
Dar es Salaam
Posted by: Robert Alu | March 22, 2008 4:04 AM
The damnation foretold upon the nation of Israel by the prophets referred to God's chosen people. Wright believes it was brought upon a nation state.
Wrong, Kevin; it went deeper than that. It was because they ignored the First Commandment and did their businsess without consulting God, in this country assuming that God would automatically sanction what they were doing.
Further, he predicts damnation based on sins the nation state has made a compelling effort to rectify. Why would God wait until now to judge us for sins that reached their zenith decades ago.
Remember, Kevin, you're not God; He does His thing in His time, and it could be that the time of reckoning is now. I remember Martin Luther King Jr. quoting someone saying, "[W]hom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." Thus the Bush/Cheney "axis of evil."
This is the same-old "America sucks" routine that is played out over and over and over, and Obama resorted to political doublespeak to extricate himself from it.
Are you really saying that America as a nation does nothing wrong? Because if you are, you're smoking something! One reason why conservative ideology is on its last legs is because it's always been so full of itself.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 22, 2008 8:34 AM
We should be building a well unarmed army of the poor and soon to be poor united by the common need for justice. Working together in common cause in a truly intergrated body politic (body of Christ for those who have been paying attention) is the only expression of "love of the other" that means a damn thing. The devastation going on in Chicago (20 kids shot down so far in March) is probably occuring in your town too. That it happens disproportionately in the African American community comes as a schock to no one.
Or perhaps you are among the rural poor subjected to a myriad of choices - like dead end jobs- dead end culture or just dead end dead military service. This is well past the point of debate the country is spiralling down. Oh yeah thanks "conservatives" who removed those pesky restrictions on finance and industry! - How's that working out for you?? Clearly relying on the market or putting all our hopes in progressive canidates is not an effective plan. Jim Wallis "Call to Coversion" was our Lenten book it confronts us once again with the cross - both its terror and its transcendant victory. As a nation we have long tolerated things as they were and justified whatever we had to do to keep it that way. Now things are not so hot and exploiting division is the old reliable fallback. It won't be ended by those engaged in it. So some are "schocked" by Rev. Wright -"Can you imagine after all we've done for his people!!" Logic and the message of the gospel may someday shake them who are in denial, but presently we should be organizing even at the expense of converting our "conservative" bretheren- They ain't listening(on the plus side I actually think a lot of them soon will)
The church has its work cut out for it - It should be organizing forums and intervention in the face dangerous ignorance - It should be a voice of abolition in the face of devasting poverty. I know it is popular to believe this can all be taken care of via blogs but if you ask me the progressive church has been generally pitiful and concilliatory to a notion of unity with a game playing enemy at the expense of its critical task -ie. bringing the kingdom of God to earth. If the treatment of the poor in society is as urgent and world saving as Christ seemed to think we would do well to put all our effort there.
Finally, lets admit that a singular individual no matter how brilliant is going to lead us to the promised land - that no brilliant young leader can serve two masters at once - its still God or Mammon. If the glue holding the country together is simply wet and sticky(liberal guilt?) maybe justice as outlined in the gospel would be a better mix. Happy Easter.
Posted by: ange willis | March 22, 2008 9:25 AM
"Further, he predicts damnation based on sins the nation state has made a compelling effort to rectify. Why would God wait until now to judge us for sins that reached their zenith decades ago. At best, Wright is a hack theologian."
You really need to study old testament prophecy a lot better. Israel and by extension Judah believed the same thing. Their sins were decades old and were not fully applicable to the time and yet second Isaiah and Amos were the folks that held them to account. God recognizes that sin is perpetual, that the ease of today is often times payed for by the injustices of yesterday. We are all connected and sometimes that connection and sin pass down the generations, meaning God and will judge accordingly when he wants to. There is no shelf life on genocide, racism...
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 22, 2008 2:31 PM
"Wrong, Kevin; it went deeper than that."
What went deeper than what? Can you make an effort to use fewer pronouns? I have no idea what you are saying.
"It was because they ignored the First Commandment and did their businsess without consulting God,"
They consulted false gods, for the most part. But what does this have to do with my contention that the original poster is confusing the nation of Israel with a nation state?
"Remember, Kevin, you're not God; He does His thing in His time, "
Which is after a nation has made substantial efforts to repent? Is there any scriptural example of this taking place?
""[W]hom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." Thus the Bush/Cheney "axis of evil.""
Huh?
"Are you really saying that America as a nation does nothing wrong?"
I don't see how you concluded that from my statement.
"Because if you are, you're smoking something!"
Nice drug reference.
"One reason why conservative ideology is on its last legs is because it's always been so full of itself."
Heard you the first time.
"God recognizes that sin is perpetual, that the ease of today is often times payed for by the injustices of yesterday."
God recognizes that sin is erased by the grace of Christ crucified. How does the concept of post-generational sin gel with the idea that Christ died for individual sins? And again, this does not contend with the question of whether the nation of Israel is comparable to a modern nation state.
Posted by: kevin s. | March 23, 2008 12:40 AM
"God recognizes that sin is erased by the grace of Christ crucified. How does the concept of post-generational sin gel with the idea that Christ died for individual sins? And again, this does not contend with the question of whether the nation of Israel is comparable to a modern nation state."
Sin is not erased by the grace of God. That line of thinking is problematic for several reasons. One it assumes that the cross illiminated our ability to sin. That is truly not the case. We must ask forgiveness and forgive others for their sins regularly in order for us to know grace. Two it distorts the truth of our falleness and neediness on God. If what you wrote were true we would no longer need him.
The cross illiminated sin's ability to condemn and control us but it did not erase it. It was not designed to do that. The mystery and power of the cross and the resurection is that they embue mankind with the love and power to live redeemed lives separated from sin's ability to kill and destroy. God's grace is powerful. It can compel us to not sin but it's greatest gift and power is of his love for us to be real and for us to realize and live in our own perpetual weakness so that he can shine through us even more. To paraphrase the greatest prophet in history "He must increase while I decrease."
Christ died for all sin, corporate and individual. He died for the nationalistic fear mongering Jews that served Rome. He died for imperialistic Rome, he also died for John, Mary, Martha and his other followers that loved him. He died for all of it so that all of it, the entire world would be redeemed.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 23, 2008 12:47 PM
" One it assumes that the cross illiminated our ability to sin."
Right. Poor choice of words. But grace does cover sin, erasing it from God's memory. How do you square this with the idea that God will bring damnation upon an entire nation state?
"We must ask forgiveness and forgive others for their sins regularly in order for us to know grace."
"The cross illiminated sin's ability to condemn and control us but it did not erase it."
Do you mean it "eliminated" or "illuminated"? If the former, I agree with you.
"Christ died for all sin, corporate and individual."
Correct, and I think the concept of God damning America (or any nation, really) ignores this. Faithful, non-racist, Christians died in the 9/11 bombing. Even more lost loved ones, their livelihood, etc...
In light of the cross, where do you find merit in Wright's theology?
He died for the nationalistic fear mongering Jews that served Rome. He died for imperialistic Rome, he also died for John, Mary, Martha and his other followers that loved him. He died for all of it so that all of it, the entire world would be redeemed.
"
Posted by: kevin s. | March 23, 2008 7:09 PM
"But grace does cover sin, erasing it from God's memory."
Well that verse is actually poetry. it speaks of the length God will go in sparing his people condemnation. Nothing can be erased from God's memory. He would no longer be omniscient if he did forget anything. That would mean he is no longer God at least the God I know.
"How do you square this with the idea that God will bring damnation upon an entire nation state?"
Read Revelation and tell me what you think after reading God damning nations, churches... I think there is a disconnect for conservative Christians when it comes to understanding how damnation and condemnation work. Eternal condemnation works in some mysterious way. It's not fully explained. But there is temporal judgement for sin as well so when nations perpetrate evil acts and continue to do so God judges and condemns them. Sometimes that can be in plagues or a lack of crops or total destruction.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 23, 2008 7:28 PM
I forgot to address that. Thanks for the spelling check it's eliminated.
"In light of the cross, where do you find merit in Wright's theology?"
Wright's theology is correct according to biblical prophetic models. Every prophetic book and prophet said similar things. Exodus to Revelation reveals a prophetic tradition of God judging the nations when they act wickedly. His assertion that God could or should damn the United States is actually biblically accurate when taken in context.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 23, 2008 7:33 PM
They consulted false gods, for the most part.
But, in the process, they remade themselves as God. That their worship was directed outward was only trivia.
I don't see how you concluded that from my statement.
When you made the following quote: "This is the same-old "America sucks" routine ... " No -- we're talking about people who saying, "We should wake up and face our sins, or else." Not that America is bad but that America has done some bad things. There's a difference.
God recognizes that sin is erased by the grace of Christ crucified. How does the concept of post-generational sin gel with the idea that Christ died for individual sins?
Because that's not what the cross was about. Ultimately it was about reconciliation with God and His people with each other, as His intent always was to reserve a people for Himself that would live by His law and in the process bless the entire world. Jesus doesn't save people for their own sake; He gives us a job to do.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 23, 2008 10:59 PM
"Nothing can be erased from God's memory. "
For damnation purposes, sin can be erased. That is my point, and I think I have been clear on it by this point.
"Read Revelation"
I've read it. What passages lead you to believe there is collective damnation of nation states?
"But there is temporal judgement for sin as well so when nations perpetrate evil acts and continue to do so God judges and condemns them."
There is? What do you mean?
Posted by: kevin s. | March 24, 2008 12:16 AM
I viewed some of the comments as unfourtanate and beleive they were said out of deep frustration and anger. I have said as much but fourtanetly I do not have the stature to have every comment recorded.
Martin Luther King Junior dealt with the same issues and I don't recall him taking the approach reported by Rev. Wright. But King was killed in his youth and who knows what 40 additional years of racial unjustice might have done to him.
All Christain's and especially those in leadership need to be told when they step over the line ... the path (the way) is over here.
Perhaps we all need to pray more for pastors in the world ( and our selves) that the Holy Spirit would guide them and counsel them and ocassionally pull them aside ... what is happening here ... do you realize what you just said ... could you have addressed this more effectively.
I forgive Rev. Wright and my hope is that I am also forgiven when I do unwise things that do not reflect well on Christ or God's Kingdom.
Posted by: Rick | March 24, 2008 12:27 AM
""We should wake up and face our sins, or else." "
Very few have read this into Wright's commentary. This is an exceedingly generous interpretation, given the context.
"Because that's not what the cross was about."
Because what's not what the cross was about? Your use of nebulous antecedents are making it very difficult for me to decipher your argument.
"Ultimately it was about reconciliation with God and His people with each other"
But it wasn't just about reconciling Israel, which was my point.
"Jesus doesn't save people for their own sake; He gives us a job to do."
Okay, but how does that address my question?
Posted by: kevin s. | March 24, 2008 12:45 AM
Martin Luther King Junior dealt with the same issues and I don't recall him taking the approach reported by Rev. Wright. But King was killed in his youth and who knows what 40 additional years of racial unjustice might have done to him.
He was moving in that direction -- in (I think) 1966 he gave a speech in which he said that "America is going to hell."
""We should wake up and face our sins, or else." "
Very few have read this into Wright's commentary. This is an exceedingly generous interpretation, given the context.
Nope -- it is the context. Remember, Wright never said "God damn America," full stop. As I said on another blog, folks got PO'ed at him, really, because his message is that conservative America isn't all that and, as a result, it deliberately left out his modifiers.
"Jesus doesn't save people for their own sake; He gives us a job to do."
Okay, but how does that address my question?
You asked the wrong question -- He died not for individual sins but to change people's sin nature. Before someone meets Christ sin is all he/she does ("Everything that does not come from faith is sin").
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 24, 2008 8:25 AM
This conversation, so far, has been quite theoretical. For the record, I am white, grew up middle class, went to college, worked as an engineer. In other words, except for being female, I was part of the privileged class.
I would like to know what individuals have done to increase their own understanding of what it is like to be of another race, gender, or economic group in this country. For example, I was privileged to have an older black woman say yes when I asked if she would be willing to talk to me about what it was like growing up in the South before the Civil Rights movement. I learned a lot. At the same time, I learned only a small taste of the reality. I have been in groups where men come away from the discussion completely blown away by how much time and energy women spend thinking and acting on personal safety - they have no idea until they listen to a group of women talking without the men interrupting. Each of these are small examples of increasing understanding of someone else's reality. The more small pieces of understanding we each accumulate, the closer we get to truly walking a mile in each other's shoes.
It is not up to the minority person to reach out to the dominate culture, it is up to the dominate culture people to reach out to the minority, or less privileged, people to increase understanding. And there is almost always someone who is less privileged than you. If you are white, talk to a person of color. If you are middle class, talk to someone poor. If you have a job, talk to someone jobless. If you have a place to live, talk to a street person. If you were born in the U.S., talk to an immigrant.
What have you personally done lately to reach out and increase your understanding of someone else's reality? Isn't it about time that you do so?
Posted by: Diana Neff | March 24, 2008 11:29 AM
Diana --
Actually, one of the more interesting things I do is ask people about what it was like where they group up racially. Usually asking about the early 70s covers a lot of their experience. I have found that every neighborhood seemed to handle it differently.
In my own situation, I grew up in a white flight neighborhood, and kids were bussed to different schools and we were all integrated- probably as early as 1968. The flight started early too -- adn continues to this day. In my husband's home town, despite changes in laws, there was no bussing and they remained segregated through his high school graduation (it was a small town).
If we really want to know where each other is coming from, then we should probably know something.
When I was finishing up my degree a few years ago, we studied 12 Angry Men. The students in their early 30s didn't know that blacks couldn't sit on juries back in the day. They almost didn't believe me when I told them. (We saw the old version and a newer version that had a more politically correct mix of jurers.)
Obviously, this is not something I ask at first meeting, but with any group that becomes pretty good friends, I do have the conversation. Maybe some of those people who seem so ignorant come by it fairly honestly.
Posted by: frankie | March 24, 2008 1:08 PM
"For damnation purposes, sin can be erased. That is my point, and I think I have been clear on it by this point."
You have been but I don't know if I have been as clear on my point. I don't like the word "erased." When I read it feels dishonest. I like the word cleansed or purged. It's more in keeping with prophetic tradition. Also condemnation does not have to be purely eternal damnation. Condemnation can include and does include national destruction. Just look at the Philistines, they were completely wiped out. They know longer exist. God condemned them to be wiped out without saying anything about what would happen to them eternally.
Any time you see the word "Woe" in Revelation it's a curse. It is not a warning or a word of lament but a curse.
But let's look at Revelation 14:6-8
6And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people;
7and he said with a loud voice, "Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters."
8And another angel, a second one, followed, saying, "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who has made all the nations drink of the wine of the passion of her immorality."
6 and 7 Reveal the fact that God judges corporately, nations, people groups, tribes, language groups all face his judgement. The entire world is judged in their own kinship group while he simultaneously judging the entire world.
Revelation 15:
3And they sang the song of Moses, the bond-servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying,
"Great and marvelous are Your works,
O Lord God, the Almighty;
Righteous and true are Your ways,
King of the nations!
4"Who will not fear, O Lord, and glorify Your name?
For You alone are holy;
For ALL THE NATIONS WILL COME AND WORSHIP BEFORE YOU,
FOR YOUR RIGHTEOUS ACTS HAVE BEEN REVEALED."
Look Corporate Salvation. In these verses the nations see God's righteousness and they worship. God is not content to just save individual people, he wants to save groups within those nations and when possible the entire nation.
Revelation 16 speaks of corporate discipline/judgement/condemnation.
1Then I heard a loud voice from the temple, saying to the seven angels, "Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God."
2So the first angel went and poured out his bowl on the earth; and it became a loathsome and malignant sore on the people who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped his image.
Look more corporate judgement, for the earth and the people that worshiped the Beast. You will see a similar them in this chapter ending in verse 12. He is not just singling out a few individuals but he is judging an entire people group. This group worships the beast, but nowhere has he sent them to hell (whatever that means.)
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 24, 2008 2:04 PM
"What have you personally done lately to reach out and increase your understanding of someone else's reality? Isn't it about time that you do so?"
I am leaving those questions to the white folks.
p
Posted by: Payshun | March 24, 2008 2:09 PM
Thank you very much Sondra! You rock my world. May God always guide us and grant us the wisdom and courage to love our brothers and sisters regardless of our differences. :)
Posted by: Michael Yun | March 24, 2008 3:52 PM
Sondra,
I appreciate your tone of humility and true maturity. As a black man, I almost thought that white people in America today, especially with this latest push to join the "new school" of racial dialogue, had succeeded in rushing past history and black suffering in the name of being "hopeful". It seems to me that because of how morally bankrupt, cruel, and uncivilized racism and slavery is, whites in America are jumpy about avoiding accountability for historical realities and are quick to exploit the chronological distance between this former American civil order and the emerging civil order in America. This is a desperate and unnecessary move because the key to getting past this evil chapter of America is to own it, repent from it, and work to restore what was injured by the sin committed. Many faith communities will find this process described to be familiar to them.
A recent conversation with a white, Jewish woman required me to distinguish for her my concern for white accountability and repentance from being in the "black and angry" box. John Perkins, many white evangelicals (including Jim Wallis) and many black "new schoolers" (Christian and otherwise) on race in America are flirting with dismissing the historical suffering and documented injustice of being black in America. How so? By grabbing for progress and future blessings (through a particular interpretation of salvation, Barack Obama, Ward Connerly, and other means) without honest self-assessment and repentance. This whole issue has so many subtleties today that if black and white people are not prophetic and discerning, the failures and losses of integration to black life will be further compounded in the name of progress, the future, and "hope." We must honestly and precisely deal with race in America and everything that has transpired because of American racism before we can tear off into the future, lest the “future” will be the past and the present with even more complexity and subtlety.
A final thought I want to mention is that Monday night, on CNN, they ran a story about a representative of Germany giving a speech to a Jewish group. This German woman sought to show repentance and contriteness with words such as “we bow before you” and “we bow before the survivors of the holocaust”. After this story, CNN returned to discussing Dr. Wright’s famed remarks. All of this together made me wonder, did anyone even notice that the German-Jewish story and the Wright-racism in America story are related? Will America and whites in America ever express repentance and contriteness to Africans in America in the way that Germany expressed it to those Jews? Six million human beings is horrific, but what about the untold number of human beings lost in the middle passage, in slavery, in resisting slavery and seeking escape, by lynching, and all the systematic American annihilation efforts perpetrated on African American human beings? Sondra, your comments bring hope to me. Your honesty and willingness to see the world and human living from the perspective of those whose experience you do not, and never will, share gets me fired up, and ready to go.
Posted by: Marcus Croom | March 25, 2008 11:19 AM
I just came to the US a year ago, I am a black African missionary married to a white American. I studied history and international relations. I also studied a bit of American history and American diplomacy. As i read the different websites and posts, I am so shocked at the ignorance many Americans have about how others around the world view them or even some of the activities of American diplomacy around the world. Most Americans do not even sit down and ask themselves why did the events of 9/11 happen? Most people are very supercial and let others do their research for them. Very often this leads to deception. There is a saying that when two elephants are fighting, the grass suffers. Many countries suffered when the US had the cold war with the USSR. You just need to read about the activities of the CIA. They recently release what the agency called "family jewels" about their dids around the world. Well I don't want to derail this very good discussion about reconcilliation about race. But thought it's important that people face the important question about "Why do they hate Americans?" Even though i am not an American, I love this country and most Americans i have met are very kind and hard working people. I have been blessed by this country. i became a Christian because someone from this country dared to obey Jesus' command of the great commission. My wife and son are from here. I feel so sick when I move around Africa see people with Bin Laden's shirts. Some of these people feel America is a bully because of it's foriegn policy.
Posted by: Efi | March 26, 2008 1:50 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?