Dwight McKissic said something to me the other day that absolutely shocked me. He had called me about another matter, and but he told me something that really disturbed me.
The podium at the SBC Annual Meeting last year was just like me – lily white! When he made his motion to make racism as serious an offense as homosexuality in the SBC bylaws, there was not a single person of color involved in making the decisions. He claimed that there was not a single black man on the stage during the entire convention.
Here’s the thing: I never noticed. It never occurred to me that the leadership of the SBC was exclusively white. I would put my hand on a Bible and swear before a court of law that I am not a racist. I have fellowshipped with predominantly African American churches in Cedar Rapids and Waterloo. When I was a pastor in a southern state, a hotbed of discrimination and racism, and I stood against racism, I preached against it, our church choir sang in black churches and we held interracial joint services (much to the dismay of some of our members). I am not a racist.
But when I was at the SBC last year, it never occurred to me that everyone on the podium was white. I don’t think about the fact that every entity head and pretty much every key administrative position in those entities was a white as a fresh Iowa snow. I just never noticed.
Seeing What My White Eyes Didn’t
But Dwight did. He noticed that Baptists of color have been asked to participate in Baptist life, but not in Baptist leadership (with a few exceptions). Dwight made a motion last year at the convention.
I hereby move to amend Article III, Section 1 of the SBC Constitution to read: “1. One (1) messenger from each church which: (1) Is in friendly cooperation with the Convention and sympathetic with its purposes and work. Among churches not in cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior or racial discrimination and bigotry in any form.
We have made a statement in our constitution that says that we will not fellowship with churches that affirm, approve or endorse homosexual behavior. Pastor McKissic simply wanted to include racism as a sin on that level. He wanted the convention to take a stand that says that we take the sin of racism and discrimination as seriously as we take the sin of homosexuality.
The motion was referred to the Executive Committee. Dwight tried to get a convention vote, but that motion failed. I told him two things that day. First, I told him that it was very normal for the convention to refer such motions. That was not a surprise. Second, I told him I would use whatever position I have to advocate for that motion. Despite indications of sympathy to the motion from the podium, the EC has decided not to recommend it for action. Unless someone makes a motion to the contrary, this issue is dead.
Dwight observed that the podium personalities who referred the motion, and the EC that decided not to pursue it further are as white as they can be. White people decided that we did not need to make a statement against racism in SBC churches.
Dwight is about ready to throw in the Southern Baptist towel. He is tired of beating his head against the wall. He says that the Southern Baptist Convention is a racist haven; that we turn a blind eye to the systemic discrimination and racism that are prevalent in our churches. I asked him if he intends to go to the SBC and try one more time to get a convention vote on this issue. He is not certain at this point, but I got the impression he is tired; tired of the battle and tired of the lack of understanding and support from the leadership of the SBC.
And it is my impression that he believes that the SBC is systemically and institutionally racist!
Is He Right?
Defining racism is a difficult thing. I do not believe that the leadership of the SBC is actively racist. I do not think that they are trying to exclude blacks and other people of color from positions of leadership. I think that they are like me – we just don’t see the problem. I’m white. I neither hate black people nor do I actively wish to oppress them or discriminate against them. I would vote for Dwight McKissic’s motion if it came before the convention. And yet, it never occurred to me that everyone on stage was white. I would bet my spleen that Johnny Hunt did not say to himself, let’s make sure to keep blacks off the stage. He wouldn’t do that. We wouldn’t do that.
But we just don’t see the problem. It would seem that we just do not see the problem like our black brethren do. We see progress. We know that in our hearts we don’t mean to be racist or discriminatory. But they see exclusion. They see white folks telling black folks that there really isn’t a problem with racism.
There’s a lot about this I just don’t know. But here are some things that I know or believe:
The SBC was planted in racist soil
That is a harsh statement, but I think that history bears this out. There was a time when Baptists, even in the South, stood against slavery. But as time went on, Baptist preachers began to accomodate themselves to the cultural norm and even found biblical justification for slavery. When the national Baptist organization enforced a policy that slave owners could not serve as missionaries, the split began which culminated in the founding of the Southern Baptist Convention.
I wish it were not so. But the fact is that racism is a genetic defect in the SBC. Our founders were good men who loved the Lord and wanted to proclaim the gospel. They loved the Word and believed it. But they had this giant hole in their convictions that allowed them to be good Christians and still believe that racism and slavery were okay. How? I don’t know? We all have blind spots, but this was a big one.
The SBC has been a haven for racism
Even when slavery ended, the SBC remained a place where one could serve Jesus and discriminate against black people. My first pastorate was in a Deep South church in the late 80s and early 90s. I was shocked when I saw the deep-seated racism that existed in the hearts of “fine Christian people” in that area.
Our youth ministry put up a basketball goal in the church parking lot so that we could have some “fellowship” games. One day, the goal was gone. It was a crisis. One of our men had seen some black teens playing basketball in a street and invited them to come down to our parking lot and play. They did. When some of the folks saw that blacks were playing basketball on the church parking lot, they removed the basketball goal that day. At next Sunday’s business meeting they “sent the pastor a message” by voting down a close friend as a deacon and taking away my raise for the year. Why? Because some black teenagers shot hoops on our parking lot.
And these people constantly told me that they were not racists! One man, a pillar in the church, told me a story that “proved” that he was not a racist. He and some friends used to go hunting and they would give the black lady who worked for them some of the meat (after she cleaned it of course). His wife gave me a history of the county we lived in. It mentioned the good race relations in the county and attributed this to the fact that the blacks there knew their place and stayed in it!
In the next county to the north, the courts had mandated integration in 1959, and instead of obeying the order, they shut down the public schools rather than integrating them. A whole generation of African Americans grew up without schools because these folks were so committed to segregation. And a majority of the folks that made that decision and enforced it were likely members of Southern Baptist churches. They believed that God wanted their educated separately from black children. Good Baptist folks and racists – at the same time.
I’d love to know what percentage of KKK membership through history has been Southern Baptist. Actually, I don’t want to know.
The SBC has repented of our racism
Things have changed. Even back in the heyday of segregation and discrimination, there were courageous men who took a stand against this blight. And the light began to dawn on us. Finally, in 1995, at our Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, the SBC formally repented of our racist past. You can look here to read the resolution that was passed. I was there and I was thrilled to stand on behalf of our forbears and repent of the institutional sin that had so marked our existence.
I think we have made great strides. A few years ago, I was sitting at a table with some pastors from our association and a pastor told a racist joke. Every one of those white pastors was offended at the joke. A few decades back, we would have laughed and told another one, perhaps. But, on the other hand, we did not move to disfellowship the pastor who told the joke. Maybe in another decade we will be at that place.
But the SBC has taken steps to repair the damage our racism has done. That is probably why men like Dwight McKissic are affiliated with us today.
The SBC is still a white man’s haven
But the simple fact is that the SBC is still a convention run by whites. SBC presidents. Entity heads. Key administrative positions. There have been so few blacks or people of color in any of these positions. And there are still Baptist churches in certain parts of the country that discriminate in less open but nonetheless heinous ways. It is shameful.
We have, by our actions, told people of color that we now want you on the bus, and you can sit anywhere you please. That’s progress, yes. But, the white folks are still the only ones with drivers licenses.
I do not believe that this is intentional. I do not believe our leaders are intentionally exclusionary. We just don’t see the problem, as I did not even notice that the convention podium was an all-white thing last year.
The SBC has not done enough to demonstrate our commitment to racial equality.
Dwight McKissic seems to think that there is institutional racism in the SBC. I’m not sure I agree. But I do think that we have NOT DONE ENOUGH to prove to men like Dwight that we are not racist. Since we have such an undeniable racist past, it is our duty to do everything we can not only to repent of racism (which we’ve done) but also to prove that we will not tolerate it in our midst any more. We have to prove ourselves and demonstrate the genuineness of our repentance. If we did not have the past we have, that might not be the same. But with our past, we have to go the extra mile and prove it! Our words are not enough.
Here are some suggestions:
1) We need to adopt Dwight McKissic’s motion! I don’t even know if Dwight will be there this year. He’s had it. But we need a motion to bring the referred motion to the floor and have a vote. Folks, we have to tell the people of color in the SBC that we are going to be as intolerant of racism as we are of perversion. We took a stand about homosexuality. Let’s take a stand about racism. Let’s tell the world that we are adopting a ZERO-TOLERANCE policy toward racism.
Our past dictates that we must take an aggressive approach in the future. In my humble opinion, the Executive Committee blew it on this one. We need to correct their mistake.
2) Let’s get some driver’s licenses for some of our black leaders. I hate quotas, but we need to instruct the committee on committees that they need to increase black and other ethnic representation on our boards. The next time there is an entity head search committee, could we at least consider some non-white candidates? I would love to know if either the IMB or NAMB search committees ever gave serious consideration to anyone but white candidates.
3) We must be personally intolerant of racism. If I had it to do over again, I would tell that pastor that his joke was not appreciated. Instead of just fuming, and talking about it later with other fuming pastors, I’d say, “There is no place in a Christian organization for racist jokes.” We need to be willing to confront racism.
So, I believe two things:
- Since we have a clearly racist history, the burden on us is much greater to demonstrate clearly that we will not tolerate racism in any form in our convention in the future.
- We have made progress in the last 20 years, but we have NOT done enough.
We can do better!
I’m headed to Council Bluffs and a basketball game tonight (with a stop at Cheesecake Factory – the best restaurant in human history).
Play nice.
East High is headed to STATE! And the Santa Fe salad at Cheesecake Factory was better than ever!
A related item from the EC meeting that bears mentioning in this context: http://bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=34708
I am with you with the passage of the motion I am also equally concerned with the idea of quotas but other than the quota how can we show to the world (who is watching) that we are actively progressing in the area. If nothing else surely some of those who help form opinions in the SBC (like yourself) could talk to some of the minority pastors and leaders about running for national office. I personally think that Fred Luter, pastor of Franklin Avenue Baptist Church of New Orleans would be a great SBC President.
I think we can accomplish what we need without quotas.
Here would be my only question regarding the resolution–How would you define a church endorsing racism?? For instance, if a church has openly homoexual members who are participating in that lifestyle we know they endorse homosexuality. What would define endorsing homosexuality? I know. Stupid question. But let’s say Deacon Smith is a racist but he just holds that sin in his heart and isn’t open about it. How would the SBC know, or how would his church know, that there is a problem?
Without question this motion should have been acted on and it’s a travesty that it was not.
Dave, are you suggesting an “affirmative action” type of consideration conerning leadership positions?
I’m curious concerning how many white Southern Baptists there are compared to minority Southern Baptists.
I would gladly vote on a resolution; but, what I don’t understand is why minorities want minorities in leadership if race isn’t an issue? If the person in leadership affirms the Baptist Faith and Message, why should I care what color he or she is? I don’t understand the gripe?
The most-qualified people should be invited for these positions… race should never be a factor. I basically don’t care what color the person’s skin is that is in SBC leadership, as long as he or she affirms, and leads in response to the Baptist Faith and Message.
How do you necessitate minority consideration without being “racist” towards whites?
Here’s the thing, Jared. There is very little danger right now of whites being excluded from leadership in the SBC, so I’m not real concerned about that.
However, blacks are (I think unintentionally, but nonetheless actually) excluded from most leadership positions.
No, I would not argue a quota system. I am calling for the SBC to do these things:
1) Make it clear that we will not tolerate racism in our midst.
2) Be intentional about including minorities in leadership positions.
We just need to be aware of the perception – to see things through the eyes of the black Baptists in our midst.
Dave, I’m with you then brother. Whatever I can do, let me know.
Joe, that is the problem with the motion. How do we define racism? Discrimination?
We probably need to work on defining that a little more carefully.
Racism is a form of intolerance. It is inhumane.
There is nothing inherently ungodly about intolerance. In fact, Jesus chastised the churches of Thyatira and Pergamum because they WERE tolerant of false doctrine and immoral practices in the church.
Tolerance is no virtue when it is the tolerance of evil or falsehood.
We are to be intolerant of that which is false or ungodly.
I am advocating that the SBC be intolerant of the evil of racism.
Tolerance, as it is presented in this culture, is often more an evil than a virtue.
Hi DAVID,
You wrote, “I am advocating that the SBC be intolerant of the evil of racism.”
Yes. I see your point and I approve of your statement whole-heartedly.
I am wondering this:
Could you affirm the Bible’s teaching that every human life is sacred, and is of equal and immeasurable worth, made in Gods image, regardless of race OR ETHNICITY ?
You ask a good question Joe. I am not sure we have a good way to know. It is like what Paul said to Timothy, “the sins of some men are conspicuous, going before them to judgment, but the sins of others appear later.” (1 Tim. 5:24) I think we just have to disavow open racism in our ranks and not tolerate it.
The motion would have been a good step in that direction. I pray that it is brought back and enacted.
I’ll save the pessimism for another day, so here are the positive thoughts:
1. We need to definitely encourage more local churches partnering together across ethnic lines. Once a year is a start, but if we start seeing more actions by local churches to break those unnoticed lines, it will help tremendously. Part of that comes back simply to seeing: I’m often told there are only 2 churches around here: Baptist and Methodist. Actually, there’s 2 more: both African-American. Yet the white folks don’t notice them.
2. Part of that working together also could come through associations–it is possible for a church to be a member of the local SBC association without being in the SBC (at least in most of them around here.) Any like-minded church could be a part, and it’s an easier place to get into leadership. In my experience, Baptist associations will take anyone willing into leadership roles. So, rather than an old-boy network blocking anyone, all qualified people of any ethnicity would find easier consideration. It’s also a good place for Baptists that want to see change to get in: if you’ll actually show up to those meetings, you can really change things.
(That’s been my experience, I know some of you have dealt with other experiences that are the opposite.)
3. Preach it, write it, and live it: each one of us can make racism a part of our preaching on a regular basis. There’s not many texts in Scripture that don’t allow for highlighting that we’re all sinners in need of a Savior. Why not use racism in your definitions of sin that you present? Preaching on Creation? There’s places to address this. Bloggers? We’ve contemplated many aspects of the power of blogging. I don’t know that we could blog McKissic’s motion back into play. (I honestly don’t know that passing that motion would be more than a paper tiger or empty words anyway.) Yet I do know that we could raise the awareness of racism through our blogs and our church websites and newsletters.
Including acknowledging our own white-guy problems with noticing it.
Here’s a thought: Dave, next time you talk to Pastor McKissic (actually, he’s Dr., isn’t he?) next time you talk to Pastor McKissic, ask him to write a blog post. Not just to be posted here, but that you’re going to get as many bloggers in the SBC to repost on their own blogs as well. I’ll put it on mine. A single day of bloggers raising one voice about racism in the SBC?
Couldn’t be any less important than pianists at the pastor’s conference or the idea that someone who you thought didn’t respect Scripture really doesn’t, could it? If we can fume about the rest of this, let’s do something positive. Might change both the issue and the perspective on bloggers.
Doug
I’d gladly post it on mine, as well.
Squirrel
Doug, this goes down in the pantheon of excellent starts. Get this guy to write something passionate, something that addresses as many aspects of the issue as possible. I’ll repost, I’ll put it on facebook, I’ll share it with blogging friends of mine.
The last time I was on stateside assignment, I met the leader of a BSU (or whatever it is called now) from Alabama. He worked on what he called black college campuses. Said that he was the only state convention or associational BSU director in the state for black colleges and was expected to cover them all. However, most white or racially-unlabeled colleges each had their own BSU director. Thought I was gonna puke.
Let’s get this motion back on the floor, and view it as only the first step.
Doug: Go to Dr. McKissic’s blog. He’s been there and done the blog posts over and over again.
Has he done a blog post since the Executive Committee rejected his motion? Not if I’ve got his blog address right.
If there’s a good one on his blog that he would approve people copying and reposting, then which post?
The idea is a unified effort to raise awareness and to demonstrate that it’s not just one person on one blog with the opinion. That it’s a broadly recognized problem that a larger group is willing to talk about. That white pastors in white churches are willing to put in a public, permanent forum their agreement that things need to change.
Maybe it will work.
I think that Dwight McKissic reads this blog from time to time. So, I will make an official offer to him.
Pastor McKissic, if you want to write something on this subject, I will post it here.
And with your permission, I’ll repost it for my 4 readers. Not just a link back to here.
“”Dwight is about ready to throw in the Southern Baptist towel. He is tired of beating his head against the wall. He says that the Southern Baptist Convention is a racist haven; that we turn a blind eye to the systemic discrimination and racism that are prevalent in our churches.””
This seems like a pretty broad statement to me. Quite frankly, I don’t really look at the “color” of people–at least any more than notice they are distinct. I draw no conclusions from color. Apparently, Dwight does.
He equates “racism” with “homosexuality” which really plays into the hands of homosexual lobbyists. If I were black, I’d be offended by this comparison. It simply is wrong-headed and non-productive.
There is no “racist lobby” that I know of in America that has the support of any SBC church I know of. This same thing cannot be said in regard to homosexuality and churches.
Dwight’s no doubt a sincere and nice guy. I pastored in the same town he pastors in so I guess you could say we are acquainted. In fact, I received an honorary citation from the Mayor. But, I don’t think Dwight’s anywhere near correct in his wholesale condemnation of the SBC today. Though, he’s entitled to his opinion.
He’s also entitled to skip the ship in regard to SBC life. Perhaps he can join the “young pastors” who are always threatening to leave. I have some disgruntled church members that use that threat all the time. I can’t say I’d stand at the door to try to keep them in the fold. That wouldn’t be very Baptist.
I do know of churches that are predominantly mono-racial with very few minority representations. I’m talking about black churches. I’ve heard them refer to themselves as a “black church.” I’ve never heard a predominantly white church refer to themselves as a “white church.”
The SBC that existed two centuries ago is not the SBC of today. It is not a “haven of racism” by any stretch of the imagination–at least not in my neck of the woods.
I don’t want to be critical of Brother Dwight, though I do think his rhetoric is a bit “hot.”
I hope a more sympathetic and sensitive spirit reigns. to be cleAr, I think racism is every bit as unnatural perverted and ungodly as homosexuality!
I hope you did not think that my disagreement with being part of “a haven of racism” was insensitive. Though, you are as entitled to be as wrong as anyone else.
Also, I did not imply in any way that “racism” was NOT unnatural and perverted, so I hope that is clear.
Also, I have a little connection with what it means to be a minority through my wife of 31 years. She is white and went to an all black inner city high school. I can assure you that “racism” is not limited to any one race.
Also, I’ve been the minority in my own inner city church where 60 per cent of my congregation was not white. So, I think I’ve had sufficient sensitivity training and do not think it is “insensitive” to suggest that calling the SBC a “haven of racism” might be a little bit too harsh and broad.
And, you brought up the “skip the ship” as an integral part of the discussion and I have given my response to that. Just to be clear, I am neither friend nor foe of McKissic. I understand you are his friend and that’s fine.
I simply think his contention of “institutional racism” (as you put it) is simply not true across the Convention.
I just want to be perfectly clear that it is Dwight’s approach to the matter and his conclusions I take issue with, not the intent of his heart.
I am very sensitive to social issues. I’m not in the Mid-west or Bible belt. I’m in the Los Angeles basin and I face this issue every day.
As a Southerner, a descendant of slave owners, I am amazed at how little prejudice I learned in my sharecropper grandparents home in Arkansas. The reason was due in part, no doubt, to the fact that both grandparents had had the influence of good black people on them. My grandfather had wondered into a Black area of Detroit many years beofe I was born, and a Black man helped him get out of thre due to the danger. Later I would learn from my father that a Black man had come into his home, when he was a child and had taken care of him and his sisters while his mother and step-father were in the hospital with the Spanish flu in that great Influenza epidemic in 1918/ He actually said, “If that man had not come in and prepared our meals and taken care of us until mom and my step-father got out of the hospital, I reckon we would have died.”
But in growing up I was not around Black people until I moved to St. Louis, Mo. There in my second year of high school I developed an acquaintance with a black student in the next seat in home room. We use to bet on the baseball teams (I wasn’t a Christian then). He knew the teams better than I did, and he took my lunch money every day until I finally said, “J—-, I’m tired of you winning my lunch money every day, and I get hungry. So I’m gonna stop bettin with you.” He laughed. We were friends, and I never thought anythig about his race.
In my first church, one of my members, a principal in a high school in Missouri, recommended tat I drive up to Lincoln University (a Black school that had integrated in reverse) and go to school. He said I would get famous scholars in small classes…and I did. The church, by the way at one time, had had a black man and his wife to join. They had moved away to be near their children in old age by the time I became pastor. The members told me about them and how they had joined and a white man had refused to join because they had, and the members told him they still would take any one who would come. And they like the man and his wife, and it was obvious.
At the Black school I had a famous Black historian in small classes. he inspired me to start doing research in church history (he said choose something you like and read and take notes on every thing you can get your hands on). I did. I took notes for 6 years, some 3000 5×8 notecards. When I moved to Kentucky, and, later, enrolled at Morehead State University, I wrote a M.A. thesis in merican Social & Intellectual History on the subject, “The Baptists & Ministerial Qualifications:1750-1850.” While I was attending Morehead, another Black Historian recommended me for the position of Instructor in History at South Carolina State College in Orangeburg, S.C. I served there from 8/70-5/72. That was a real eye opening experience regarding the experience of Black folks and the effects of slavery and segregation. As one white lady told me, who taught in the early grades of primary school, “Mr. Willingham, I never knew what a terribe effect segregation had on the personalities of those little Black children until I taught them (She had originally been a member of FBC Charleston and we met in the FBC of Orangeburg).” She added: “I cried, when I realized what segregation had done to their personalities.”
In the Summer of ’71, while attending Columbia Univ. in NYC, a professor there came to me in a faculty reception (though we were students, the faculty of Columbia gave the faulty members from the Black schools of the South a reception) and said, “I heard from one of your colleagues that you know of a great body of primary source materials on Black people that no one has ever tapped?”
I said, “Yes sir. It is the Baptist church records.”
He said, “Well, tell me about it.”
I aswered, “Their names are in the records. When they were sold from one part of the country to another, they moved their memberships. They heard the same sermons as the Whites. They knew the teachings, too. In fact, some Whites purchased the freedom of some of the Black men and set them free to preach. In one instance, a Black pastor was called and did pastor a White church (which also had Black members) for about ten years(this was in Virginia).”
To shorten my comment, let us say the professor recruited me to do my doctorate under him, and I wrote a prospectus for a Doctoral Dissertation in Black History on the subject, “The Baptists and Slavery.” I even delivered a lecture in an afternoon lecture series at Columbia, “The Stanley Elkins Thesis: A Critique.” And had a great honor that da, when an 86 year old blind precher who was still pastoring in Brooklyn got on the subway and came all the way to Columbia Univ. to hear me give that lecuture. He was a grad. of Rochester Divinity School from Nova Scotia, had had Billy Sunday preach in his church during Sunday’s greatest crusade, the NY crusade in 1917, and had pulled his churhc out of the Northern Convention because of Harry Emerson Fosdick’s famous speech against the virgin birth and fundamentalists in 1927.
In 1975-76, I did my Doctor of Ministry project at SEBTS on Christian Love and Race Relations. My project director said, “You ought to have known better than to select a controversial topic like this. If they fire you, I’ll be right there, behind the church, supporting them.” My thought was, “If I were a moderate , you wouldn’t say that.”
I got the project done without getting fired, and then the director started nit-picking me to death. The Friday before the baccaluareate on the next Friday which would be followed by graduation on the next day, I blew up. To make a long story short, I graduated. And though I am sure many know of my background in Black studies as well as Baptist history, opportunities to make use of the Black history knowledge have been more scarce than hens teeth.
God’s purpose in it all was to prepare a family in that church for black grandchildren. I didn’t know it, when I set out to do that project. I was only doing something with what I had learned which is how one makes progress in the realm of learning. Would to God I could have been able to utilize what I know to help White and Black Baptists to learn to live and work together amicably. I do take comfort in the fact that the answers to my prayers for a peaceable resolution to the racial issue becomes more apparent every day. Praise God!
I don’t think there’s much “active racism” in the mainstream of the SBC.
It’s just that we’re mostly white, have long been that way, and we don’t think about it or consider changing that fact. We run in the same circles and are very cautious about who we support for things like elected SBC office and committees, and so, since most of us run in mostly-mono-ethnic circles, we recommend the people we know, and the only people we know are just like us.
I actually do not personally know an SBC pastor that is not white. I know pastors in others traditions that are not white. I have heard of SBC pastors that are not white. But I do not know any. So, if I were appointing a committee or recommending someone or making a nomination, would I nominate anyone other than a white person?
Probably not—because I’m hesitant to attach my name to a stranger.
We do have to do better. There are some structural adjustments that would help, but a lot of the change has to be among us in our normal behavior.
As to whether Dr. McKissic over-emphasizes the issue of racism, he might, but we kind of need it, don’t we? In truth, we’re not fine. We are, generally, complacent. It’s not the same.
Excellent comment, Doug – lots of good insight.
I agree that few SB pastors are intentionally racist. I think it is the kind of thing you described.
But as I have said, our racist past as a denomination obligates us to go the second, third and fourth mile in demonstrating our commitment to calling racism what it is – a sin against God.
We do. I think we’re dealing with another facet of SBC life here as well:
It takes so stinkin’ long to get anything really done. Think about it: the CR strategy (please don’t jump on the CR right now, folks, thanks) was a 10-year-plan. 10 years!!
In 2 years, Dr. McKissic could take his church out of the SBC (probably less, since they’ve already seen why it wouldn’t be a totally bad thing). In the next 3, he could find like-minded churches to form a missions-sending group with him. In the following 5, that group could support a growing body of missionaries as well as start sponsoring seminary students from those churches at various seminaries, providing the future leadership with an education.
Meanwhile, Guidestone and Lifeway aren’t exclusive providers—so an SBC church that left and went with the new group wouldn’t even have to change literature, insurance, or bookstores.
So in 10 years, while you might not have 16.5 million members, you would have a new denomination, founded by Bible-believing conservatives that has a heritage of seeking racial harmony.
Or you could hopefully have made a few beginning changes in the SBC.
That anyone bothers shows more patience than I have.
In an SBC church in the South, my first primary SS teacher at the age of 6 was black. She wore pillbox hats and white gloves every Sunday and would reach over and hold my hand real sweetly when I talked too much. :o)
I can remember my mom talking about how elated she was when Billy Graham refused to segregate the crusades.
Racism is evil and if our brother, Dwight, thinks it exists, we owe him to take that seriously.
I think the problem with Racism in the SBC is the fact that it is NOT the overt KKK racism of the last century. Rather our racism takes a different form. It is deacons going over to that black couple that just walked in, saying welcome, but then mentioning that there is a “better” church that they might be “more comfortable” at just down the street. That church mentioned being mostly black. Here at MBTS several professors have told stories like that that they have had to deal with. And folks…THAT IS RACISM! When a old church in the inner suburbs that is all white, barely making numbers, but not reaching out to the immediate area that is now mostly black, THAT IS RACISM! What can we do to fix this? I honestly dont know, but something needs to be done and prayed about.
PS…Voddie Baucham for SBC President!!
I was really thinking Voddie Baucham for USA President instead.
I don’t look good in a burqua. :o)
I only look good in a burqua. We’re not going there, though.
I have a kaffiyeh. And I look good in it.
Wife doesn’t have a burqua—the Muslim nation she grew up in wasn’t that repressive. She has some lovely dresses, though.
Smusch – I think you are right.
In our Association we have several African American churches. Some began as missions of churhces in our association. Others began on their own. The church that most recently joined us did so after a self study of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. Then they went before our Credentials Committee where they gave evidence of like faith and practice. We have received them into full standing in our association.
Our church has worked with one church in particular in some of their ministry projects. It would be appropriate to say that they graciously gave us opportunity to participate with them. We have worked with others as well. Our church has African American members and using TEAMKID we actively reach children in our neighborhood.
But we did have some experiences that were not so good. In a disaster relief efort the churches of the community came together to work. Our church was able to begin a work and invited any church who wanted to to participate. It was one of our SBC African American pastors who brought race into the issue when he said that we (white pastors) could not reach African American people in the disaster because we did not understand their needs as he moved to take over our ministry venue.
Another African American pastor wanted to partner with my church and then with our association. He had a growing church with an exciting worship service and influential firends in our church. However, his theology and practice in his church was not up to BFM 2000 or New Testament standards. When he came before our association and began to understand that we would address these issues, he withdrew his application for membership.
Whether we agree with Dave’s post or not, everyone so far seems to be assuming that large segments of non-whites want a seat at the SBC table and are being denied it. Could it be that many non-whites are just as content with the “most segregated hour in America” as the whites are? Proportionately, there are probably as many “black” churches as “white” ones across the country. They’re just different denominations.
The day a black man is elected to a leadership position in the SBC will be the same day a resolution against gluttony (read buffets) will pass.
I’m sure people said similar things about a Black man being elected president.
Due to a typing mistake I posted an unfinished reply. My point woudl be that I am fully willing to work with any pastor and church that has like faith and practice and mutual respect for each other. As for the SBC, I have voted for minority leaders and will again. But I am not for any kind of quota system.
I like Voddie Bacham and his Family Based Youth ministry. I wonder if that would keep him from being mainstream enough for a SBC leadership positon.
I think your 4th paragraph has a typo. It reads: “But when I was at the SBC last year, it never occurred to me that everyone on the podium was a black person.”
Thanks, you are right. I made the correction.
The old adage applies here, methinks: “Everybody’s responsibility is nobody’s responsibility”.
I know Dwight McKissic fairly well, and am honored by such. I’ve worshiped in his church, participated in meetings with him, and eaten at his table. I don’t know a finer man, and if he sees a problem, then there is one.
We go, every now and then, to Red Hills Baptist Church, outside Kingston, Jamaica. When we’re there, we’re generally the only whites there. We love them, and they, us. But if we lived there, and the situation was as it is in the SBC, and whatever gifts I or my white friends have were consistently overlooked, I’d see the problem, too.
Dave, you’re a pretty good start. Say it loud, repeat it often, and make it burn.
I should stop there but I won’t. “Corporate repentance”, like the SBC repenting over this or that, is good press, but otherwise meaningless. The SBC repented over inflated membership numbers and passed a resolution dealing with regenerate church membership, too, and that’s had no effect that I’ve seen.
Whatsoever.
Corporate action, of that sort, takes the individual off the hook, so to speak. We had a Great Commission Resurgence Task Force, which issued a sweeping report last year, overwhelmingly passed by messengers who were probably mostly pastors. Of course pastors would be for it: it took the local church off the hook for the massive failure to disciple the majority of the people God placed in our churches. So pastors get a pass, in that regard.
I really hope Dwight doesn’t leave. I will call him to encourage him. We can’t afford to lose men of his caliber and character.
Well .. we couldn’t afford it if we actually used men like him…..
Dwight McKissic is a great man of God. He has a heart for the SBC and has been active in convention matters for several years. I am proud to count him as a friend. The SBC needs to step up and adopt Dwight’s motion. Racism in the church is an abomination and those churches who support it, either by their action or by their inaction, should not be recognized as cooperating members of the SBC.
Les
What Les said!
I doubt that with special exceptions, you would not seat a jury today that was not racially mixed unless you were courting an appeal; because the insidious, “secret” emotion that is played out over the phones, at some ” special men’s clubs ” is the Underground culture that feeds the controlling few of many of our SBC Baptist churches. The easiest and best way to solve the problem is not by edict, but by example. An example that says we like our culture and our history but we respect you the black or hispanic and your culture and your history and we want you to join our church if you would like – we want you to share with us your Christian emotions-your loves and sorrows in every church function we have. If a white person cannot bring him or herself to say “yes sir” or “yes ma’am” to a black person then they have an embedded hangup and some have a hangup . If you can’t shake hands you’ve got a hangup and we have it . Our Leaders have the problem and until they show the way the “followers” will continue to believe that the “secret often unspoken racist word” is still guiding us. Break that and you’ve opened up a new world for more than just the SBC; and the energy that is created will feed itself and the coffers. Too many nasty comments have I heard for me to know that racism doesn’t exist in harmful ways by a narrow minded few to say that it doesn’t exist.
My name on my computer is misspelled on one selection and I proof read everything but the name. This is the correct spelling and my briefest thought on the subject.
Thatf isf okayf, Jackf.
Let him who is without typos cast the first stone!
Great post, Dave. I agree with all of this and also agree with Dwight McKissic. In years past, I expressed this sentiment to him personally. I don’t know how actively racist the SBC is if you look at in classic terms. However, unless you are part of the “club,” you have no role in SBC life. And, to be part of the club means that you went to seminary with the club, are known by the club, support the club, and help perpetuate the club, buying the line that the SBC is the last, great hope for Evangelicalism in the world today. If you don’t necessarily buy that line, the club doesn’t have much use for you, even if you are completely orthodox and are faithfully serving the Lord.
The truth is, not many, if any, black people are in the club. The other truth is that racism now hides under the guise of “personal preference” and “consumer choice.” Our churches are built on this. We “choose” to worship with people just like us who affirm and confirm our lifestyles. This perspective sits at the foundation of the church growth movement and megachurch movement. We have forgotten the implications of the gospel as illustrated in Ephesians 2:11-22 and we have made the gospel all about us, our comfort, and our preference. While most would not see themselves as racist, they would also never consider worshiping in a church with people different from themselves because that would make them uncomfortable or would not serve the purpose of affirming their lifestyle. We have little time or energy to break down racial barriers in and through our churches when all of our time/energy is given to pursuing the American Dream and carving out a better life for ourselves.
So, it should be no surprise that there are no blacks in leadership in the SBC. The perception is that there is no real benefit to having blacks in leadership in the SBC and if we don’t perceive a personal benefit, then we won’t do it. And, that is where the real racism, or classism, or elitism lies. It is the same reason that we have few small church pastors in leadership in the SBC. We don’t see the benefit in it. Could you imagine if we didn’t have megachurch pastors in leadership? They are there because we think that their presence provides us with a personal benefit – or, they have convinced us of that.
If we somehow came to believe that we would be better off with black people in our churches and in SBC leadership, then we would start to do the hard relational work of laying down our lives in sacrificial love to come together with people who are culturally different from us. But, that isn’t happening and it says everything about what we truly value.
Dr. McKissic is in the SBC to be the prophetic thorn in our side. He should not quit or get tired. God is using him to prick our conscience and maybe he won’t see success the way he’d like, but no one else is causing us to think about this stuff. If he is only here to show us our folly, then so be it. Someone needs to.
I’m tempted to copy this and turn it into a post.
Anytime. Feel free. I really do think that this is the issue. If you ask the average SBCer if they are racist, they vehemently say no. But, our seperation now plays out under the guise of personal preference and choice, which we all play into at the very core of how we do ministry. It is a pretty big deal.
Please do. As one who has been found to be of no use after significant sacrifice and expectation – this summary hits the mark. It’s somewhat cathartic to see someone else actually put it in writing.
Alan,
I think you have hit a very important point. Rather than seek to broaden our fellowship, we are actually planting churches for different groups. I would start giving examples and almost did, but that could get tacky fast, so I will stop there.
Jeff, are you suggesting it is possible to plant a multi-ethnic church in a predominantly exclusive culture? If so, I’d like to know what missiological study, or where in the Scriptures, there is evidence for being blind to culture in regard to planting churches.
My experience in planting two churches has been that you have to plant seed indigenous to the soil and environment. I don’t think it is fair to assume that starting a predominantly Persian work in the Bay Area for people who live and speak as Persians is “racist.” I think that is called, Christian.
The problem is we are not talking about the difference between the average church and ethnic churches (such as Hmong or Chinese). When the average “black” person’s family history has been in America for over a century, just as long as many “white” people’s familes, what we are talking about in churches are not a difference in ethnic origin. We are ALL Americans. And the difference in culture is no different than a difference in economic status. Or are you suggesting that rich and poor should not worship together in the same church? You see in scripture the Jews and Greeks were coming TOGETHER to worship. And THEIR differences were a lot more severe and pronounced than the average American “white” and “black” believers.
Frank: Interestingly Dr. McKissic’s church is both multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. It is growing and could be considered a mega church. I have been there and worshiped a few years ago. It was an amazing experience. It is in fact where I had the privilege of meeting Alan Cross, Bart Barber, Robin Foster and others. It was where Dr. McKissic, I and my husband became friends. A friendship I will always cherish as others have expressed their love for Dr. McKissic.
In answer to the person who asked what the number of whites and blacks is in a position of authority in the SBC this may answer that question.
Dr. McKissic wrote on SBCToday in 2008 this “On a visit to the SBC Executive Committee Building in Nashville, Tennessee this past September, I was privileged to take a guided elevator tour of 7 floors. I happen to notice that I didn’t see any African Americans on either floor. When I asked who was the highest ranking African American in the executive building because I wanted to meet and dialogue with him or her, I was told, the highest ranking employee at the executive committee building was “the head custodian”. That response completely took the wind out of my sail. I have not felt welcome or completely included in the SBC since that day, though I must confess that my reception at the Executive Committee was marked by every Christian courtesy and grace.
America would not stand for the White House or the Republican or Democratic Executive offices to be completely staffed by all Whites. Less you think I’m being overly racially sensitive; how would you respond if the SBC executive committee employees were all African American? Perhaps you would be left with the feeling of being alienated and unwelcomed as well. If I could find an Anglo gentleman to serve as executive pastor, certainly the EC could find an African American to serve somewhere in addition to the head custodian in a upper level management position…
If an African American is elected president of the SBC, that would be a major step in the right direction. Because the presidency is largely a ceremonial post that would document “we are welcome”—not just as a missions project of the SBC—but we are also welcome at the pinnacle level of ceremonial leadership. I’m praying that Pastor Fred Luter becomes the first African American president of the SBC, but it would represent serious empowerment and inclusion if a distinguished, qualified African American pastor or denominational servant were appointed at the appropriate times to the presidency’s of the EC, IMB, NAMB, or the head of any other convention entity. Are African Americans welcome as missions projects or as contributors to the cooperative program? Absolutely! Are we welcome to serve as entity heads? The jury is still out.”
“”I have not felt welcome or completely included in the SBC since that day,””
Debbie, I was not aware you were being excluded for your blackness 🙂
Also, I pastored a church down the street from McKissic and I’d venture to say if his church is not significantly Hispanic, then he has a way to go as much as others.
Why will no one address what it would be like if a white person toured the floors of the National Baptist Convention? McKissic’s experience may mean something–it may not.
“Interestingly Dr. McKissic’s church is both multi-cultural and multi-ethnic.”
I would feel ‘at home’ there. 🙂
Frank,
I wasn’t referring to planting churches for linguistic reasons as much as I was thinking of “affinity” group churches. You can make a case for planting a church for an ethnic group, like say the Persian immigrants. But why are we consuming lots of time planting churches for “sub-cultures” like say cowboy or biker churches?
Are we saying that we can’t relate to cowboys or bikers without a special church? Are we doing it to avoid the “hard work” of building intentional relationships with people who are a little bit different that us? I know this is a question about racism, but I think the symptoms of our problems show up in these things as well.
“But why are we consuming lots of time planting churches for “sub-cultures” like say cowboy or biker churches?”
This is an interesting question.
I think about the early Church, and how it went out to the far corners of the Roman Empire and beyond, encountering those who had never heard of Our Lord, but who harbored a silent longing for the God for Whom they had been created, and only in Whom they could find their rest.
Often, on learning about Our Lord for the very first time, many came quickly into the Church as catechumens and after a time, were received into full Christian communion.
Bikers and cowboys.
Hmm. . . well, I think there IS a biker group out there called the ‘Pagans’.
🙂
Jeff, I get your point, though I don’t think I agree. I have been involved with both biker style and cowboy style ministries.
I will grant you that they can become narrow and ingrown in theory, but in practice, they become much broader in their outreach. For example, many non-cowboys become involved in the “cowboy” church and many non-bikers become involved in the biker church.
I will say this from my experience: I’ve never met a more welcoming or inclusive group of people than those involved in the biker style churches.
I do agree any time the purpose is to isolate or exclude, then it is not a godly approach to ministry. I just don’t think the two go together of necessity.
Frank,
I too have been involved in biker ministry although not a biker church as such. The Dakota Baptist Convention does a big giveaway at Sturgis as a way to share the gospel and I have been able to participate in that ministry and I have become good friends with a couple of guys that pastor biker churches here in the Dakotas. I don’t have anything against those kind of things, beyond what you similarly identified in your comment which is the concern of “cloistering” if I can use that word.
Frank, I would submit to you that missiological studies on this issue in America are usually wrong, taken captive by pragmatism. The problem is that we attempt to plant churches in America along cultural and socioeconomic lines. That is a mistake and only prepares that church for a lifetime of isolation from other cultures. Sure, it “works” better, but at what cost? I do not argue at all that people want to be with people like them and overcoming this is very difficult. It is one of the biggest discipleship issues of our age, in my opinion, and one that few want to face.
We have real trouble living for the “other” instead of living for ourselves.
Alan, given that your expertise in missiology is correct–I’ll assume that for the moment–how do you plant a multi-ethnic church reaching a segment of the culture that does not speak the language of the planting church? I guess it is pragmatic to at least present the gospel in a language someone speaks, but I don’t see how that is non-Scriptural.
How is demanding that a group you want to reach speak your language, eat your food, celebrate your holidays, use your liturgy “living for the other?” That sounds like living for oneself.
And, where in the Bible does it say that if something does NOT work it is more spiritual? You might be surprised if you read Luke 19:13 at the word in the ESV translated, “Engage in business.” It seems being pragmatic is not something that the Lord had a problem with.
If I follow your logic it goes like this: ignore the culture to which we are going and duplicate the culture we are from. I don’t know any missiological studies (my graduate minor) that supports that theory.
Re: to Frank below,
Frank, no, I completely agree that language and cultural differences among first century immigrants is a pretty big deal and it would be counterproductive to try and force everyone into one gathering, especially when there are language issues. One thing that can be done, however, is to have the Anglo churches partner with the language missions through support and fellowship. We are doing this now in starting an Hispanic church/gathering.
I am talking about continuing to divide churches according to race, culture, and socioeconomic issues among people groups that have been here in America for 300 years. The division between blacks and whites over the issue of culture and personal preference is the one that really needs to be addressed missiologically and not pragmatically. That is what I am referring to. You are on solid ground when you talk about having seperate gatherings for first generation immigrants according to language. That ground gets shakier as you go to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation, however.
Part of the strenght of the church is in learning how to love one another and come together in Christ, despite our differences. Our unity is in Jesus. Few are doing this effectively, however. I understand that. It is very hard. But, I believe that if we take Ephesians 2:11-22 seriously as one of the first implications of the gospel laid out in Ephesians 2:1-10, then it is work that we need to do and it can only happen through sacrificial love – something that often seems to be in short supply.
Alan, I think we agree that “segregation” for personal preference alone is not Godly.
I’m not sure we agree that such segregation is much a part of black culture (I’m speaking outside of the South) as it is white.
Also, I think that having “cowboy” services or “bikers” services for the purpose of integrating people groups into the life of the church is a helpful strategy. I will agree with you the title, “Cowboy Church” or “Biker Church” seems to fundamentally miss the point of missions. Jeff expresses this idea in a post above.
My whole problem with this thread is the contention that every SBC church everywhere should repent of their racist practices. I find that to be a bit over the top, no matter what the color of the person saying it.
Romans. There was nothing in the surrounding culture that would lead to Paul to desire Jews and Gentiles to form one church rather than First Jew and First Gentile across from each other. We must reach people where they are but our vision fall short when we leave them there. Language mission work, whether it is Persian, Spanish, or Chinese, falls flat when the vision doesn’t extend beyond reaching the first generation to see the needs and just as important the kingdom opportunity with the second generation. We leave those kids sitting in the middle. Building a bridge is absolutely much harder and current funding mechanisms definitely do not facilitate it. If it matters to God enough to inspire Paul to write Romans, why doesn’t it matter more to us?
I’m just happy to see this topic being openly discussed. Thank you Dave and Dr. McKissic for making us, at the very least, ponder the issue. Praying something positive will come out of it.
I have not read the comments but changing the name of the SBC would not be a bad idea. It should have been changed decades ago.
Great post….good discussion. I think what is missing in SBC in this issue a plan/path forward. Repentance should be seen as the beginning not the end of our history here. For instance: if a wife found pornography on her husbands computer and he was TRULY broken over it and repented would they just continue on with life as it was before? No, if there was true repentance there would also be a desire on the part of the husband to SHOW the change. So, they would put some safe-guards in place to do as well as they can to make sure it never happens again.
SBC got the repentance…now it is time for a plan to move forward. And a plan probably doesn’t start with having a Black SBC president. It needs to start simply with inclusion- on a local level. Here are a few ideas:
Churches need to celebrate Black History Month. There is a spiritual heritage there that deserves to be honored and celebrated the way we honor and celebrate Lottie Moon and others.
Materials need to be produced to celebrate significant lives of Black Christians throughout history. Would it be hard to include 1 black person in something like 5 Who Changed The World? No, but it does require some intentionality.
EVERY local pastor needs to be intentional about building relationships with one black pastor and their black church members. Relationships have a lot of power….
When I was growing up my pastor was really moved by the Promise Keepers initial steps towards racial harmony in the Church. Our church didn’t institute any quotas or have any black staff members that I can remember….BUT:
We had guest preachers that were black on a regular basis.
We celebrated black history month every year- honoring historical Christians that were black, singing old “negro-spirituals” and learning where they were written and why.
We had joint worship services with Black churches in our area.
All I can say was there was intentionality behind it. I don’t know how you legislate intentionality- but I think it can be more encouraged than it is today.
I think that is the key word – intentionality. We don’t need quotas, but we need to, at every level, make choices to break barriers and include people of color.
“We had guest preachers that were black on a regular basis. ”
Did they occasionally turn white? 😉 (sorry, couldn’t resist)
If there were more black mega-church pastors in the SBC, there would be more blacks in leadership in the SBC. It may not be racism but rather our obsession with the mega-church.
What is leadership in the SBC? Is it just being on the podium at the convention? Maybe it includes being a trustee at a Seminary or just being the pastor of a church. Dwight McKissic was/is both and that means that he was in SBC leadership. He raised a theological point in chapel at SWBTS where Southern Baptists do not have agreement and then resigned to focus on being pastor at his church. While I may or may not agree with his thinking on this issue I applaud his actions and integrity but it beings me to the point I want to make. I want the leaders of our convention to be acting within the BFM 2000 and supporting the CP and mission efforts that we have. Where you disagree, we have meetings every year where you can come and make your motions and resolutions to try and change what needs to be changed.
I am not for quotas but lets put the best men and women in places of leadership in our convention.
I do not understand how anyone who has been a member of or pastored Southern Baptist churches, at least in the South, can fail to see the racism present in them. Maybe they don’t keep a barrel of axe handles in the foyer anymore (there was one in my uncle’s church, in Alabama, in the early ’60s, just in case “the n—–‘s came to try to integrate the church”), but racism is there, smouldering underneath, and waiting for an opportunity to spring out. We all have heard stories, and some of us have experienced them firsthand–I certainly have. Granted some of those are 20-30 years out of date, but even when the principals have died, their legacy often remains, and the institutional “DNA” is still there. And it isn’t just “down South,” it happens in the Upper South too. One of our (thankfully) former members told me after an African-American minister preached here that, “those people are welcome to worship here, but if they do, they have to learn to worship as we do.” This was within the last 5 years, as was the time another one of our members, an ordained African-American who has pastored a church, went to interview with a pulpit committee less than 20 miles away. After a cordial meeting, he was escorted out by one of the members who told him, in parting, “You need to remember: we are not as diverse as what you are used to.” He never heard from them again, not even a “thanks but no thanks” note. And last year was not the first time the pulpit personalities at the SBC was all-white. The last one I attended was in Greensboro; Fred Luter may have preached, but that was the only time he was on “stage,” and the only other person of color ever up there was Condoleezza Rice, who is not even Baptist. And need anyone be reminded of the story about Morris Chapman (I think it was) saying the highest ranking African-American at the EC Building was the head janitor? Anyone want a Bible verse? How about, “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation,” found in Exodus 20:5, 34:7, Numbers 14:18, and Deuteronomy 5:9. And by the way, I can exegete that away as well as any of you, but it still sends chills up and down my back when I read it.
I serve a church which is roughly 20% African-American, with a staff which is 25% African-American (including the janitor, who is Caucasian), in an Association which has several predominantly African-American churches. We got where we are by using the “magic” word, INTENTIONALITY. Yes, there are folks who leave over it, but I for one am glad they do. Whether you call it institutional DNA, learned behavior, generationally transmitted behavior, or whatever, it can be changed–but it takes energy to do so, and to expend that sort of energy requires INTENTIONALITY.
John Fariss
I think there are a lot of churches intentionally making changes, reaching out beyond racial boundaries.
My fear is that if you scratch the surface in a lot of places, you will find that racism and discrimination are just below that surface.
This is an interesting blog–and a dangerous one. It is clear that anyone who does not agree with McKissic’s broad, sweeping, subjective statement that the SBC is a “haven of racism,” is not going to get elected “King for the Day.” Yet, even understanding that risk, I think I’ll proffer an opinion as to some assumptions I think are less than well substantiated.
One, there seems to be an assumption that many black pastors desire platform positions at the SBC. I did not say leadership positions because many black pastors have and do have significant leadership positions in the SBC. Like all assumptions, this one might be true, but it is far from proven.
Second, nobody has mentioned the lack of white representation at the National Baptist Convention. Every black pastor that I have know over the last three decades has been dually aligned. This was even more so 15 or 20 years ago. Many black pastors are strong leaders in the National Baptist Convention and I know of no white leaders in that convention. This leads to a third assumption I see.
Third, people use the word race as a descriptive term based upon skin color. Having lived in the inner-city of Oakland, California I think I can safely say that “black” represents a distinct culture, not just a skin color. I’ve preached in black churches and they have a very distinct–and wonderful–expression that is different from the typical SBC church. They, like us, (if we dare use those terms) enjoy their culture. I think it seems wrong to suggest that black churches are forced to remain predominantly black because of racism. Would we say that about a predominantly Chinese church in San Francisco?
Fourth, there seems to be an assumption that the highest level of leadership in the SBC is a “platform position.” Who will sit on your right side the disciples asked? The power of the SBC sits in the pews of the SBC churches. They just allow the “platform” personalities to pretend they are running things. Someone decried being a lowly pastor and “having no role” in the SBC. We have the biggest role — the bank roll.
Fifth, there seems to be the assumption that some mono-lithic “thing” exists called the SBC. No such thing exists, even at a national convention. The problems I see being discussed are certainly, in my mind, geographically colored. In California our leaders come in every color of the rainbow–including black. Our state executive is Hispanic and has been nearly all his life.
My conclusion is: if we try a mono-lithic broad brush approach that includes condemning churches across the board, we will contribute to the problem, not the solution.
Before someone condemns me for being racist because I think someone’s statement is too harsh and broad — live in the inner-city and hear gunfire and watch racial tension on a daily basis. Pastor a church that is 60% of a culture not your own–then you can fire away with impunity at me.
I in no way suggest that McKissic is anything other than a fine, young man. That doesn’t mean I am so enamored by him as to not be willing to have a bit of a disagreement.
PS–My 4 month old granddaughter is half-Hispanic and beautiful. I’m a proud, first-time grandpa (though too young of course) and wanted to shamelessly get that plug in 🙂
Thought I might share some thoughts with you of the history of Calvary Baptist in St. Louis where I was baptized and ordained (’57 & ’62) and which church no longer exists except in union with another church and hence with a different name. I did not know that when I joined Calvary, they had turned down an American Indian for membership. Had I known it, I would not have joined as there was rumors in my family of an ancestor being Cherokee (later turned out to be true). After the pastor came who was to be my ordaining pastor, he persuaded the church to move as the neighborhood was changing from White to Black. During the period before the move, he had a Cherokee pastor from Oklahoma (a man with a degree from Southwestern Seminary) to come and preach a revival. I remember hearing the man preach. Thebn the church moved, nd there were blacks in the new neighbohood, and they began to attend and to join Calvary at its new location. One black member, an engineer at McDonnell-Douglass became not only a deacon but even chairman of deacon. After Calvary sold its building in the new location to a Black congregation, and uniteed with another church in a third location, they apparently had about as many, if not more blacks than whites. The last pastor I heard of them calling in the past few years, was a white fellow from Illinois that the Black members wanted. I preached for my son this past Sunday who has a rural church here in NC. There was a white man and his Black wife in the first service and in the second service there were at 3 or four Black children setting with the white childtren. they came up and shook my hand after the service. Years ago I made it a point to often pray for an end to segregation, and it is beginning to happen. Things are changing. God speed the day, when all prejudice will end.
Having a second marriage will also get one a lot of rejection in churches these days. We are also troubled with the fact that all of our society has been under severe strain and stress for 10 years. Indeed, with the economy’s nose dive, we are suffering from PTSD big time. The middle class has about vanished, and soon the poor will be present in such numbers that our social service systems will be overwhelmed and collapse. God have mercy on us then, if we do not get an answer to our prayers for a Third Great Awakening.
Dave , It would really be a good read if you could get Pastor Dwight McKissic and/or Pastor Fred Luter to comment on any part of this discussion. The timing might not be better.
I wrote on this issue last year. I got little positive response. I know the idea of how to apply this is the sticky issue with some but I think Les said it well earlier, we need to figure this out and get it passed. The SBC in leadership and employees is more white than any of us would ever dream! I do not think this equals racism under the table, or at least I pray it does not, but it does reveal something that needs to be addressed.
I have worked with several black Pastors and I honestly do not know how they do it – they feel alone when it comes to SBC matters. SAD and pathetic.
We must do something!
You know what, Tim, you raise a good point.
This ought not be an issue that the black pastors have to push. The impetus should come from US, not them.
I am thinking about this. We need to call for this to be voted on, or present something new as an alternative.
The impetus for all of this needs to come from the white majority.
Black Baptists shouldn’t have to come hat in hand begging for what we should have been theirs 150 years ago – full partnership in SBC life!
Dave, I really do not understand this statement from my perspective in California. I think that it is actually demeaning to the many–and we have many–black pastors.
I have been associated with this Convention for over 30 years and I simply do not see now, nor have I ever seen, a black pastor “begging with hat in hand.”
I’m not saying this has not existed or may exist in some places but I don’t see it as “rampant” or as widespread (especially in the West) as you put it.
I know this is your blog and you can say whatever you want, but I just think that statement needs some kind of qualification or substantiation if applied across the board.
I’m certainly hesitant to offer anything from California as a model for anywhere else, but in this instance–unless I’ve been blind for three decades–I think we are good (not perfect) examples of diversity at all levels of church life.
I don’t think its that hard to understand, Frank. Dwight McKissic should not have to come to the SBC asking us to deal with the problem of racism and discrimination in the SBC.
We should be going to African Americans, breaking down any walls that stand there and intentionally seeking to include them in every area of Baptist life.
It’s a simple point.
It’s simple to you because you cannot see past your personal relationship with McKissic. I get that. That’s why I have not mentioned other issues that would come to the fore if McKissic ever wanted to be a prominent leader in the SBC. And I’m not talking about the color of his skin.
We disagree on whether there is rampant hatred of blacks from Massachusetts to L.A. in SBC life. I simply do not see it from where I am sitting. You have no problem with that kind of statement because you have a personal investment in McKissic.
No need to be condescending. Race is not a simple issue and making blanket statements implying every SBC church is racist is not supported by any facts or experience I have.
Also, if you are incorrect in your blanket condemnation of churches across the SBC, you’re rhetoric will cause persons who do not feel they are rampant racists to dismiss your cause out of hand.
No, you definitely misunderstand. It has nothing to do with Dwight McKissic.
First of all, I had a couple of conversations with him last year at the convention, and he called me last week about another issue and we got to talking. I respect him, but he and I are not exactly BFFs.
What I am saying is not because of my personal relationship to Dwight McKissic, which is minimal at best.
I am saying that ending discrimination is the job of the majority not the minority. It is our job to tear down the walls, not their job to knock them down.
Dave, you keep arguing a point I’m not making. I agree with what you are saying just not what you said in your post article: the SBC is a “haven of racism.”
This implies an overt across the board condition. I don’t think you have sufficient information to indict me (I’ll just talk for myself at the moment) for racism with no evidence.
Also, I mentioned all the assumptions that are being made. I think working on the basis of assumptions will be counter productive.
I don’t think you can deny that the argument in this thread was greatly based upon the personality you presented. Someone even said, “If NAME said it, it must be a problem.”
I think that is a dangerous way to approach a very volatile issue–beginning with an infallible pope.
So, I don’t disagree with the fight for equality among all. I just don’t think it seems wise to make enemies where none exist. Quite frankly, I don’t know why you will not even entertain the idea that there are places where diverse people are very much an integral part of ministry. The problem as you describe it does not match my experience. That is all I’m saying.
Not wise to make enemies where none exist? What?!?! If as you say, racism is NOT a problem in the SBC, than surely the SBC would have NO PROBLEM condemning racism and encouraging SBC churches to find ways to reach out to “skin colors” different than their own. If such a position and potential resolution would “make enemies”, then that only goes to PROVE there is a racist element in this denomination. Maybe in your ivory towers in California you dont see racism, but even here in Missouri it is obvious. Not only do I see it with my own eyes, but I hear it from my seminary professors who have YEARS of ministry experience, some of whom can give examples of racism as late as the 90’s just before they began to teach. I am sorry, but I think I will trust THEIR observations whose combined experience is far more than the “30 years” that you have. These professors have served in churches across this country, including one professor who actually served the SBC/NAMB in California.
Smus,, before you fall off your high horse at least frame the argument in truth, rather than your flimsy strawman. I never said racism wasn’t a problem in the SBC. I accept your apology for attributing to me something I did not say.
Also, I did not say anything about a resolution making enemies of anyone. I was talking about c alling people racists because they happen to be members of an SBC church. If you think that is a good path to follow to correct the problem you outline, then not much I can say.
When you ever get any experience actually living in an inner city environment where being white is the minority, then I’ll help you back on your high horse.
I don’t know if you feel guilty about your previous racist attitudes and behaviors or not. If you do, then feel free to confess that as you should.
I’ve never had any racist feelings and did not grow up in a racist SBC church as you did, perhaps. If you want my support for a resolution to call anyone associated with the SBC a rampant racist, then consider that a “no vote.”
Just for the sake of the argument, I will agree that the number one most pressing issue in your mind and ministry is racism. In my experience (granted only 30 years) the most pressing problem is economic disadvantage that affects the Hmong, Hispanic, or blacks.
Please be careful not to smoke too close to your straw man.
Now you are calling me a racist? And you say I am using strawmen? First it should be worthy of note that I was not raised in the SBC. I “became” baptist through a SBC college, joined a SBC church after graduation, and received the call to seminary less than 2 years after joining. My current church just had our annual gathering with a “black” National Baptist church where one sunday afternoon they come to our church and lead the service, and two weeks later we go to their church and lead the service. Great time, and I enjoy it (even though I had to miss this years due to heavy class schedule). Actually, my experience with “blacks” in church included a church that had a nice “black” lady give the sermons once a month (I now have a problem with that because she is a woman, not because she is black FYI). I was raised Presbyterian (on my fathers side) by parents and grandparents who taught me to look at what a person has to say, not what they look like. Here at seminary, one of my best friends is from Nigera. And when I look at him, I dont see a black man…I see a stupid Arsenal fan (GO MAN U!!)…lol…he is my friend and brother in Christ, and the fact that he is black does not matter to me. No more than the fact that I have a friend who is a brunette. For me that is the same difference.
It is through having this upbringing, that I CAN come into the SBC and see the racism that exists. Praise the Lord not at my church, but I still see it.
The fact is in your post dated March 3rd 2:30am, you DO say that “race is simply not an issue”. And that is NOT TRUE! Maybe if you got out of the “inner city” and spend time in the rural churches through out America you would see that. Again, i am not talking about the KKK brand of racism. I am talking about the more subtle “wouldnt “they” be more comfortable at “their type” of church.” Again THAT is racism, and THAT needs to be aggressively rejected and removed from SBC life. We spend all this time and effort talking about the sin of alcohol, or the sin of abortion, or the sin of homosexuality. But we spend little to no effort to confront the sin of racism.
BTW…Don’t ever call me a racist or someone who was raised as a racist again…
Frank, trying to converse with you is about as frustrating as trying to nail jello to a wall. I just wish you could converse and share opinions without turning everything personal. Do you think that is possible?
I agree—although we (white majority) need to make sure that it’s not just something to make us feel good, but rather something that:
1. Really works
2. Really works
3. Meets the need as perceived by the minority–by that, I mean solving first the problem as seen by the African-American members of the SBC, not what we white guys think the problem is.
For example, someone mentioned that the people ‘on the platform’ aren’t really the most important and if we want to see change, we should focus where it’s most important. But if a first step is to fix something as simple as who preaches one of several sermons or who presents one of an endless litany of reports—then we’re being foolish not to start there. We’d be foolish to end there, but if we can do a few easier things, maybe those will steamroll into larger, more permanently effective things.
And for the record: I’m ecstatic to hear from people on this blog that racism isn’t a problem in your church or state convention. Down here in the South, and in the heart of the SBC, it’s so endemic as to be beyond funny. We need churches planted outside of the South, a name that fits around the nation, and some serious repentance and disciple-making, starting with all of us that claim to lead.
Seriously, in both undergraduate and graduate Baptist heritage classes, I was taught the reason for founding the SBC in 2 sessions. At OBU, at the least, the Baptist Heritage professor gave us an entire class period to argue about it and discuss it, but in seminary? 1 mention and then moving on. With more focus on the reasoning of “northern control” rather than the slavery issue. No real discussion of Baptist compliance in Jim Crow-era issues, nothing.
Pardon the expression, but we are, in general, white-washing our history.
However, a practical plan would be a nice thing to have. I think those of you going to Phoenix are going to need 2/3 to get the motion considered if the Exec. Committee reports as it stands. What’s the plan if you get 2/3 minus a handful—the majority are for it, sure, but not enough to even discuss it, much less vote it.
And are there other ways, perhaps better ways, to address the whole issue? Other than realizing that it’s going to take:
1. Admitting that a single-voted action is not going to fix it. We’re talking a real lifestyle change in the SBC.
2. Building real relationships at the personal level and church level.
Anyway, I’ve got to get ready to preach tonight.
Doug, thanks for a well-thought, reasonable perspective on the matter. I thoroughly agree that this is a matter in which geography plays a part.
Agreed as well. We don’t struggle as much with white/black issues here in the Dakotas as we might struggle with white/Native American issues instead. But that struggle is a personal one for some people and not as much at the church level as far as I can see.
Thanks for the compliment, Frank. Every now and then, I try to be reasonable.
Dwight or Fred would get my vote even before this race discussion.
I’m particularly fond of Dr. Luter every since he came on my radar about fifteen years ago. I’ve enjoyed every opportunity to listen to this man.
Dr. Luter would be a fine man to hold any level of leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention.
I had the privilege of having Black people as bosses, Chairman of the Dept, etc., when I was teaching. It was my experiences with them as fellow students, teachers, and as supervisors, that persuaded me that they were as talented, if not more so, than I am, if God so gifted them. I found African Americans to be a caring people, their assimilation of the Christian Faith often surpassed that of their White counter-parts. Today I was reading a biography of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by Stephen B. Oates. In it the author cited Dr. King as saying: “Arnold Toynbee says in A Study of History that it may be the Negro will give the new spiritual dynamic to Western civilization that it so desperately needs to survive.”(p133) I put that with Eric Metaxas’ biography of Bonhoeffer in which Metaxas discusses the African American’s regard for the Bible as particularly impressive to Bonhoeffer. He also pointed out the influence of the Negro Spirituals, one of the great bodies of inspirational music, on Bonhoeffer. I add to it what I know about the Black peoples regard for Holy Scripture and would note the following.
In Walter Isaacson’s (I do not have my information at hand but I think I have the right author) The Hairstons: An American Family in Black and White, there is an instance in Black History in World War II where a Black officer was in training with the 24th colored infantry (one of the Buffalo Soldier regiments) at a base in Arizona (Ft. Grant, I think). He was with the other black officers in the chapel, when a white major or colonel came in to talk with them concerning their pending participation in the battles in Italy. The officer said wih all the prejudices he could muster, “You people constitute 10% of the population, and I am going to see to it that you constitute 10% of the casualties.” Gloom settled over the officers, because in war the soldiers are told to get the enemy to die for his country. Our soldiers job is to kill the enemy. After the meeting the white officer left, and just then the ranking black officer on post, a General who was a chaplain, came out of the offices behind the altar quoting I Cors.13, “love suffers long and is kind,…” That was his effort to help his officers cope with the expression of prejudice by that white officer.
Fast forward to the Korean Conflict. The Black Hairston who had been in that chapel had joined the air force and had become a pilot. One day he was ordered to fly a General over the battle lines. When he saw the General he realized that it was the fellow who had made those racist remarks in the chapel in in Arizona in World War II. His unit had suffered many casualties. He vowed to get revenge. The observation plane was an in-line two seater. The general was so big that he could not wear a parachute, while the Black officer/pilot wore his. When they were up to cruising altitude, the pilot set the plane up to crash and reached out to open the door, preparing to abandon the plane and let it go down with the General. Just then the voice of the Chaplain from years before came back into his mind quoting, “Love suffers long, and is kind,….” The pilot could not continue. Instead he finished the flight, landed, saluted the General, and marched away. A Black General, a Chaplain, quoting I Cors.13 during training in World War II saved the life of a White General some years late in the Korean Conflict.
That experience is suggestive and illustrative of the the Bible’s influence on African Americans, and it underscores the reply to our new atheists and their rabid attacks on the Christian Faith as liable to to run aground on the shoals of those like the African American believers who have found the message of Jesus as the reason for being fully and truly human in the midst of a society that sought to degrade them. I feel like saying, “Praise God for His wonderful works to the children of men, especially for His great work in the lives of our Black brethren.”
Thanks for this post, Dave. Very well-balanced. It concerns me that many of black churches in my town are not particularly orthodox in their teaching. The church I am a member of is historically a white church, but that has been changing slowly over time. God has worked in amazing ways to change the hearts of people in my church who have been racist. A few of our membership and even more of our regular attendees are black. Some well minister with us. In recent times we have engaged in what I would consider significant ministry to black neighborhoods. However, I’ll know we’ve truly crossed the threshold when blacks have significant leadership among us and no one thinks anything is any different.
“However, I’ll know we’ve truly crossed the threshold when blacks have significant leadership among us and no one thinks anything is any different.”
Yep!
Dave,
Were you at the 1995 annual meeting? I don’t think it was in Indy.
Just checked, it was in Atlanta.
But that brings up a interesting point. Some people here obviously have a problem with Bro. McKissic’s resolution. How about a simple resolution admitting we have not adhered to the 1995 Resolution, that we now reaffirm what it said, and wish to “re”-strive to eliminate racism in all its forms in SBC life. That may not carry the same weight as Bro. McKissic’s resolution, but it may be enough to get people to think, with out feeling overtly targeted.
I’m old, it all runs together and gets confusing.
I was at the meeting in which we formally repented. I don’t remember when and where. I would have said it was Indy. But that is based on memory.
An interesting followup to this chain of discussions:
http://www.sbclife.org/Articles/2011/04/Sla2.asp
I’m thrilled to see the effort that has been made in this regard and reflected in this report – but time has long passed without any action. Sometimes you need to get the job done without looking for an astronaut to fill the job or begging someone to do it . Even someone with an SBC title attending a black Baptist church where he lives would be a huge step in that direction . Is there such a person that can go without an entourage and maybe include his wife. I doubt it .
I have a tough time understanding how the SBC can have allowed the NAMB to operate as it did and then immediately turn around and give such an important issue only a report. I see it as a ” control issue ” as the rest of the SBC is probably just as messed up as NAMB was/ still is . The report isn’t worth the money it cost to produce it and if that is the best effort our President of SBC can produce then he should step aside. Same ole – same ole and the beat goes on. The Federal Government has looked into cases of embezzlement of funds within churches before and if the qualifying groundwork has been laid at SBC could force more effective solutions. They have been given every chance to make amends and humble themselves before men and God . Amen.
I am a on the fence. There are problems that exist. But this is all this brother talks about. I am disgusted with the allusion to the sin of homosexuality and racism. Nice one brother. That’s just poor logic. I would be more impressed with him articulating racism in the National Baptist Convention. I would like to hear him take a blog post or two on black liberation theology. I would love to hear him denounce Jeremiah Wright’s views. I would love to hear a critical analysis of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and how their politics and constant marching and rants are exploiting African Americans.
I’m African American and I’m tired of the woe is me, mentality.
I don’t believe the SBC needs Affirmative action. I believe people attend churches that are basically the make of their community, and some are intentionally/unintentionally segregated.
Yes, problems exist. But balance is needed because he’s polarized on this issue. Go to his blog, and it’s the same thing, over and over. I’m not a Calvinist but I would rather see Voddie Baucham or Eric Redmon as SBC president. Fred Luter, I can’t get pass his accent at times. I’ve been by his website to listen to his sermons. I can’t see what would qualify him as a major leader. Church size? I don’t know. I’m not trying to be cruel, I just want to understand a little better.
I think if the SBC would allow him to any position of leadership it would be because of name recognition and that would be a shame. I may not agree with the other brothers that I mentioned earlier in some areas, but they are thinkers. They can lift the text of scripture and they seem to have insight on various subject matters that are thought out.
Fred Luter doesn’t strike me as a thinker. Maybe I’ve missed something. I’m certainly not questioning his heart or motives, or ministry to his church.
Finally, my concerns aren’t about race or ethnicity at all. I’m concerned with the conservative and the liberal. The biblical and the unbiblical. Getting the gospel out, evangelism, discipleship, prayer, ministry.