Rocks, Martin & Psalm 62

Rocks & Martin

In February 1968, the prospect of death looming large in his life, Martin Luther King, Jr took a sabbath with Ralph Abernathy in Acapulco, Mexico. Around 3 am, Abernathy awoke to find that King was not in his bed. Frightened, he went into the living area of their hotel suite and discovered that King was on the balcony in his pajamas, staring into the darkness at the ocean.

Abernathy approached King, "Martin, what are you doing out here this time of the night? What is bothering you?" With his eyes still fixed on the ocean and his ears tuned to the roar of the waves, King whispered, "You see that rock out there?" "Oh, sure I see it," Abernathy replied.  "How long to you think its been there?" King asked. "I don't know. I guess centuries and centuries. I guess God put it there."

"Well, what I am thinking about?" King said softly while Abernathy remained silent. And King began to sing, "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; let me hide myself in thee." In his hour of trial and darkness and waves crashing in on him, King could only think about trusting in God. Only God could provide him with the peace he so desperately needed. So when he saw that rock it reminded him of the powerful words of the Psalms put to music by Augustus Toplady in 1776.  Singing the song brought a little shalom in the storm. 

A basic element in the Psalms is their expression of continual, total and exclusive trust in God alone. God is the problem. But God is the solution. The element of trust dominates our text for meditation, Psalm 62. This theme is present in many others too such as Pss 4, 16, 27 and 131.  Yet for me Ps 62 stands out.  It is expresses the firm hope in God's ability to enable his faithful ones to become "more than conquerors."

God ALONE is Trustworthy (62.1-7)

Psalm 62 is easily divided into two major parts: 1) the first eight verses are the psalmists expession of trust in God and 2) verses 9-12 are the psalmist's "homily" to the gathered people of God to trust in Yahweh as well.

"My soul finds rest in God alone; my salvation 
comes from him.
He alone is my Rock and my Salvation; he is my Fortress, I will never be
shaken" (vv. 1-2)

In the midst of the turbulence of 1968, Dr. King found that the only way for him to find shalom was to imagine himself secure in the "Rock of Ages" so our psalmist does the same. God is the sources of all peace and security. These are not words that are spoken naively or rashly.  The psalmist has meditated on his well-being and realizes that all is evanescent except God. God alone is the ground of stability in his life - the Prophet of Justice learned this through real tribulation, just as the psalmist did.

Notice the metaphors the psalmist uses to talk of his God, "my Rock, my Salvation, my Fortress." All of these are images of confidence, strength and security. The ancient Hebrews, unlike the Greeks, did not talk about God in mere abstraction. They talked about God in concrete, observable and vivid ways. They also talked about God in highly personal terms. He is not someone way "out there" who may or may not know that we (and me) are around.  He is not just concerned with the corporate people of God. He is concerned with me.  He is MY rock! He is MY salvation! he is MY fortress! Therefore I shall not be moved. What Yahweh has done in the past for the whole of Israel by redeeming them from slavery he does in our own lives as members of the covenantal family.  

"How long will you assault a man? Would all of you throw him down -- this leaning wall, this tottering fence?
They fully intend to topple him from his lofty place; they take delight in lies.
With their mouths they bless, but in their hearts they curse." (vv. 3-4)

Here we finally get a window into the crises of the psalmist. It is a struggle we all face sooner or later.  People - family, friends, brothers and sisters - people are friendly to our face.  They pretend to be concerned with our well being.  They act the friend.  But they honestly would like nothing more than to see us fail! To see us stumble! And they would actively take part in our ruin! That kind of "persecution" is many times as painful as public ridicule precisely because these folks were imagined to be family or friends. Sometimes they are just simply our enemy.  The psalmist bemoans the fact that they assail him with their double tongued behavior.  They bless him verbally but curse him in their heart.  Sound familiar?? Sadly this takes place in God's Family even yet!

It is interesting to note that even though the Lord is his mighty fortress, physical and verbal attacks are nonetheless undeniable real and quite painful.  Being the Lord's servant does not makes us immune to suffering and injustice in this fallen age (cf. 2 Tim. 3.12).  We might even argue that it heightens it.  Look at Jesus, the purest of Servants of the Lord.  Did he not suffer the very things the people of God confess and lament in Psalm 62? God was His rock. God was His salvation. God was His fortress.  And he still died on that ignominious Tree for the likes of you and me.

"Find rest, O my soul, in GOD ALONE; my hope comes from him.
HE ALONE is my rock and my salvation; he is my fortress, I will not be shaken.
My salvation and my honor depend upon God; he is my mighty rock, my refuge"
(vv. 5-7)

In these verses, our psalmist engages in what we call today "self-talk." There is no denying, and the Bible does not deny, that the fallen world is tough to live in. But God is with us. Our minstrel recalls fundamental concepts for our own peace and security.  Do not put trust in ourselves or others.  Real "manliness" does not come from bulging biceps, fearlessness in the face of enemy bullets, or perseverance, nor in our intellectual capacity or imagined doctrinal precision.  This is in stark contrast of the "world" which claims that a "real man" depends on no one and nothing except himself!  Yet this psalmist (David??) declares that his hope is in God ALONE. It is  not in himself.  It is not in his mighty men. It is not even in his ability to pray or worship correctly. It is in Yahweh. Here is the key to being hidden in the Rock of Ages.

The Singer's faith in God is moving and very challenging.  Because the Lord is our salvation, we can remain steadfast in our obedience.  We will not be shaken. Yet it some how all depends upon God. He alone can provide the way out of the dreadful situations we find ourselves entrapped in. 

The word "salvation" is a multifaceted word in the Scriptures. Sometimes it means deliverance from Sin, from enemies, or even death.  All of these are dimensions of the biblical doctrine and we need to not think one is more "Spiritual" than the other.  These dimensions are all embraced by Jesus and they should be by us.  But in Ps 62 "salvation" means deliverance from the situation that has ensnared the psalmist.  It is a real crises.  This understanding of "salvation" is important to us in our contemporary situation too.  Many folks have lost a conception of what "Sin" is (including Christians), but we all know what it means to have an aimless or miserable life! We know of lives that seem to be devoid of purpose and meaning.  When Christ died on the Cross it was not merely to save us from Sin, though he did do that. According to the apostle Peter, Christ redeemed us from "the EMPTY WAY OF LIFE handed down to you from your forefathers" (1 Pt 1.18).  This is incredibly Good News. Our God is a God of salvation.  Salvation that impacts and transforms the here and now of life and not just when we die.  Our God desires the fullest of lives possible.  Our psalmist embraces these truths with gusto.  So should we.

But the psalmist stresses that a good life is from God. It is his grace.  Without God life has no meaning or purpose. We are nothing without Him.  He testifies "my honor depends on God." My stature is nothing outside of the Lord.  I might as well have never existed, for human honor and worth derive form the Creator God.

Don't Trust in Humans (62.8-12)

"Trust in him at all times, O people, pour out your hearts to him, for God is 
our refuge.
Lowborn men are but a breath [lit. 'vapor'], the highborn are but a lie; if 
weighed on a balance, they are nothing; together they are only a
breath [lit. 'vapor'].
Do not trust in extortion or take pride in stolen goods; though your riches 
increase, do not set your heart on them" (vv. 8-10)

Our psalmist now becomes the teacher of the Gathered People of God.  He addresses them rather than himself.  He exhorts us to trust in, to have faith in, God at all times for he alone is our refuge. We should "pour out our hearts to him." This is a call to prayer! A call to dependence rather than independence! When we feel assailed we seek instinctively our "refuge."

What the psalmist wants, perhaps, more than all else is not to fall into the trap of trusting in fallen humans And that includes ourselves. The description of humanity in vv 9-10 is in stark contrast to the description of God in vv 5-7.  God is permanent and unshakable, he is a Rock.  He is reliable so he is my Salvation.  He is strong as a Fortress that cannot be breached.  Yet humanity whether a poor pauper or a rich bureaucrat is a wisp, a vapor, and "a lie."  Vivid imagery captures the human dilemma here. Our teacher says if you take both the rich and the poor and put them in one pan of a balance scale and nothing in the other pan they would fly up because "nothing" would weigh more than them combined.  We cannot trust in humanity for our security and stability or our peace.  We will find no rest there.  Those who have done so have learned, as the psalmist has, that humanity will always let us down.  God will never desert us.  He is faithful.  That is the Good News of Psalm 62.

The Bible is full of exhortations not to trust in humanity.  Paul in Romans 3.10-18 creates a collage of citations from the Hebrew Bible saying it is the gospel truth ...

"There is no one righteous, not even one there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of shalom they do not know there is no fear of God before their eyes."

Not a pretty picture of humanity painted by Paul. Humans are liars and untrustworthy.  Only God is faithful so put it all in him.  Our singing teacher reminds us that money and power are common sources of human trust for safety and security too.  But he warns that trusting in apparent might rather than in the right.

Two Things to Take to the Bank (62.11-12)

"One thing God has spoken, two things I have heard: that you, O God, are
strong and that you, O LORD are loving. 
Surely you will reward each person according to what he has done."

The psalm employs a Hebrew idiom, "One thing ... two things" which simply means "repeatedly," or "over and over and over and over." The psalmist closes his song to the church by sharing the testimony of all who have walked with God, he is Strong and he is Loving! These are two things that are certain as reality itself.  God is Strong!  God is Loving!! You can hang your life on these two truths.  You can live your life even in the darkness holding onto these fundamental truths.  They are more than "truths" they are simply reality.  "This I have heard, this I know ... "This is the basis of his faith in God delivering him from the straits he is in.  God has the power and God has the motivation to do it.

Because God has the power and the motivation to right the wrongs of this fallen world - he will do just that.  One day God will judge each man and woman.  He will measure our deeds. The very deeds of evil by you, me, everyone ... the whispers, the lies, the double-mindedness God will bring out.  This is in fact ground for praise in the psalm.  It is not the psalmist's place to exact vengence on his enemies.  God will take care of that on that Day. And he will do it perfectly.  This is why Christians look forward to the Day of Christ's appearing. All will be set right. The ones who have put their faith in his faithfulness will be rescued by the angels of God and will greet the King.  Trust in God. If we have shalom and peace in our lives we must give God control.

So I concluded these musings on this amazing text with a call to simply rest in God.  In Good times.  In Bad times.  We like Martin Luther King, Jesus, and the psalmist before them can lift our voices and sing, "Rock of Ages, cleft for me; let me hide myself in Thee!"

Read More

Stories of Grace, Stories of Forgiveness: Frederick Douglass Affirms the Humanity of a Slaveholder

Frederick Douglass is one of the greatest Americans to have ever lived. Far greater than Malcolm X. Greater still than Martin Luther King Jr. His name should roll off our tongues with the ease of George Washington, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. Perhaps even faster than the latter two. I place him in that elite category of Founding Fathers: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. They go together like Moses, Aaron and Miriam.

Douglass' story is sadly not one that is told as frequently and deeply as it should. We have much to learn from this man among men. He wrote his story three times in Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave; My Bondage and My Freedom; and Life and Times of Frederick Douglass. In 1991 William S. McFeely published an extensive Pulitzer winning biography titled simply Frederick Douglass.

Colonel Lloyd

Born in about 1818 (Douglass was not sure the exact date) to a slave who had been used for the lustful gratification of the the "master" of the plantation. This was not exactly an unusual thing to occur in slavery. Douglass would eventually become the slave of Colonel Edward Lloyd who owned three to four hundred slaves in Maryland. He would be sent off to Lloyd's son in law, Thomas Auld from whom he escaped in 1838.

Sixty-three years after his escape from human bondage on an early June morning in 1881 the world had changed greatly.  The slavery Douglass knew as a young man was gone.  The nation had been bloodied by Civil War. Douglas was known internationally and was a powerful moral force in the United States. On that morning the former fugitive slave, now Marshall of Washington D.C, was aboard a cutter heading up the Wye River off Chesapeake Bay. His mind could not have but recalled the landscape he had written about in his 1845 Narrative. Suddenly Douglass caught "the stately chimneys of the grand old mansion." The mansion of none other than Colonel Lloyd. Writing in his 1893 Life and Times, "I had left there a slave and returned a freeman; I had left there unknown to the outside world, and returned well known."

How would the family of Colonel Lloyd receive Douglass? How would Douglass act toward this family who had grow rich off the oppressed? How can the slave and the former oppressors come together? Is it possible for redemption to take place? Is it possible for reconciliation to be a reality in the face of the the grossest evil? The greatness of Douglass tells us that yes it can be done. Those committed to God's good news for his fractured creation can indeed voice the blessed word, yes! it is possible! That is our word to the world bleeding from self-inflicted wounds. 

Howard Lloyd, the great grandson of the colonel, greeted the elderly Douglass with as "hearty a welcome as we could have wished." Saying his father was away on business, Howard offered to escort Frederick Douglass around the palatial grounds. Testifying to the powerful memories that flooded his mind he writes, "I found the buildings, which gave it the appearance of a village, nearly all standing, and I was astonished to find that I had carried their appearance so accurately in my mind for so many years."

In a detail that is possibly overlooked but fraught with meaning for Douglass he saw the old room off the kitchen where he had slept in a bag. Only the dirt floor had disappeared under wooden planks. This room was Douglass' introduction to the barbarity of slavery. From that room he had witnessed "Aunt Esther" with "wrists firmly tied" above her head. The top of her body stripped bare as she was whipped by Colonel Lloyd till she bled profusely on the ground below. He cries of mercy indelibly etched into his young mind for eternity. Of it, Douglass wrote in his Narrative "I shall never forget it whilist I remember anything." But now Douglass was standing in that same room of bitter memories with Howard Lloyd.

Howard took Douglass next to the family cemetery. As they enter the grounds Howard offers Frederick a "bouquet of flowers and evergreens from different graves around us."  Douglass is so moved by the gesture that he would bring it back to his home in Washington and preserve them as a testimony that grace can exist even in the most horrid of places. What memories and thoughts passed through the old orator's mind as he stood over the grave of his former tormentor we do not know. But in that moment he forgave both him and his family.

After the walk through the garden of tombstones Lloyd took Frederick into the mansion itself and onto the verandah. Here the former slave whose flesh bore testimony to the whip was now at ease in the old master's chair and receiving the greatest of courtesy from the family that he had excoriated as examples of the horrid evil of slavery.  And they where! Yet forgiveness was able to allow the victim and victimizer to fellowship in shalom as a testimony of the possibilities of God's vision.

What does forgiveness look like? Douglass narrates for us a beautiful picture of what true and costly reconciliation looks like.  Forgiveness looks like Douglass and Howard standing over the grave of the Colonel and recognizing in one another a genuine fragility of humanity. No more and no less.

Captain Auld

Frederick Douglass relates another tale of forgiveness in his Life and Times.  Sadly, McFreely's excellent biography barely touches on either of these powerful episodes. The example of Douglass makes no sense in a secularist worldview.  Douglass was adamant that the USA could not afford to forget the horror of slavery.  To do so would invite the resurrection of tyranny.  He was a prophet because tyranny was revived because the horror of slavery minimized (as in Gone with the Wind a pure apologetic for the Old South). Even today most Americans simply do not realize that the legacy of slavery is around us each and every day.

However, Douglass was for forgiveness. He showed us, white and black, how we can still embrace the humanity of those around us. Douglass tells us that he received an invitation from old Captain Auld (Lloyd's son-in-law and a former master) who was now dying and confined to bed. The fiery orator was stunned by the invitation.

"To me, Captain Auld had sustained the relation of master - a relation which I held in extremest abhorence ... He had struck down my personality, had subjected me to his will, had me property of my body and soul ... I, on my part, had traveled through the length and breadth of this country and of England holding up this conduct of his ... to the reprobation of all men who would hear my words."

He could have easily refused to go. Most of us probably would have been among those who counseled against it. But Douglass agreed to visit Captain Auld. But why? "He was to me no longer a slaveholder either in fact or in spirit, and I regarded him as I did myself, a victim of the circumstances of birth, education, law, and custom" (my emphasis).

When Douglass entered the elderly man's room they "addressed each other simultaneously, he calling me 'Marshal Douglass' and I, as I had always called him, 'Captain Auld.'"  Just as he had been moved by Howard's symbolic gift of flowers - a gesture of letting old hate die - so now Douglass is moved to the core of his being that his old master called him "Marshal."  The greatness of this apostle of liberty is on display as he responded to Auld in pure grace. "Hearing myself called by him 'Marshall Douglass,' I instantly broke up the formal nature of the meeting by saying, 'not Marshal, but Frederick to you as formerly."

Anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear recognizes immediately the risk Douglass is taking here. Risk to his own personhood. He risks his personal dignity.  He invites his former master to address him in familiar terms, terms closely tied to his former identity. So dangerously close to - boy! He is taking a political risk here with his black constituency.  But the former slave was more concerned in modeling the way forward to an America that was paralyzed by bigotry.  He allowed himself to be vulnerable even to Captain Auld because he saw that Auld was the victim of prejudice himself. Douglass gave him forgiveness. His forgiveness allowed him to see a person rather than simply a slaveholder.

As the visit came to a close Douglass relates,

"We shook hands cordially and he, having been long stricken with palsy, shed tears as men thus deeply afflicted will do when excited by any deep emotion. The sight of him ... his tremulous hands constantly in motion, and all the circumstances of his condition affected me deeply, and for a time chocked my voice and made me speechless."

The greatest orator in American history is speechless!

The scene is incredibly powerful. I believe that the former slave rendered mute by the trembling tears of his former master is intended to move us in the same way. Douglass in no way forgot slavery. He in no way forgot evil. He forgave a man who committed evil. His gift of the grace of forgiveness affirmed the humanity of even Auld. This kind of behavior does not make sense in our world but Douglass knew that such behavior was the only hope for the future.The spirit of forgiveness is the Spirit of Life.

Forgiveness, Gift of Grace

How I wish we knew more about such giants as Frederick Douglass. He has words to say to America about race relations today.  He has words to say to the rich and the poor. He has words to say to anyone who has been wronged, seriously wronged, by another human being.  We can learn what genuine "righteous indignation" looks like in his immortal "What to the American Slave is Fourth of July?" We can learn from him the passion of simply wanting to have an education.  What a lesson that is for today's abysmally apathetic moms, dads and kids on education. We can learn from him the danger of collective amnesia. But we can also learn from him that even the grossest offenders and the weakest of victims can in fact forgive one another.  Justice is not simply about evening the score (ohhh that is what the world believes justice is). Justice bears fruit in shalom and reconciliation. This is a message that even Christians need to hear. Perhaps Christians most of all!

The stories of grace and forgiveness that Frederick Douglass models exhibit three biblical truths regarding the notion of forgiveness as it is put into practice.

1) Douglass rediscovered the humanity of the person who hurt him. As we practice the Spiritual gift of forgiveness we likewise must discover or rediscover the fallen, defaced and even broken humanity in the person who has wronged us. This is often a difficult and painful process because our own fallenness will want to defend our reasons for denying the essential humanity of the person who has grossly wronged us.  This is why the picture of Douglass over the grave of Colonel Lloyd is so gripping.

2) Douglass surrendered his right to get even with the tyrants. This is fundamental to biblical forgiveness. Douglass did not deny the pain, the suffering, nor the barbarism of slavery.  That is in fact the very evil needing to be forgiven. No, forgiveness affirms the bitter reality that the wrong has in fact been committed. Rather in forgiveness we choose, in light of rediscovering his or her humanity and the greater light of the cross of Jesus Christ, to give up the right of revenge. Douglass could have easily exacted retribution upon Captain Auld but instead became his equal. I am as speechless as Douglass was himself.

3) Douglass decided, this was a conscious decision, to revise his feelings toward the persons who had gravely wronged him. His feelings regarding slavery and bigotry did not change one iota nor should they.  What he changed was his feelings toward human beings.  Colonel Lloyd was a victim of a prejudiced upbringing and society.  Auld was a tragic figure himself. Frederick Douglass in light of the grace of forgiveness changed his feelings toward them.

Maybe the United States should put Frederick Douglass on the ten dollar bill rather than Alexander Hamilton. He deserves it far more. His is a great story.  Near the end of his life, one of the images he wanted us not to forget, was that even slaveholders and former slaves could come to see in one another the image of God and extend the most profound of blessings upon one another - the gift of forgiveness. At no time is a human being more like God than when they give the gift of forgiveness.

Who does not need forgiveness.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - Jesus of Nazareth

Read More

Uncle Tom's Cabin, The Bible & America, #2

"Reading the Bible with the eyes of the poor is a different thing than reading the it with a full belly. If it is read in the light of the experience and hopes of the oppressed, the Bible's revolutionary themes - promise, exodus, resurrection and spirit - come alive." (Jurgen Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit)

An "Event"

The publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin (UTC) was significant. Theodore Parker, the famous Boston preacher, called it a "world event." And it was! Harriet Beecher Stowe had been contributing chapters of the book in the abolitionist newspaper The National Era throughout 1851-52 and the public was eating it up. When printed, the book was immediately (no international copyright laws back then) published in three Paris newspapers simultaneously. It's first print run was sold out in a few days. The book was quickly translated into thirty-seven languages.  It produced countless conversions to Christianity, such as the dying German poet Heinrich Heine.  It mobilized waning anti-slavery zeal of the day.

UTC  was also cursed by thousands. It was banned in southern states and caused a riot among students at the University of Virgina where it was burned publicly.  It was branded "pulp fiction." Conservatives labeled Stowe a "revolutionary" and an advocate of "higher lawism" (fancy words for civil disobedience to the Fugitive Slave Law). UTC was even branded forthrightly as a "pernicious book of sin."

Whatever one may say of the book, with one hundred and fifty years of hindsight, it cannot be said the book was neutral or conservative. Reading the book is a moral experience. I've never had to put Tom Sawyer or Huckleberry Finn down (love them both) because they moved me so deeply in my inner being but I have Uncle Tom's Cabin.  Indeed I read recently from one English literature professor arguing that UTC should replace Twain in our prescribed canon of reading in high school. It has my vote. 

The Bible, How is It to be Used? Uncle Tom's Cabin's Answer

Harriet Beecher Stowe was brilliant.  She has not always been recognized as such by secular, white male, historical scholarship since WW II.  Much of this scholarship has been astoundingly biblically illiterate, incredibly uniformed on how religion and American culture were intertwined through the Civil War, and even (ironically) prejudiced against her and UTC. This trend has significantly reversed in the last fifteen years most significantly with the publication of David Reynolds tour de force Mightier than the Sword: Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Battle for America. Stowe read widely knowing such theological heavy weights as Schleiermacher and Feuerbach and was fans of the writers of the Romantic Movement. Her husband, Calvin, wrote her confessing how he misses their late night scholarly "discourses in sheets." He wrote of his longing to have her with him because he,

"wants to got to bed & talk about Tholuck, Dannecker, Jean Paul, Frederick William ... There is not a soul that I can say a word to about any of these matters, and I begin to find out, (what I knew very well before) that you are the most intelligent and agreeable woman in the whole circle of my acquaintance." [1]

Among the things that disturbed Stowe was the use of the Bible by Christians to justify slavery.   By 1852 there were plenty of biblical apologists for slavery and racism among United States Christians, North and South. This apparent biblical endorsement of slavery had a pacifying affect upon the anti-slavery temper that was building in the 1830s and was steadily loosing ground throughout the 1840s. For Stowe this was a serious misuse of the Word of God.  Her questions generated in the narrative properly force hermenutical questions upon us too. Near the end of her book she makes a direct appeal to the reader (not the only time she does so in the book) that gives a window into what she thinks the reader should do even if some of the technical aspects of the biblical text are in question.

"But what can any individual do? Of that, every individual can judge. There is one thing that every individual can do, - they can see to tit that they feel right. An atmosphere of sympathetic influence encircles every human being; and the man or woman who feels strongly, healthily and justly, on the great interests of humanity, is a constant benefactor to the human race. See, then, to your sympathies in this matter! Are they in harmony with the sympathies of Christ? or are they swayed and perverted by the sophistries of worldly policy?"

The "sympathies of Christ." Whatever one does about slavery, Stowe demands that the Christian side with Crucified One. This is her angle of attack against the biblical apologists of slavery and she weaves this in through her characters in the novel.  I want to look at a few of these characters as they express Stowe's criticism of the use of the Bible.

Augustine St. Clare of New Orleans: Social Location & Vested Interests

Augustine, the father of Eva, is a complex character.  Augustine is married to Marie who "always made a point to be pious on Sundays."  Yet Augustine refused to attend church no matter how much his wife pleaded. Stowe tells her bigoted Christian readers that one of the greatest Christian thinkers in history was an African named Augustine  "Bishop of Carthage" and that not only he but most bishops were "men of color."  Augustine St. Clare however becomes her instrument to critique not only the church but the "clergy."  The unbelieving, slave owning, Augustine does not think the Bible actually justifies slavery.  When Marie and cousin Ophelia corner him on the matter he "goes off" on the ladies.  Slavery is controlled by economics and the hermeneutics of the clergy is put in service of justifying oppression.  I quote at length

"The short of the matter is, cousin, ... on this abstract question of slavery there can, as I think, be but one opinion. Planters who have money to make by it, - clergymen, who have planters to please, - politicians, who want to rule by it, - may warp and bend language and ethics to a degree that shall astonish the world at their ingenuity; they can press nature and the Bible, and nobody knows what else into the service ..."

But should slavery adversely affect the price of cotton, Augustine says

"Well suppose that something should bring down the price of cotton once and forever, and make the whole slave property a drug in the market, don't you think we should soon have another version of the Scripture doctrine? What a flood of light would pour into the church, all at once, and how immediately it would be discovered that everything in the Bible and reason went the other way!"

Stowe, through Augustine, pins the vested interest that drives the justification of slavery.  The real motivation was not exegesis and certainly not the "sympathies of Christ" but power and economic interest.

"If I was to say anything on this slavery matter, I would say out, fair and square, 'We're in for it; we've got'em, and we mean to keep'em, - it's for our convenience and our interest;' for that's the long and short of it,' that's just what the whole of what ll this sanctified stuff amounts to, after all; and I think that will be intelligible to everybody, everywhere."[2]

Looking back it is easy to see that Augustine (Stowe) was dead on in this critique.  In the Stone-Campbell Movement one who defended slavery was James Shannon.  Shannon was ne of the most educated men of the movement.  He was president of Bacon College (the first college in the SCM) and later the University of Missouri.  In 1844 he addressed the student body of Bacon College on The Philosophy of Slavery, As Identified with the Philosophy of Human Happiness. This was later published in a booklet in 1849 and went through several editions.  Shannon offered a myriad of interpretations in support of slavery as essential to "human happiness."  In his criticism of the abolition movement he freely uses the economic dimension.  Abolitionists were guilty of breaking the tenth commandment "thou shalt not covet." "Hence, the advocates of Emancipation without compensation to the owners, are involved in the deep guilt ... of violating the tenth commandment and exciting others to a similar violation." [3] Slave holders are entitled to their "property" regardless of any claim by abolitionists.  Stowe sees this argument for what it is ... vested interest and power play ... but Shannon would have denied that. Are we blind to our own vested interest and how that shapes our hermeneutic?

George Harris, Eliza's Husband: Spirit of Humanity & Fellowship

George is a powerful character we even meet him before Tom in the narrative. He is intelligent (taught himself to read). He is creative.  He is militant.  His was separated from his wife, Eliza, and baby son. He and Eliza's exodus to the north is the opposite mirror for Tom's descent further south. Doubt plays a significant role in his character.  Stowe believed that God, especially through Christ, was on the side of the sufferer.  She described him as "God the Omnipotent, the Creator, the Destroyer, is suffering himself to be detained in weak human hands, and controlled by the passionate earnestness of human desire ... He whose touch could annihilate, can yet be held by your infant hand--can be swayed by your prayer."

It is this suffering, caring Creator, that is so difficult for the oppressed slave - in George - has difficulty in believing.  During the journey George meets Mr. Wilson a law and order man. Mr. Wilson attempts to use the Bible to support the Fugitive Slave telling George it is his Christian duty to return. He told him how Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon.  Yet the angry fugitive will have none of it.

"Don't quote the Bible at me that way, Mr. Wilson, ... don't! for my wife is a Christian, and I mean to be, if I ever get to where I can; but to quote Bible to a fellow in my circumstances, is enouch to make him give it up altogether. I appeal to God Almighty; - I'm willing to go with the case to Him, and ask Him if I do wrong to seek my freedom."

Mr. Wilson admonishes George to trust in God and his laws (which in this case would mean obedience to the Fugitive Slave Law). But George fires back at his antagonist: "IS there a God to trust in? ... There's a God for you, but is there any for us? [i.e. black slaves]"

George is reunited with his beloved wife (not legally married because they are slaves) and his son Harry in a Quaker community in Ohio. The Quaker's were on the outside of the orthodox religious establishment in America so these folks have a similar function as the non-believing Augustine. Through these unrepentant breakers of the Fugitive Slave Law George learns the true meaning of Christian faith.  Stretching all social bounds of the time, Stowe has George and Eliza sit down and eat at white person's table ... in a white person's home. As Jesus affirmed the human worth and dignity of social outcasts in the Gospels so George is moved deeply that a person accords him actual human dignity. The Quaker Simeon Halliday tells George that God actually bestows upon us goods for the purpose of being generous and merciful.  George is astonished that this man would risk going to jail to help him and his escaping family. Simeon and George read Psalm 73 together and it soothes his soul and the flame of faith begins to flicker in George.  Stowe says of this psalm that the words might sound like pious bosh from a self-indulgent exhorter but "coming from one who daily and calmly risked fine and imprisonment for the cause of God and man, they had a weight that could not but be felt ..."  Simeon demonstrated the sympathies of Christ. George rejected the use of the Bible as a prop for injustice. At the Table we are all equal ...

Uncle Tom: The Man of Sorrows

One of the "ah ha" moments for the followers of stereotypes is that Tom, as Stowe narrates him, was anything but an "Uncle Tom." He is introduced to us a "large, broad chested, powerfully made man." The "air" around him is "self-respecting and dignified." He is literate (it was against the law in many southern states for a slave to learn to read).  Tom is strong and stands his ground.  He sacrifices his personal needs for the sake of other slaves and refuses to disobey his conscience.  He is a principled man ... a serious stab at the ugly stereotypes of black men of the day.  He will not cooperate with evil and will not bring harm to others.

Tom is truly a Christ figure in the book. Tom is the ultimate embodiment of the true meaning of the Christian faith and the Bible in particular. As Tom is ripped from his wife (not a legal marriage again), sold down river to almost certain death we hear the pathos of the slaves come through with power in Stowe's imagery. The Mississippi is imagined to be the river carrying the lamentations of the slaves to the - absent - God. Would that "the tears of the oppressed, the sighs of the helpless, the bitter prayers of poor, ignorant hearts to an unknown God - unknown, unseen and silent, but who will yet 'come out of his place to save all the poor of the earth!"

Tom arrives at his new "owner," Simon Legree.  Legree is Tom's third owner in the narrative, each spans the kind of slave owners Stowe believed to be in the South.  It is easy to hate Legree. Legree is an inhumane tyrant.  But Stowe does not want us to hate Legree rather she invites us to pity him. He is the end result of the system of dehumanization of slavery upon the slave holders! He pales in comparison to Tom. He retains the brute power of force but is emasculated by the real power of Tom's presence. The more Simon rails at, and abuses, Tom the truth of what he is is revealed. Tom reads the Bible to the other slaves on Legree's plantation. An important text was Matthew 11.28, "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." But the slaves cannot believe that God "is around" for "God never visits these parts." Stowe quote Ecclesiastes 4.1-2 to embody the darkness of Legree's place.

"Again I saw all the oppressions that are practiced under the sun. Look, the tears of the oppressed--with no one to comfort them. And I thought the dead, who have already died, more fortunate than the living, who are still alive ..." (NRSV)

Cassy, Legree's sex slave, laments to Tom - the Lord "isn't here! there's nothing here, but sin and long, long despair!" Truly Tom has arrived in hell.

To Legree Tom was a trouble maker precisely because he was such a powerful man. "Had not this man braved him, - steadily, powerfully, resistlessly, [sic]- ever since he bought him." This made Legree fear and hate Tom. Legree attacks Tom's faith saying "I'm your church now!" Legree succumbs to the irrational fear of the oppressor (echoes of Exodus 1.12) in his fear of Tom's mighty personality. When Tom refuses to flog another slave Simon he has Tom whipped nearly to death. After the whipping Tom says to Simon,

"I'll give ye all the work of my hands, all my time, all my strength; but my soul I won't give up to mortal man. I will hold to the Lord and put his commands before all, - die or live; you may be sure on't. Mas'r Legree, I an't a grain afeard to die. I'd soon as die as not. Ye may whip me, starve me, burn me, - it'll only send me sooner where I want to go."

Sambo and Quimbo, slave overseers bought off with alcohol and sexual favors, finish the cruel torture of Tom. Yet in the book Tom forgives them and they break down: 'O, Tom! do tell us who is JESUS, anyhow?"  Sambo and Quimbo are victims of the system of evil too. Tom's forgiveness simply enrages Legree. His anger boils as he realizes that "his power over his bond thrall was gone."  Simon Legree literally beats Tom to death in an incredibly moving narrative. 

Tom is the Christ who willingly endures great suffering for others. As Tom nears death he reads of the Passion of Jesus. Soon "a vision rose before him of One crowned with thorns, buffeted and bleeding." Like Jesus he forgives his enemies and loves them. Tom is the embodiment of the sympathies of Christ.

Far from being an "Uncle Tom" the Tom that Stowe narrates was incredibly challenging and offensive to white Christians of her day.  And he is still a powerful figure when read today.  Tom is the model of nonviolent resistance found in Martin Luther King Jr and Rosa Parks.  Just how threatening Tom was we will see in our next blog.

In Worship at the Lord's Table

Harriet Beecher Stowe believed that God had moved her to write Uncle Tom's Cabin. While there were antecedents in her life for the contents of the book it was not until February 1851 that she began the novel.  While visiting Brunswick, Maine she attended the First Parish Church.  As she was taking the bread and wine she reflected upon the cross of Jesus. She says that she at that moment had a "vision that was blown into my mind as by the rushing of a mighty wind." The vision given her at the Lord's Table was of an old slave being whipped to death by two fellow slaves who were under the control of a white man.  Stowe was so disturbed by her vision that she began to write UTC and felt the entire time as if the words were from another source. The story of Tom's death in the novel is clearly the literary version of her vision. For her a visit to Calvary at the Table led her to another Calvary ... not the one of Christ but an American Calvary of slavery.  At the Table, in worship, she was moved to identify powerfully with the hated and oppressed nobodies in the United States ... the slaves. Worship changes lives - just ask Harriet.

Final Hermeneutical Thoughts

Stowe saw powerfully and clearly that God takes a side. Her frustration with the church and Christians in general because of their complicity in injustice reached a breaking point. We have only scratched the surface of how she explores biblical themes and how they might look in the eyes of the oppressed. Through her novel she forces us to ask potent questions.  Is it a legitimate reading of Scripture that endorses something blatantly contrary to the values and mission of Christ? She forces us to ask of ourselves ... are we so enmeshed in the machinery that our exegesis and theology always supports us in our own agenda? She forces us to ask does the fact that we have money or power control how we read the Bible and determine what is or is not righteousness? Again she saw that God does takes sides.  She saw this because she looked through the eyes of the slave.  Reading from that location is not always easy.

One powerful narrative that slaves in the South routinely gravitated to was that of the Exodus. There interest in the Exodus was not historical or critical but it was gripping.  They saw something that whites like James Shannon did not ... God took sides. If we look briefly at the Exodus we see four things that are theologically significant and call for response by God's People:

1) A struggle between the powerful and the weak is going on
2) God hears the cries of the weak and is fully aware of the situation of the weak
3) God is not neutral in this struggle between the powerful and the weak
4) God calls his people to join in the struggle for the weak  [4]

If this actually true then how should that affect our Bible reading? and more importantly our living in this world? Harriet Beecher Stowe believed it meant shelving self-interest and engage in the risky business of altering the status quo ... I think we can learn a lot from this small but powerful lady.

NOTES:

1] Quoted in Patricia R. Hill, "Uncle Tom's Cabin as a Religious Text," a paper delivered at the June 2007 Uncle Tom's Cabin in the Web of Culture conference sponsored by the National Endowment of the Humanities.  Pages are not numbered but on my print copy see p. 4.

2] All quotes from The Annotated Uncle Tom's Cabin, eds Henry Louis Gates Jr & Hollis Robbins (W. W. Norton, 2006).

3] James Shannon, The Philosophy of Slavery, As Identified with the Philosophy of Human Happiness, An Essay (A. G. Hodges & Co., 1849), 13.

4] For a very readable source on hearing the Bible from another location, and that looks at specific texts and works through them see Robert McAfee Brown Unexpected News: Reading the Bible with Third World Eyes (Westminster/John Knox 1984).  See pp. 33-48 on listening to the Exodus.

Read More

Uncle Tom's Cabin, The Bible & America #1

I hate to admit that in 1990 if some one had mentioned "Uncle Tom's Cabin" to me, the only reference to come to my mind would have been the hair band Warrant.  To be sure it was a different sort of song for a metal band - no drugs and no sex. The song was something of an allegory. To this day I can still sing the lyrics.  The song opens ...

"Just for the record let's get the story straight.
Me and Uncle Tom were fishing it was getting pretty late.
Out on a cypress limb above the "Wishin' Well."
Where they say it got no bottom, say it take you down to hell!

Over in the bushes and off to the right.
Come two men talkin' in the pale moon light.
Sheriff John Brady and Deputy Hedge,
Haulin' two limp bodies down to the water's edge.

I know a secret down at Uncle Tom's Cabin, oh yeah.
I know a secret that I just can't tell."

Three years out of high school, and nearly the same number of college years under my belt, I was stunningly ignorant of not just "American" history but black American history. I knew nothing of the stories of Mickey Schwerner, James Chancey and Andy Goodman, [1] and many more Civil Rights works and Freedom Riders that were murdered either by, or with the help of, law enforcement.  But in 1990 Uncle Tom's Cabin was simply a great rock song to jam to on the way down the highway.  In 1995 I learned there was a book by Harriet Beecher Stowe by this title and read it for the first time in response to a black friend who told me my world was to white. Since then I revisited the book in 2001 and again at the end of 2012.  Being far more mature and knowledgeable in 2012 my reading was considerably richer.

Harriet Beecher Stowe (1811-1896)

Uncle Tom's Cabin or, Life Among the Lowly is possibly the quintessential American novel and without a doubt the most influential book outside the Bible to ever hit the shelves in America. Historian David Reynolds states baldly in his history of the lives and after lives of UTC, Mightier than the Sword: Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Battle for America, "No book in American history molded public opinion more powerfully than Uncle Tom's Cabin" (p.xi). It was by far the runaway best seller of the 19th century but unlike the contemporary Da Vinci Code it changed the world.

When  Abraham Lincoln met Stowe in December 1862 he is quoted as having said "Is this the little woman who made this great war?" [2]. Harriet was born into what became a large, prominent and reforming family in America.  Some one said of Lyman Beecher, Harriet's father, on his seventy-ninth birthday that he was "The father of more brains than any man in America" [3]. Among her famous siblings were Henry Ward Beecher.  Unlike some other famous families the Beechers were not fabulously rich (Harriet lived in poverty until after Uncle Tom was published) rather they were famous because they rocked the American boat. 

Harriet married Calvin Stowe in 1836.  Calvin, whose first wife died of cholera, was Professor of Greek at Lane Theological Seminary in Cincinnati.  Calvin was fluent in seven languages, had a good sense of humor and encouraged his wife's writing abilities.

Stowe embraced an abolitionist position over time.  Her father, Lyman Beecher, was anti-slavery but considered abolitionism to be extreme.  Before Lyman moved to Cincinnati one of his parishioners was William Loyd Garrison who emerged as a radical abolitionist. Garrison and the elder Beecher had a falling out over what Lyman believed was the former's extremism. The elder preacher focused upon what he thought were the real sins of the day "rum, Sabbath-breaking, Catholicism, and gambling." [4] He exhorted Garrison on slavery, "you can't reason that way! You must take into account what is expedient as well as what is right." For his part the editor of the Liberator became convinced that the Christian church, the American government and the Constitution had been corrupted to the core by the slave interest.  Harriet moved far beyond her father on slavery and the issue of race period.  She met with Garrison, and though reticent about his heretical reputation came to appreciate him greatly as an ally and friend.  She said that no one could "know him and not love him--love him personally, love him for his earnestness and his faithfulness."  But she did ask him "Mr. Garrison, are you a Christian?" [5]

What pushed Stowe beyond her father and into the abolitionist fold? Scholars point to a number of reasons.  The underground railroad passed, almost literally, by her front door step.  She and her husband Calvin were confronted with the reality of fugitive slaves when they learned that a girl in their employ was in fact a runaway slave.  Her husband Calvin, and her brother, Henry Ward Beecher, helped the girl escape via the Underground Railroad through a friend John Van Zandt (who shows up in UTC as John Van Trompe).

Second major source of antipathy for slavery as a system per se in Stowe was the pervasive sexual exploitation of female slaves by white "masters." This exploitation was common in two ways: 1) the sexual gratification of white males and 2) forcing females to become "breeders."  Many female slaves were forced to have sexual relations with various men in order to "breed" a fresh crop of slaves to work or sell.  Eliza Buck, a young "mulatto girl" and fugitive slave, came to the Stowe household in Cincinnati. She was the offspring of an illicit encounter between her former master and her slave mother.  She too became the victim of repeated rapes by the same man. Eliza told Stowe of being sold down in Louisiana and then to Kentucky.  Harriet had also met Lewis Garrard Clarke, an escaped slave so light he could pass for white. Clarke's family had been broken apart and variously sold, his sister being sent to New Orleans as a sex slave. Clarke's sister was befriended by a Frenchman who purchased her freedom. Harriet brings this secret "privilege" of the white slave owner out in full view in UTC. She was disgusted by it. The havoc of slavery on families ... indeed in most southern states marriage was illegal for blacks ... was an abomination to God. Stowe illuminates powerfully the family bond among slaves whether legal or not.

Another source of Stowe's growing hatred of slavery was the violence used by those who protected the system.  James Birney a family friend was a former slave owner who emancipated his slaves. He began what he believed was a mild and moderate voice for the emancipation cause, The Philanthropist. But on July 30, 1836 a mob estimated to be about 4000 strong, surrounded Birney's Cincinnati office, smashed his press and threw it in the Ohio. The mob then proceeded to pillage streets with the houses of free blacks.  Birney just escaped with his life.[6] The next year however, Elijah P. Lovejoy, a special friend, was attacked and murdered by a mob of proslavery advocates.

Finally Stowe became a reader of slave narratives. The stories of Josiah Henson, Henry Bibb, Lewis Clarke, Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth and others. These heroic tales revealed to her people, not animals, with a thirst for liberty, capacity for learning and critical thinking, and above all the capability of pride in being God's creation. Stowe came to embrace the humanity of the African slave.

Harriet Beecher Stowe became convinced that Christianity and slavery was absolutely incompatible. In Uncle Tom's Cabin she unsparingly exposed the toll that slavery took upon both blacks and whites who, surprisingly, are bound by a common humanity.  For her the responsibility of slavery lie with both Southerners and Northerners who made economic profit off it. Slavery was more than a personal evil but a systemic evil that must be atoned for.  Indeed slavery was America's Calvary ... the beaten and dying slave was the American Christ.  That was Tom!

Wrapping up Part One ... Factoids to Whet the Appetite

Two of the most frequent responses to Uncle Tom's Cabin are:  1) the surprise that Tom was no "Uncle Tom" and 2) just how profoundly "religious" the work is.  The stereotype of "uncle Tom" as weak, servile, and passive is the work of a massive subversion of the book. Not only is Tom incredibly strong but George Harris (another major character) is a Malcolm X kind of man. When I think of Tom now I think of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr ... brave and willing to suffer on behalf of others. This is no trait of a weak and cowardly person. 

Stowe was an inspiration to both Leo Tolstoy (who thought UTC was a brilliant novel and I would say he was a qualified critic) and Vladimir Lenin who held UTC was his favorite novel from childhood [7]. Translated into 37 languages, used as a Sunday School text, adapted into countless "Tom" plays ... UTC remained a powerful and subversive force even when it was forgotten by many. 

More to come ...

Notes:

1] See the classic by  William Bradford Huie, 3 Lives for Mississippi with an Intro by Martin Luther King, Jr (New American Library, 1964, reprinted several times)

2] Daniel Vallaro discusses this remark and its authenticity at length in "Lincoln, Stowe, and the 'Little Woman/Great War' Story: The Making and Breaking of a Great American Anecdote," in Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association (Winter 2009) at www.historycooperative.org/journals/jala/30.1/vollaro.html#FOOT54

3] Quoted in Debby Applegate's Pulitzer Prize winning biography, The Most Famous Man in America: The Biography of Henry Ward Beecher (Three Leaves Press 2006), 264.

4] David Walker, free black and fellow Bostonian, castigates white Christian preachers for condemning these very evils and yet turning a blind eye to slavery.  "The preachers and people of the United States form societies against Free Masonry, Sabbath breaking, Sabbath mails, Infidelity, &c. &c. But the fountain head [i.e. slavery] compared with which, all those other evils are comparatively nothing, and from the bloody and murderous head of which they receive no trifling support, is hardly noticed by Americans." David Walker's Appeal to the Coloured Citizens of the World, ed. Peter P. Hinks, (Penn State Press 2000), 44.  Walker and his Appeal had a profound impact upon Garrison.

5] Henry Mayer, All on Fire: William Loyd Garrison and the Abolition of Slavery (St. Martins Press 1998), 417-424, quotes from p. 421.

6] David S. Reynolds, Mightier than the Sword: Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Battle for America (W. W. Norton 2011), 93-94.

7] ibid., 175

Read More

Love: The Road Less Traveled, Jn 13.1-17

A word about this post.  The following is the text of a sermon I was invited to preach at the Bell Flower Missionary Baptist Church in Grenada, MS on February 14, 1999.  The occasion was a "Community Praise & Worship Service" in the middle of the month of love and Black History Month. Belle Flower M.B. Church is a historic church in Grenada, MS.  It is the oldest historically black church in the city, it was host to Martin Luther King Jr in the 1960s and the church was fire bombed after Dr. King spoke there.  In the auditorium the evidence of the fire is still visible in places. It was a great honor to asked to address this nearly all black crowd (except for the white folks I persuaded to come with me).  I chose as my text John 13 and combined the themes of love and black history.  I have not edited the text. I realize that I was somewhat juvenile in my homiletic so bear that in mind.  It was my prayer that it blessed then and it is my prayer that it does so now.  I prayed and I preached from the heart to a city in serious racial turmoil ...a little over a year later I was fired from the congregation for which I preached.  Enjoy.

Love: The Road Less Traveled

(After reading all of John 13.1-7 I made the following brief observations to set up the text and context)
* Jesus' death is near (v.1)
* Jesus "shows the full extent of his LOVE" (v. 1b)
* In the last hours of his life God in human flesh is on his hands and knees washing feet like a common slave, including the one who means to murder him
* His disciples are puzzled, indeed Peter rejects this humble demonstration of radical love (v.8)

The Full Extent of Love

What does John mean when he narrates that Jesus "showed the full extent of his love?" I thought the Cross was the full extent of the Messiah's love? Perhaps the key lies in the fact that this event is a drama of the Cross itself.  Jesus served all humanity - good and the bad - on that Cross and here he served humbly even those who had already betrayed him.

The one who would do Jesus in, Judas the Betrayer, is sitting in that circle of disciples to have his feet washed.  Amazingly Jesus washes Judas' feet too! Jesus knows the plot that has hatched in Judas' mind I am convinced. And here we have Jesus being the servant to the one who in mere hours will hand him over to be murdered.  This is the extent of his love! Perhaps John is testifying to the fact that Jesus did what no other person in that circle would or could have done ... that is to actively love the one who is seeking your demise.

But we often respond like Peter.  We claim we want love. Yet when love does show up we reject it as too costly. We want love but we find love to heavy to a cross to bear.  So we settle for less!

My friends if the extent of Jesus' love in John 13 shows us anything it reveals that love is painful.  I imagine in my mind that as Jesus washed Judas' feet that a tear welled up in his eyes.  Is that far fetched to imagine that? But wash his feet he did and that was painful love.

Love is painful. Perhaps that is why it is the road less traveled.

Jesus was often lonely because of love.
Jesus was hung upon the Cross because of love.
Jesus discovered that true love is a dangerous thing in this world.

The Road Traveled Less Often

Isn't that why we on a daily basis choose to relate to each other on every basis but love? We relate to each other on the basis of competition, of power, of self interest. How we can make this or that come out to our own advantage. How we can preserve our power base or influence in the community.

Love takes too much time.  Love takes way too much commitment.  Love requires that I take you into account in every action and every decision I make.  Love demands I put you before myself. Love commands that I serve my enemies and bless those who would "do me in" ... Just as Jesus showed Judas the full extent of his love.  Perhaps it is the requirements, the demands, and the commands of love that make love the road less traveled.

We know that Martin Luther King knew the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ on this vital point. For King, love for his enemies became his cross to bear! His sermon "Loving Your Enemies" [1] sends shivers down my spine because he does for me what the picture of the stooped Jesus over the feet of Judas did for John ... it was only in hindsight that John could, or did, know that THAT was the full extent of love - that even Judas was not excluded from the love of the Messiah. It was only AFTER the suffering of the Cross that John could look back and see Jesus kneeling before Judas caressing his feet and know the depth of the love displayed in that act of humble kindness.

King addressed the National Conference on Religion and Race in Chicago on January 17,1963. His words bring John 13 to life, for love is no mere abstraction:

"To be a Christian one must take up his [i.e. Christ's] cross with all its difficulties and agonizing and tension packed content and carry it until that very cross leaves its marks upon us and redeems us to that more excellent way which comes only through suffering.  Only through love."

Is carrying a cross easy? I do not think so, and I have never endured any cross such as that of Jesus nor King.  The cross was not easy for Jesus ... he begged the Father to be set free from it!! It was not for Dr. King.  And in Grenada it will not be easy for you and it will not be easy for me.  That is why Love is the Road Less Traveled in this town haunted by loveless past.

Perhaps Dr King caught a glimpse of Jesus bending over the feet of Judas on that day when the Cross became an unbearable burden.  It was a day the nails of the Cross pierced with unbelievable pain because they were hammered with pure hate. You know the day - it was day that lives in infamy.  December 15, 1963! The day a haven, a place of worship, became the target of terrorists. A bomb planted by those who hate at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in Birmingham.  That bomb killed four little girls: Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, and Cynthia Wesley.  They were just little girls.  I have two little girls! Rachael and Talya and I know the anger in me should someone harm them. The Cross was beyond a torture stake on that day!

Dr. King spoke at those little girls funeral. Innocent as the pure driven snow! The victims of a senseless hate crime.  I cannot even begin to wrap my mind around that.  But when King addressed that crowd we learn the depth of his Christianity.  We learn the extent of love.  We learn of the Road that he often traveled alone in the footsteps of the One who washed Judas' feet.  Just to read King's words we can see the impression of the Cross bearing down upon him. He said at that funeral

"in spite of the darkness of this hour we must not despair. We must not become bitter; nor must we harbor the desire to retaliate with violence. We must not lose faith in our white brothers. Somehow we must believe that the most misguided among them can learn to respect every human."

Then King says these unbelievable words "God has not given me permission to hate."

I am unworthy to even utter these words because I am sooooo far from the vision of love embodied here.  I would have lost faith I think!

Martin Luther King Jr my friends followed Jesus and took the road less traveled. Heeding the words of the Hebrews Preacher "consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you do not grow weary and lose heart" (12.3) King saw the full extent of Jesus' love for his own enemy and believed that to be a disciple he must love as Jesus loved.

Do we not naturally balk at that kind of love ... it is costly. We are Peter and say we cannot endure such humility, we have too much self respect to serve THEM! Whoever "them" may be ...

The road of love requires courage but if we want peace in our community, if we want renewal in our community, if we want a new day in our community then we must follow first Jesus and then Dr King down that less traveled road.  Until we do we will not have God's shalom in Grenada.

The question that we all must confront is: Am I willing to bear the Cross of Love and serve the Judases of Hate? Am I willing to put even those who would "do me in" before my own interests? Are our congregations in Grenada that dare to call Jesus "Lord" willing to follow the one who knelt before Judas? Are we willing to come together for the sake of the kingdom? Are we willing to walk on the road less traveled?  Milan Kundera was painfully correct when he wrote "nothing is heavier than compassion."  Look at Jesus before Judas as John gazes back upon that scene through the gift of memory - and be amazed!  Look at King saying "we must not lose faith in our white brothers" ... and be amazed! Compassion. Love. The Cross is hard to carry.

The On Ramp to the Road

But suppose every person here in this crowd tonight says I am willing to follow Christ down that road less traveled, What then? I confess to you right now my friends that I do not know all the answers and perhaps I do not know ANY answers.  I have never endured anything like the Lord before Judas.  I have never endured anything like an attack on my precious little girls. As I was unfit to vocalize King's astounding words I confess to being unworthy to say what we "must do."  But I believe that God in his Providential mercy has brought all of us here to this place tonight.  In the middle of this month that I am standing in the very pulpit that Martin Luther King Jr himself stood I cannot help but feel God is on the move and he demands that I do SOMETHING.  I do not always know what it is but I know something offered in his name can be blessed by the Holy Spirit. So with fear and trepidation I offer a few suggestions to help us travel the road together.

1) Love Begins With Understanding. To feel with, to share with another human being, I must know something about your burden and you mine.  True understanding means I must learn to listen longer and speak much less.

I submit to you this is why God was incarnate in human flesh. For the Messiah to understand the human condition he needed to become a true human being. Jesus lived, Jesus suffered, and Jesus died, and Jesus was raised from the dead as a human being.  He loved us enough not only to wash Judas' feet but to get inside the skin of the despised Jew and experience our life in this fallen world in order that he could represent us to the Father! The great German pastor/theologian Helmut Thielecke wrote "tell me how much you know of the suffering of your fellow man and I will tell you how much you love them."

So the task for us all here tonight is to begin the process of listening, learning and understanding. Do I care enough to learn about your life? Do you care enough to learn about mine?  Can we move beyond the stereotypes of what is black and what is white and listen to the unique stories we all have? We may find that our stories identify us both a mere humans.  To enter the Road Less Traveled we must begin to understand one another.

2) Understanding Must Deepen My Willingness to Bear Your Burden. Understanding is not the end of love rather it is the entry point. Understanding love bears fruit in my own life in shouldering the burdens of your life. It is a most interesting fact that the Greek language, in which the NT was written, that the word for "compassion" literally means to be moved with anger at a given circumstance!  For example two chapters ahead of Jesus washing Judas' feet we read about Lazarus. Most of our English translations tell us that Jesus was "moved" or something similar (cf. Jn 11.33, 38).  But Jesus was not simply 'moved' he was "angry."  He understood deeply what death had done to his friend and it made him ANGRY ... not at Lazarus but at death and the power of death, at the circumstance! Does our understanding - as limited as it is - move us the way Jesus' understanding did him? Are we "moved" to the point to be willing to actually do something about it?  If not then I have arrived at the love Jesus shows Judas and that King shows us throughout his life.

3) Love Means I Must Commit to LIVE My Baptism.  Bear with me on this point please.  (Read Col 3.1-12, note esp. v. 12).  The apostle says the Christian life reflects the crucifixion we receive in baptism.  King spoke movingly about bearing that Cross till its impression is left in our lives - Paul says that is what baptism does in our journey down that road less traveled.  As a fallen member of humanity I am nailed with Christ to the Tree in the waters of baptism.  The old human dies and we walk leaving all the stuff of death there in the grave.  In baptism we are clothed with the qualities of Christ - compassion, lowliness, meekness, forbearance and love (see 2.9-12 [died with Christ]; 3.1ff [raised with Christ]) The Christian life is one of fulfilling our vows made to the creating and redeeming God we made in baptism.  It is through baptism that we learn there is no Greek, Jew and for our purposes tonight - NO WHITE and NO BLACK - rather Christ is all and in all (3.11).  Traveling on the road of love demands that we live these baptismal claims. It was no easier in the first century church than it is in our own day for Jew and Greek than it is is in Grenada for black and white ... but if we want to claim love as our way then this is the path we take.

Conclusion

My friends we must choose the path less traveled every single day.  There are exists off the road every which way we look.  Love is a choice.  Jesus made a choice to serve Judas.  Martin Luther King made a choice to love those white brothers. Love is hard because we must freely and willingly take up that Cross when all around us the voices come from within the white community and the black community to caste it aside as too burdensome.

Will my fellow ministers in Grenada walk along this path? Will the mayor? Will our divided and hostile city council? Will teachers in our schools?

I think I know why love is the road less traveled but it is the one to which we are called as Christians. I do not claim that my walk on that road is perfect, in fact I do not even know if I am on it!  But I will confess to you my heart's desire is to walk in the steps that Jesus walked and to love those who would "do me in" even as he loved them.  Perhaps we - you and I - can enter the road together tonight understandingly bearing with one another and I do not think Grenada is prepared for the revolution that can happen when we all decide to make Love the most traveled of all roads. May God bless you and keep you and make his face shine upon you.

Notes:

1] My edition of this great sermon is in Martin Luther King Jr, Strength to Love (Pocket Book 1963. Mine is the 2nd printing from 1968), 41-50.  This is a priceless gem of a book.  King's sermon "My Pilgrimage to Nonviolence" (pp. 165-173) should be required reading for Christians.

Read More

A Black Intellectual Writes to Thomas Jefferson

The Colors of Liberty

On July 4, 1776 explosive words from Thomas Jefferson captured the hearts of men and women, white and black, in the British Colonies in America.  Those words read, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." These words set the world ablaze not only with war but with a new way of looking at humanity.  The "Age of Liberty" though was not exactly as it appeared to be however.

Following the Revolutionary War, from 1783-1800, many of the Patriots lead a full blown retreat from the implications of the famous words above.  The seventeen years following the war have been termed by the provocative work by Larry Tise as "the American Counter-Revolution."  In fact Thomas Jefferson, who always retained the rhetoric of the pursuit of individual rights is deemed as "the most radical counterrevolutionary" of them all [1]!

Jefferson had published, in 1785, his Notes on Virginia that attained near canonical status among slave holding Americans. When Jefferson won the most contentious election in American history it was because of the "federal ratio" - that is the Three-Fifths Clause in the Constitution giving southern slave states a greater number votes in the Electoral College (Jefferson lost the popular vote).  Future president John Quincy Adams wrote of the election of Jefferson, "The election of Mr. Jefferson to the presidency was, upon sectional feelings, the triumph of the South over the North - of the slave representation over the purely free" [2]. The Notes changed the way Americans thought and talked about liberty, freedom, equality and the rights of humans. Now even with the Revolution fresh in mind there was no vision that could bind all humans together within the United States.  For Thomas Jefferson black folks were constitutionally inferior, morally bankrupt, and unfit for social equality with whites. They may be good for sexual exploitation however [3]. 

Thomas Jefferson's new doctrine reads rather clearly in his Notes, "I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of the body and mind." Liberty was colored even for the writer of the Declaration of Independence.

A "Black" Enlightenment

If Thomas Jefferson did not believe his own words they inspired folks on the other side of the colored liberty line. The period saw African Americans breaking out of the stifling limits and bigotry in significant ways.  Phillis Wheatley dazzled white readers with her poetry. Olaudah Equiano became a world traveler and a crusader for black liberty. One man who emerged from the shadows was Benjamin Banneker.

By 1791 Banneker had become a well known celebrity of sorts.  Banneker was a free black tobacco farmer in Maryland. He was in many ways he was the counter part of his white name sake Benjamin Franklin. He was born and raised in destitution. Both were self-taught. Both loved mathematical puzzles. Both were fascinated by nature, patterns of weather, and astronomy. Both enjoyed the challenge of creating almanacs. Both, it would seem, were products of the Age of Enlightenment. Banneker's first almanac was rejected because the publisher did not believe a black man was capable of performing the mathematics required for one. Yet when his almanac was published for 1792 that it was a "COMPLETE and ACCURATE EPHEMERIS for the year 1792" and had been

"calculated by a a Sable Descendant of Africa, who, by this Specimen of Ingenuity, evinces, to Demonstration, that mental Powers and Endowments are not the exclusive Excellence of white People, but that they Rays of Science may alike illumine the Minds of Men of every Clime, (however they may differ in the Colour of the Skin) particularly those whom Tyrant-Custom hath too long taught us to depreciated as a Race inferior in intellectual Capacity."

In other words black men were not mere brutish beasts.  Further in 1791 Banneker had been engaged by President George Washington as one of the surveyors and planners for the soon to be capital of the United States. Banneker, a true son of the Enlightenment, was a man who believed that liberty came for those of a different color too. Thomas Jefferson did pass on the Almanac to the Academy of Sciences in Paris as possible evidence that some blacks were capable of science.

A Black Intellectual Writes Thomas Jefferson

On August 19, 1791 a sixty year old Benjamin Banneker sat down to write a short note to Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson.  As Banneker explains at the end of the letter he initially intended to only send Mr. Jefferson a copy of almanac so he could peruse the contents.   But something moved Banneker to express himself to the supposed Apostle of Human Liberty on the matter of liberty for black people within the United States. It is not without irony in the shadow of Jefferson's Notes that Thomas' Paine's The Right's of Man was published in May of 1791 just a few months prior to Banneker's letter.  Paine's book was endorsed by Thomas Jefferson.  But what did the black intellectual say to the author of the Declaration of Independence and Notes on Virgina?  He opens

"Sir: - I am fully sensible of the greatness of that freedom, which I take with you on the present occasion {Banneker it will be recalled was a free black man}, a liberty which seemed to me scarcely allowable, when I reflected on that distinguished and dignified station in which you stand, and the almost general prejudice and prepossession which is so prevalent in the world against those of my complexion."

Banneker mentions how common the notion is that blacks are mere brutes ...

"I suppose it is a truth too well attested to you, to need a proof here, that we are a race of beings who have long laboured [sic] under the abuse and censure of the world, that we have long been considered rather as brutish than human, and scarcely capable of mental endowments."

But Banneker submits his almanac as proof of the mental endowments and human qualities of his race. He tells Jefferson that "we are all of the same family, and stand in the same relation to him [i.e the universal Father]."  Banneker likwise appeals to the "obligations of christianity" [sic]. It is because blacks and whites are part of the same family and "christian" obligation that Jefferson should pursue liberty for all men regardless of color.  He appeals directly to the Revolutionary heritage in his letter to Jefferson. Surely the men of 1776 were no hypocrites.

"Sir, I have long been convinced that if your love for yourselves and for those inesteemable laws, which preserve to you the rights of human nature, was found on sincerity, you could not but be solicitous that every individual thereof, neither could you rest satisfied, short of the most active diffusion of your exertions in order to their promotions from any state of degradation to which the unjustifiable cruelty and barbarism of men have reduced them. 

Sir, I freely and cheerfully acknowledge that I am of the African race, and in that colour which is natural to them of the deepest dye, and it is under a sense of the most profound gratitude to the Supreme Being of the universe that I now confess to you that I am not under that state of tyrannical thraldom and inhuman capacity to which to many of my brethren are doomed ..."

Banneker reminds Jefferson of the "powerful effort" of the "British Crown" to reduce the colonists to a "State of Servitude."  At that time Jefferson "clearly saw into the the injustice of a state of slavery."  So clearly did he see that Banneker ironically quotes back to Jefferson those nearly immortal words that filled so many oppressed with a sense of hope.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their creator [sic] with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Banneker confesses his dismay at how any person could say those words much less write them and justify the existence of slavery and the racism required for the peculiar institution to survive in the atmosphere of the post-Revolutionary War. Banneker forthrightly points out Jefferson's hypocrisy witnessed in his Notes and in his own possession of slaves. 

"Here, sir, was a time in which your tender feelings for yourselves had engaged you thus to declare, you were then impressed with proper ideas of the great valuation of liberty and the free possession of those blessings to which you were entitled by nature; but sir, how pitiable is it to reflect that although you were so fully convinced of the benevolence of the Father of mankind and of his equal and impartial distribution of those rights and privileges which he had conferred upon them, that you should at the same time counteract his mercies in detaining by fraud and violence so numerous a part of my brethren under groaning captivity and cruel oppression, that you should at that same time be found guilty of that most criminal act which you professedly detested in others with respect to yourselves."

The black intellectual pleads with Jefferson to become empathetic with black slaves.  Appealing to the the words of a lamenting Job "put your soul in their souls stead."  Thomas Jefferson did not and could not ever do that.

Adding Benjamin Banneker to the "Canon"

The letter of Benjamin Banneker to Thomas Jefferson on August 19, 1791 was laden with potential to renew the promise of the American Revolution. Banneker knew that Jefferson symbolically stood at the head of the revolution but also sadly was the man who derailed.  Jefferson went on to become President of the United States on the back of slaves who were not even recognized as a full human and denied even three-fifths representation and his Notes became the water hydrant to quench the fervor for rights for all Americans.

Banneker, an elderly self-educated genius saw through Jefferson and called Jefferson's bluff. This man can serve as a model of what can be every bit as his white counterpart Benjamin Franklin. He did not let his circumstances define him. He had limited "formal" schooling but was a life long disciple in the best sense of the word.  He disciplined himself daily and nightly in the path of knowledge rather than property or wealth. His physical travels were very limited but his mind traveled the entire Creation of God. He broke through the stereotype that black men were ignorant sexual brutes.  He even shows that "elderly" people are not over the hill with nothing to accomplish or contribute - after all he did not publish his first almanac until he was nearly 60 years of age. Facing systemic bigotry on a daily basis he overcame by the power of his God-given and cultivated intellect.  When I read the story of Banneker I am reminded of the startling quote Thomas Chatterton Williams attributes to his father regarding basketball, "If you're going to complete then do your best, son, always do your best, but remember that I really don't care if we ever have another black athlete or entertainer" [4]. The problem is not athletes or entertainers but the stereotype that pigeon holes African-American males in those roles ... they do not define "blackness."  Banneker destroys that image and can show both white folks who still retain a subtler form of Jefferson's blatant racism and at the same time inspire a generation of new intellectuals.  Both black and white.  He is worthy of emulation.

Perhaps Banneker should be in the Canon of American Saints as much - perhaps more - than Thomas Jefferson.  The more I think about it I think Tise was correct, Jefferson was the most radical counterrevolutionary.

Perhaps you do not know much about the great American hero Benjamen Banneker.  If not let me recommend the excellent study by Robert Silverstein and Charles Cerami, Benjamen Banneker: Surveyor, Astronomer, Publisher, Patriot (Wiley, 2002). You will be blessed.

Notes:

1] Larry E. Tise, The American Counter Revolution: A Retreat from Liberty, 1783-1800 (Stackpole Books, 1998), 439-451.

2] The only book length study on the role of the "Three-Fifths" clause in Jefferson's election is the marvelous work by Garry Wills, "Negro President": Jefferson and the Slave Power (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003).  Quote from p. 1.

3] See Jan Ellen Lewis & Peter S. Onuf, eds, Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson: History, Memory and Civic Culture (University of Virginia Press, 1999).

4] Thomas Chatterton Williams, Losing My Cool: How A Father's Love and 15, 000 Books Beat Hip-Hop Culture (Penguin Press, 2010), 34-35.  Emphasis in original.

Read More

Embracing Differences for the Sake of Unity: Some Theological Reflections

The ancient philosopher, Aristotle, was quoted as saying "Birds of a feather flock together."  This seems to be his way of saying that people of similar ethnic, racial or class backgrounds tend to congregate together.  Even in the church of God, whose members in theory are "neither Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and is in all" (Col 3.11), tends to be the most segregated organism in the world. Rare is the community of faith that truly embodies the universal nature of God's heavenly outpost as the New Testament envisions it.

Catalysts for Diversity 

Charles Foster argued that the proverbial tendency observed by Aristotle is understandable among fallen humanity because "embracing differences" is not easy given our proclivity to "exclude, dominate and oppress" [1]. Writing in 1997 he believed, however, that a growing trend among congregations is to exemplify the diversity of the kingdom of God. While it is true that our congregations have more racial diversity - and Lord we need more! - a few "tokens" of God's multi-colored humanity in various congregations does not translate into having multicultural congregations. What can we do intentionally to have congregations that reflect now what the Prophet John says exists presently before the throne of God

"I looked and there was a great multitude that no one could count, form every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands ..." (Rev 7.9)

How many local congregations look like the heavenly reality? How do we move from suppressing that glorious diversity to embracing differences.  Miroslav Volf has argued that at least two intentional moves must be taken by people in for this to come close to a this worldly reality [2].  First, to embrace difference means that I/we must "create space in myself for the other." This is done intentionally.   Second, we must communicate that I/we do not want to be without the other in his or her uniqueness.  These two moves allow space for the other person in their difference from ourselves and to exist within community.

It seems to me that there are four basic "catalysts" driving an openness to cultural differences in our congregations.  First catalyst is simply the survival mentality. As a congregation spirals downward it lacks the finances to keep up a vision of the future. In this situation the a local monolithic congregation rents out space to an African-American or Chinese-American fellowship.  This possibly morphs into a joint Sunday school program or other programs that bring the two together.

A second catalyst is what some call a "gospel commitment." This is a certain perspective or understanding of "evangelism." These congregations have a desire to preach the gospel to every person regardless of race. These types of churches rarely become multicultural however, for the dominant culture seeks not only to baptize the convert but his or her culture as well [3].  These congregations fail to recognize the polyvalent nature of the Gospel message itself.

A third catalyst is the ancient Christian Spiritual habit of hospitality. These congregations not only have active witness to people with significant differences but believe in being hospitable - welcoming - to others. These Gatherings do not expect and indeed do not seek change in the other to the dominant culture. I am becoming more and more convinced of the importance of hospitality as a Spiritual discipline for witness in our postmodern and fragmented world [4]. As the ancient Egyptian monk counseled "We always treat guests as angels - just in case."

A fourth catalyst is a theological vision. That is the local congregation sees its gathering as the anticipation of and embodiment of the eschatological people of God seen by John the Prophet.  The Lion and the Lamb are not to lie down in the future only but in the present as well.  Black and White are not just going to sing praises as one in the future but in the present as well.  The diversity of God's family is not simply to be a dream in heaven but a reality at the Table of God every Lord's Day as a witness to the world that God has, in Christ, healed all racial and cultural division!  This is a vision that produces a powerful catalyst for "creating space in ourselves" for black culture, white culture, hispanic culture, etc while at the same time moving us to speak to these "others" that we simply cannot live without them.

Negotiating Differences 

Even if a Gathering has made the theological commitment to image in the present God's eschatological people this does not guarantee a multicultural congregation will result. Even the most progressive fellowship will face resistance to diversity.  This resistance is rooted in the fear of loosing identity, loosing power, loosing privilege, and loosing status. Resistance replaces patterns of mutual engagement.  Denominational groups often have "machinery" that tends to promote that status quo. Even a movement that claims to be non-denominational like Churches of Christ there are unofficial hierarchies that exist to protect the status quo in the interest of imagined "doctrinal cohesion." When dissenters sought to demonstrate the validity of Martin Luther King's vision of shalom the censure of the Church of Christ power structure was often swift and harsh. They were denied traditional forums for the exchange of ideas: pulpits, lectureships and journals (See my Social Concerns in Churches of Christ: Trends since the King Years, 1950-2000). A further source of resistance is something as simple as majority vote. Invariably the dominate culture will dominate the voting process thus making the congregation - or society - look artificially uniform.

How can we negotiate the subtle dynamics of power at work in our "church culture" for the sake of a theological vision of God's multicultural family? For example in the simple act of greeting a person whose culture will be followed in greeting? If a person of Russian descent is greeted will we follow they prevailing Anglo handshake or the Russian hug with a kiss on the cheek? What creates space in ourselves for the Russian? What communicates to him or her that we choose not to live without them?

Typically churches fall into four general patterns in negotiating differences.  The first is that sponsoring church pattern. In this model two separate gatherings use the same basic facilities. The culture of each congregation lives alongside each other rather than interact with each other.  The second pattern is that of the transitional church.   In these congregations a typical "European" majority has basically "given up" and is in the process of fleeing a perceived encroachment from another race/culture. Harvie Conn noted the historical reality that most so called integrated congregations are "actually in transition from being a white church to a black church" [5].

A third, more insidious, pattern is that of the assimilating church. In these congregations those in the minority move from the margin to the dominant paradigm. The person seems to be "accepted" but his or her uniqueness has been squashed. Foster suggests this assimilated person has been forced into a sense of "racelessness" [6].  The Borg of Star Trek: Next Generation perhaps best symbolizes this perspective.  The Borg travel the galaxy seeking to crush all cultural differences by assimilating them into the "Collective."

A fourth pattern is the celebration of the differences and embracing them for the sake of the kingdom of God. In this Gathering the believers not only feel but articulate to one another that the Creator and Redeemer of us all loves us all in our differences.  Perhaps leaders in this congregation can vocalize this sentiment: "We celebrate that Palo Verde is a mosaic of God's creation."  As long as we live and function in the fallen world this embrace is never easy but it is recognized as a gift of grace from God himself. This congregation understands that the "relational imperative is not conditional" but grounded in the gospel of reconciliation [7].

Linking Practices

Gatherings of Christ that seek to pursue a theological program representing "the mosaic of God's creation" will learn what are called "linking practices." A linking practice sends intentional explicit and implicit messages to both members and visitors that in this place all are welcome in the name of Jesus. One simple linking practice would be simply using both white and black "greeters" for the Sunday assembly.  Another simple linking practice - a ritual of acceptance - would be congregational recitations of the Lord's Prayer while holding hands or verbally affirming each other as well as holding hands when gathering around the Lord's Table to celebrate our fellowship. The aim of the linking practice is to cultivate mutuality and solidarity - to say all are welcome. For that solidarity to occur individuals must take seriously the experience of others.

"Events" can serve vitally to link us all together.  Events focus on the Gospel story itself: the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus. "Event practices" provide entry ways for all to participate in the activities that present and even interpret these events from the life of Christ, especially baptism and the Lord's Supper. These critical events lead Christians to to reflect on the power of that story for reshaping individual and communal life. Congregations committed to this theological vision of God's people make their corporate decisions based on that Story.  But each congregation will have "sub-stories" that can - and do - feed resistance to the Story of reconciliation and acceptance.

Leading God's people into the beauty of it multicultural beauty is no easy task. I do not believe there is a secret recipe or a twelve step program for realizing in the "now" what God created the church to be. Diversity of any sort threatens some to the core of their being.  Yet I cannot help but believe that God is calling us to be obedient to the eschatological reality that the Gospel proclaims was the purpose of Jesus' death and resurrection. Perhaps a relational model of leadership grounded in that theological commitment and commitment to the group that transcends my own special interests, privilege and power will go far in cultivating the multi-ethnic glory of the local church. Being a prayer warrior, seeking the Holy Spirit's guidance, demonstrating the diversity and unity within Scripture and God's design, love and long hard work just might bring that messianic banquet into reality in our monolithic churches.


Notes:

1] Charles Foster, Embracing Diversity: Leadership in Multicultural Congregations (Alban Institute, 1997), 47.

2] Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996).

3] In a historic fellowship that has at least rhetorically placed emphasis upon the Great Commission it is sadly true that Churches of Christ have participated in this mentality. Though the data is somewhat dated now Michael Moore has demonstrated how the 'monocultural' outlook of mid-south Churches of Christ has hindered evangelistic work because of negative views toward "foreigners." Moore constructed a useful instrument called "Basic Language Attitude Questionnaire" for measuring fundamental attitudes of church members toward those of a different cultural background.  See Michael S. Moore, "Basic Attitudes Toward "Foreigners" among Select Churches of Christ," Restoration Quarterly 24 (1981): 225-238.

4] I have really been convicted of this especially in Christine Pohl's Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).  Hospitality is a actually a subversive practice.  Pohl writes that hospitality "recognizes the dignity and equal worth of every person and valuing their contributions, or at least their potential contributions to the larger community" (p. 61).

5] Harvie M. Conn, The American City and the Evangelical Church: A Historical Overview (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 148.

6] Foster, Embracing Diversity, p. 45

7] See the probing discussion in Carl Raschke, GloboChrist: The Great Commission Takes a Postmodern Turn (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 132 but see 116-130 in a chapter subtitled "The Church in the Postmodern Cosmopolis."

Read More