John H Armstrong

Martin Luther King, Jr.: A Tribute

The life and legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr., is, and will continue to be, debated in America. (It is far less debated by non-Americans who see him almost entirely in positive terms.) I suppose it will take another forty years for his life to be fully appreciated in the way it really should be. But today is a very unique reminder of his life's message. As we stand on the eve of the inauguration of the 44th president of the United States we see a part of Dr. King's dream alive and well.

Appreciating Dr. King was not always the case, especially among many white Christians in America. When I was a child he was widely hated. Some even said he was a Communist, following the lead of J. Edgar Hoover, a shady and less than decent man if there ever was one. (And he promoted religion as the basis for American life. I can still recall  a tract he wrote urging parents to take their children to Sunday School.) Personally, I thank God the "good ole days" days of the 1960s are gone, though there is still much to be done as we seek to process and apply King's legacy. And racism is a long way from over. Anyone who is observant can see this is true every single day.

Martin Luther King, Jr., as we all know, lived a relatively short life filled with amazing drama. It culminated in his assassination in Memphis. This fateful day and time I will never forget. I was a student standing on the balcony of my apartment building at the University of Alabama when I first heard the news. I saw a mixture of sadness and joy all around me. It was quite eerie in one sense. I was still processing how I understood the times and cannot say that I was a civil-rights marcher or a strong advocate of Dr. King's work, though I did know in my heart of hearts that King was essentially right about the problem in America. I regret I did not see this sooner and actually join him but honesty compels me to tell the truth about my own development.

Just before Dr. King's tragic death he said: "Whenever you set out to build a temple, you must face the fact that there is a tension at the heart of the universe between good and evil." He lived in that tension and modeled grace in the midst of what we now know was deep human fear. The man was courageous but filled with doubt. He was faithful to the call God had placed upon his life. What is tragic in today's world is that so few who celebrate his life realize that he got this boldness from a deep awareness that God had called him to this work against his own will. I know what some will say---his theology was not conservative at every point. This is true but his faith was obviously deep and real and his life, though morally flawed, was a living testimony to the grace of God.

Raised by a strict minister father who "ruled his home like a fierce Old Testament patriarch" King first became a scholar who was passionately caught up with the teachings of Jesus, Thoreau and Gandhi. This, of course, is not your typical threesome for influence in most conservative circles. He was eventually driven by a vision of racial equality in a time when such seemed utterly impossible. But what he really wanted was to be a university professor more than anything else. He longed to do research and to write, to teach and to settle into a home life of simple joy. He really had little desire to be in the South, much less as a pastor at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. His pastorate was really meant to be a stepping-stone to the better life ahead. But the racial discrimination that he saw firsthand stirred him to action. The forces that shaped him---parental, cultural, spiritual and intellectual---all came to bear on his soul at a critical juncture in American history. The rest is history.

Today King is in danger of becoming an abstract symbol. But the man is far more important than this symbol. In the man we see all the weakness joined with all the grace. We see the intellect linked with compassion and to a deep sense of justice. We see the flaws but we also see the beauty.

The single most powerful thing I have learned from Dr. King is found in five simple words: "I spoke from the heart" (1963). I have always tried to do the same, whether to friend or foe. It has gotten me into trouble but it has always led me to the love of Christ in the end.

Martin Luther King, Jr., did speak from the heart and the world was better because he did. He surely made mistakes but he learned from them time and time again. He learned to take action after sober, calculated and prayerful reflection. And he learned quickly from many hard experiences. The man then powerfully used peace to bring about justice during a time of amazing social upheaval that the present generation knows so little about. May the remembrance of this good man today bring about a new call for justice and peace in America.

Does Obama's Election Really Impact the Race Question?

Many white Americans cannot understand how the election of Barack Obama provides a new context for life in American for millions of people, especially African-Americans. James Thindwa, a 53 year-old executive director of Chicago's office of Jobs with Justice, understands otherwise. Said the African-American man after the election, "People on the receiving end of racism start believing in the story of their inferiority." Thindwa notes that for years he has felt that whites look at him as undeserving of his job or that they have lower expectations of him. It is hard for someone like me to relate to this feeling because I am white and grew up with great privilege and opportunity and without racial stereotypes.

After the election Thindwa said his views have begun to change. "Now white folks are more credible. They say, 'We are not racist,' but the vote for Obama established that their claim that they have made progress is more than rhetorical."

How profound is this new response on the part of blacks? We don't know but we can pray that it's effects will be deep and long-lasting. Many feel transformed by Obama's victory. They are speaking about renewed hope for real equity and a much brighter future. I do not think this is just post-election good feeling. I think a great deal of how we perceive our lives and opportunities is rooted in how we have been treated and how we perceive others even if they have actually treated us well.

An African-American woman in South Holland, Illinois, said that Obama's victory will allow her family to be seen as the norm now, not as the exception. She notes that she can begin to trust that people will look beyond the stereotypes and not think that her sons are likely to become criminals or end up uneducated. "Their futures are brighter for me because I hope that people will really look at them for who they are."

A great deal of human success is rooted in our self-perception. The election of Barack Obama will not alter hearts but it will change many perceptions about life and human respect. I celebrate this change and pray that it will promote the advancement of all minorities in America. I also hope that someday we will elect a woman and thus break the glass ceiling that still exists in that part of our life together in this great nation.

The End of Racism in This Country

I still would not believe it unless I heard it with my own ears and watched him say it with my own eyes. Like some of you I am watching little bits and pieces of the convention coverage of the Democratic Party this week in Denver. I particularly like watching Public Broadcast System (PBS) since they do less commentary and more basic news coverage. Much of the speaking tonight is pep-rally type stuff, except for Michelle Obama who I want to hear speak personally. In between the PBS folks interview leading Democrats, not the various talking heads.

Just a moment ago, at about 8:00 p.m. (CDT), former President Jimmy Carter was interviewed. In speaking about the election of Barack Obama he said, "If Obama is elected president, and I believe that he will be, it will mark the end of racism and prejudice in America." Even the PBS gang was floored. One said, "That is quite a statement." Carter didn't budge. Either the former president has gotten more feeble than I realized or his liberal ideology has overwhelmed him beyond belief. I doubt the most ardent black supporter of Obama would agree with such a statement. It is, put as respectfully as I know how to say it, patently foolish. I would hope he would have backed off if he had been cross-examined but the interview ended there so we may never know. This is not the only foolish thing President Carter has said in the last few years. Like so many elderly speakers and leaders he seems to have never learned to "be quiet" when his time has passed. I really wish he would stick to his good will work and the Habitat ministry and all the other good works he has performed. He was once a very good, and seeming happy and contented, ex-President but now he has become a rather foolish person in a number of ways. It is actually very sad to see. Even his own party will not give him much attention this week, though he is there as a "super-delegate."

If you want to see some amazing theater and very strange claims watch these two conventions this week and next. You would think the messiah was either a Democrat or a Republican, depending on the party you listen to. But Jimmy Carter, the Christian who knows his Bible quite well, should know much better than the ordinary person that the election of a Democrat as the president will not end racism. What on earth was he thinking?

What on Earth Do We Make of Jesse Jackson?

Jesse Jackson cannot avoid the news cycle. He is either running here or there in an attempt to free prisoners overseas or he's making another "racist" statement that should offend millions of black Americans. I am not sure that his statements offend large numbers of black people but they do offend me!

Not only did Rev. Jackson mock Senator Obama, in a recently captured private statement, but he also used the N-word during a break in the same TV interview. Jackson apologized to Obama for the first statement and then apologized again last week for his use of the N-word. People ask, "How can he do this?" Simply put: "Out of the heart the mouth speaks." Basic biblical principle 101: Jackson thinks this way or he wouldn't speak this way. This is the same person who referred to the Jews with similarly offensive language some years ago. And this is a Baptist minister who covered-up a long-standing sexual indiscretion that produced a child. It took tabloid journalism to finally reveal this moral breakdown.

In the words captured on the recent video tape Jackson referred to Obama as "talking down to black people" and to other blacks with the N-word. We all know that black ghetto youth and rappers use the N-word routinely to refer to one another. I have always found it interesting that if I used the N-word, and I was taught to never use it or I would be severely punished (by my godly parents in the pre-Civil Rights South no less), then I would be widely vilified. But if Jesse Jackson uses it he gets away with a mild apology.  Jackson apologized for using "hurtful words." Please, that's all he can say?

This is also the same minister who once opposed abortion and admitted that it would result in the killing of millions of black Americans. He then changed his view at a time when he had no choice politically if he wanted to retain power and influence in the party of his choice. So much for strong moral and ethical convictions.

Jesse Jackson Sr.'s whole life seems to be one mess-up and disappointment after another. I find his attempt to present leadership to millions repugnant in the light of the moral standards a minister should adhere to in his life and speech. And when he falls his apologies are always so predictable and lame that it makes you wonder about him even more.

I wish I was wrong here but the evidence is so startling that I cannot understand why Jackson is still seen as a great leader by so many people, especially within the African-American Christian community. I do not doubt that he has done some good but I wonder how this cancels out the words that fall so freely from his lips, words that clearly undermine his moral standing and profoundly harm others.

The old saying, "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" is a myth if there ever was one. Words can heal and words can destroy. I know this much---Jesse Jackson's words are often in the second category. They destroy others. I pray that Rev. Jackson will show more than temporary remorse for his frequent offensive actions and statements. This is not about politics at all. Its about a minister who doesn't walk the walk!

We Shall Not Be Moved

Far too few people realize that the Civil Rights Movement would never have happened without the African-American Church. This was a deeply spiritual movement, bathed in prayer and preaching, like so many profound social movements in America's history. This film sets out to show how this really happened. Narrated by Ossie Davis it proves to be a great introduction to a theme that I fear is almost lost to modern Christians.

The Civil Rights Movement has been examined from many different angles but this is the first attempt to connect it directly to the Church. What role did churches really have in the rise and history of this movement and why was this so important in the long run? Why were ministers so central to this effort and how did they give it strength without becoming political partisans, at least in terms of the kind of politics that are normally associated with such social change today?

The principal participants in the Civil Rights Movement are seen on this film and openly talk about their role. Most of them are now retired ministers. One of them is an important historian of the black churches and their movement. Others include people who were youthful participants in the struggle, including two of the nine students who integrated Central High School in Little Rick in 1957.

This film should be seen by Christians of all backgrounds and ages. It is a production of Family Net Television and is suitable for younger viewers if you want them to understand the real truth of this important era in American history.

All American movements seem to become associated with music. This was very true of the Civil Rights Movement. A great rendition of the popular 1963 song by The Seekers, upon which the title of this film is based, can be accessed on You Tube. You will enjoy watching this clip.

Citizen King: The Non-Partisan Power of the Prophet

Over the course of 2008 the issue of race has become a subject of conversation for many Americans. The political candidacy of Senator Barack Obama has guaranteed that this would happen. And the preaching segments of Dr. Jeremiah Wright, seen for days on national television, forced us all to have a "brief" conversation about race once again. After saying that he would not disown Wright Senator Obama then chose to do exactly that. Wright responded by reminding us that Obama is a politician and that this is what he knew he would eventually have to do. My guess is that he meant that in a mostly positive way but I am not sure.

What I am sure of is that all prophets, of all colors and types, cannot be good politicians. I watched the PBS video, Citizen King, this weekend and was made aware of this by rethinking the life and work of Martin Luther King, Jr. The video covers a five-year period of King's life leading up to his assassination in April of 1968. These were his most active years of national work to bring about an end to systemic injustice and racism. The story begins with the struggle in Birmingham and ends with his last hours in Memphis. This is an excellent video that explores these five years by using a number of great interviews and a large amount of video footage from the era. Diaries, letters, eyewitness accounts, friends, journalists and political leaders all appear and thus give the film rich texture.

There are a number of things in this presentation that reminded me of the power of Martin Luther King, Jr. to speak with integrity to moral and social issues. Less than a year before his death Dr. King decided to express his open misgivings and opposition to the Vietnam War. People around him argued about the responses that he should give but the platform King chose was the famous Riverside Church in Harlem. There, on April 4, 1967, a year before his death, he preached a sermon in New York that was featured on this film. Here is a portion of what Dr. King said:

I speak as one who loves America and the leaders of our own nation. The great initiative in this war is ours, the initiative to stop it. . . . Don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine messianic force, to be a sort of policeman for the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment and it seems that I can hear God saying to America "You're too arrogant! If you don't change your ways I will rise up and break the backbone of your power and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I am God."

I was so taken by this portion of Dr. King's sermon that I played it several times and then wrote down the words printed above. I was moved to ask: "Where are the voices in our day that have the platform and the willingness to say such a thing to the powerful in America, found obviously in both political parties?" These were the powerful words of a moral and spiritual prophet who refused to allow politicians to silence him.

President Johnson was angered by this sermon. He felt that King owed him a lot since he had promoted Civil Rights legislation and welcomed him to the White House on several occasions. (After this speech Dr. King was never invited to the White House again!) To LBJ, a consummate politician, King's reponse was seen as a politically stunning move against him. King knew that he was not attacking Johnson as a person but rather speaking to power as God's public servant. LBJ, in private, called King (after this sermon), "a nigger preacher."

King went on to lead "the poor people's campaign" until his death. When he died he was in Memphis to support a strike by the garbage workers who were grossly underpaid and working in unsafe conditions. (Two had been killed in an accident and this sparked an open protest!) So King died serving the weakest and poorest people in Memphis, the garbage collectors. This is truly a fitting context for the end to such an amazing life.

Here is the point. King was respectful toward LBJ but he never entered the political arena and thus never became a partisan. In fact, he was not a social reformer or a politician if the truth be known. He was a minister of the gospel who wanted to see freedom and justice for the weakest of those who were Christians and citizen of the U. S. He remained a faithful minister/prophet until the end.

The film includes a clip from a young Senator Robert Byrd, one of the biggest hypocrites and pork spenders in U. S. history, who attacked King publicly in 1967 by saying that when the trouble started King always ran away. It is pretty stunning to watch this man, who now acts so self-righteous and holy in his very partisan speeches, display his true colors, colors which are plainly rooted historically in his membership in the KKK as a young man, a membership he will not talk about now.

The more I have read and studied Martin Luther King, Jr.'s life the more I have become amazed at his unique greatness. He did not live the good life. He was flawed and openly admitted it. But he rose above those private flaws and restored his marriage and his love for his wife and children. (This information came about via J. Edgar Hoover's wire-tapping his phone so they could find something with which to discredit him with in public.) But King rose above all of this and laid down his life for his God and his prophetic calling.

The one aspect of his preaching that I most disagree, and this only became prominent in his last year, is his approach to economic solutions for the the poor. During the "poor people's campaign" he said, "We cannot solve our problems without a radical redistribution of economic power." I profoundly disagree with this solution and believe it will not solve the economic woes of poor people. This form of socialism is so appealing to well-meaning young Christians but it is fraught with massive problems. What African-Americans need, and many now have, is equal access to education and jobs. We are not where we should be but we've made progress. If the church can help solve community problems, especially the in breakdown of morality and the family, then the system may yet work for all if justice prevails. (Unless you are a radical socialist you know that Utopian ideas very often drive this agenda and these will always fail.)

The question we still face is I think is this: "Can we embrace racial diversity and personal freedom, as well as economic diversity and social freedom, in a context of moral responsibility that will benefit the least among us and maximize true freedom in the very best Constitutional sense?" The way to do this is where there will always be legitimate debate. While unfettered wealth production can spoil a nation it need not do this, especially if we can again see the kind of moral courage that Dr. King lived as a prophet, not as a politician.

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting
2002
4 programs, each 56 minute episodes

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow series caught my attention because of the blog I wrote on May 6 regarding race. The producer, William Jersey, is a Wheaton College graduate and learning this prompted me to familiarize myself with his documentary film work, much of which deals with race issues. This series of four programs is, in some ways, more powerful than Ken Burns' famous Civil War series and the civil rights series, Eyes on the Prize, both award winning documentary films. In the words of Newsday, "It demonstrates why we can't hope to understand current issues of race and prejudice without facing up to our own ungodly brutal past." I concur and highly recommend this series. In my quest to understand the issue of race much better this proved to be as moving and gripping a presentation, quite honestly, as anything I have previously seen on screen.

This series also has several valuable Web sites associated with it. There is a Jim Crow history site and information at Public Broadcast System as well.

Emancipation formally ended slavery. The amendment of the Constitution legally ended it. But Supreme Court decisions, especially on a voting rights act in 1875, kept slavery (in a less legal but at times equally brutal and demeaning way) alive until the 1950s and 1960s. What black people fought for, in the Civil War, as well as in World War I and World War II, was not to be their's until 1954 and then (truly) in 1964. Many of you may feel like you know this history but I majored in American history and there were a number of lessons learned in this series. My regard for W. E. B. DuBois' understanding of how to change the race issue in America, and his efforts to that end, rose dramatically upon seeing this series. And my understanding of the failures of Booker T. Washington's approach to race increased just as dramatically.

Segregation was more than a system of whites and coloreds. It was legal apartheid of the worst sort. And it would be a correct use of the term to call the lynching movements in the South as nothing short of sanctioned, or tolerated, terrorism against an entire race of people. But the NAACP and people like Ida B. Wells labored to change the culture with real effect over time. The first Supreme Court decision won was argued by Charles Hamilton Houston, the legal representative of the NAACP, the same position held by Thurgood Marshall before he was placed on the Supreme Court.

The Civil Rights Movement, which most of us living now, at least if we were born before 1960, know something about from experience was really launched because of the successful Brown vs. Board of Education decision in 1954 that began to tear down "separate but equal" arguments as both immoral and illegal.

Since race has been pushed forward by recent political developments it is a good time for all of us, especially white Christians, to better understand why the battle before us is so important and why the victory is still only partial, though the gains made are immense compared to the long historical nightmare that America inflicted upon African-American people. Truly "racism is America's original sin." We still have work to do and the sooner more of us understood this the stronger will be our mission as a Church in America.

How We Define Race and Why

When Father Michael Pflegler, a white Catholic priest serving a Chicago South Side back congregation, railed on Hillary Clinton nine days ago people were rightly appalled. (By the way, Father Michael Pflegler has been around quite awhile and has had a very effective ministry that looks and feels like a charismatic black congregation, not a typical Roman Catholic parish in the city!) His silly tirade of May 25 created a whole new media buzz about Obama and Trinity Church. It then led to Obama's withdrawal from his membership at Trinity United Church of Christ. What Pflegler said, as he adopted a mock voice to represent Clinton, was (in effect): “I am white. I’m entitled. And a black man is stealing my show.” When this clip made it to You Tube it became instant news. (How much has You Tube changed the way we get the news and how fast we respond to it? This is another case of how techne squeezes out thought and true wisdom, as I wrote in my ACT 3 Weekly E-zine column yesterday. You can read it on the home page, see the top bar of the page, and subscribe there for future issues weekly.) 

Well, has it dawned on anyone that Father Pflegler was not quite right about this matter of race no matter how you hear his words? What if he had been more precise and said, “A half-black man is trying to steal my nomination!” Many would have been horrified. It would have seemed even more racist than much of what we now call racism. But genetically Senator Obama is half-white and half-black, as we all well know. His father was Kenyan and his mother was from Kansas. This makes Obama, in the best sense, a true “African-American.”

But this is not my point. My point is far more interesting than what seems so obvious about all of this. At some point in his life Barack Obama made a choice about how he would understand his race. When he ran for the senate in Illinois he even joked about the fact that if he had taken his mother’s name, the person who raised him along with her parents, he would have been Barry Dunham. Instead he chose his African name and thus became Barack Hussein Obama, in honor of the father that he dreamed about and yet hardly knew. (See his book, Dreams of My Father.)

So will Barack Obama, if he is elected, become our first black president? Well, yes and no. Scientifically the correct answer is no. His race, using the term as it has normally been used, should correctly be identified as mixed. The 2000 census would support this distinction. But sociologically and legally we have long applied a different rule throughout America's tortured history in dealing with race. The oddity is that this is a rule that comes directly from our overtly racist past. It should give Obama, and countless others, real pause. This old rule was simple, and I heard it growing up all the time: “If he has one drop of black blood in him, then he’s black.”

In my time this was why many churches discouraged blacks from joining us. It would lead to interracial dating. In the South this was feared so deeply that we even had Bible verses to support our racist views and often used these to oppose integration. But this “One Drop Rule” clearly comes from the days of slavery. It was created to enforce a strict economic basis for broadening slavery. White men could have sex with black slaves but the children would always be slaves, even though many would eventually look more white than black.

This crude and horrid justification for adding slaves morphed into an even broader legal concept called the “one black ancestor rule.” Even court decisions referred to this as “the traceable amount rule.” According to anthropologists the really unique thing about all this history is that no other racial group in America has had to deal with such a rule, socially or legally.

In our first one hundred years as a nation the only category Barack Obama could have chosen, in any context at all, was either black or white. Chuck Goudie, a local Chicago investigative reporter noted recently that it wasn’t until the census of 2000 that people were instructed to mark one or more races that applied to them. And the number of choices on the census was 63! We are increasingly a mixed-race country if there ever was one and I welcome it. It is not the categories of race that should unite us but rather a deep and abiding consensus about our core values and a broad commitment to liberty and freedom. This is what we are always in danger of losing.

Ironically, when Barack Obama ran in Illinois there were doubts about whether he was “black enough” for the black electorate of Chicago. He faced these same issues with some of the black electorate in late 2007 and early 2008 until he gained momentum in Iowa and beyond. At that time Obama said, “We have had a lot of issues about our identity and whether we’re authentic enough. What’s really important is for us to embrace the cultural implications that we possess and the struggles we’ve overcome.” Amen!

The point here is that the race struggle continues (in unique ways) even though the forms of it have changed rather obviously since Jim Crow. Honestly, I wish we were at the place where we could discuss this simple fact—Barack Obama is a mixed race man, period. But then we should say, “So what?” This has nothing to do with his qualifications, or lack thereof, to be the next president. But both Barack Obama, and the people around him (especially the media), have all made absolutely certain that we think of him as the “black candidate.” By this choice, and others like it, our collective national race problem will not go away anytime soon regardless of what happens to Barack Obama. Many will vote against him based upon his race, often being private about it. Many will vote for him based upon race, often openly admitting this and even suggesting that “It is time we elect a black man.” (The idea here is that we will expel our collective demons if we just elect a black man as president!) And few of either of these two responses will come from people who have not bought into the massive stereotypes that define our current social realities.

Since I argued that “mixed race” children were a non-issue, even in my teen years in Southern church youth groups, I am frankly amazed at how so many of a liberal political and social persuasion want to keep these stereotypes alive. I do wonder about their reasons. And I seriously wonder how this stereotyping helps bring about reconciliation. My goal, as a Christian, will always be the latter. 

Jeremiah Wright is Your Brother

Like him or not Jeremiah Wright is your brother in Christ if you are a Christian. I know, some readers will choke and fume and react and then say, "That is simply not possible." I am really not talking to you because you have already  determined who is and is not a Christian based upon what you hear and read, not upon the New Testament criteria themselves. (It is not your vocation, I can assure you, to make these kinds of determinations in the first place but never tell that to a person who "knows" that they "know" who is and is not a Christian!)

The biblical criteria are simple: (1) Confess faith in Christ the Lord who is risen (2) Be a baptized follower of the Savior in the fellowship of his Church. Since none of us lives the life of Christ with even the remotest perfection then all such standards should be jettisoned by people of real charity. Wright, by these and many other standards, is my brother. I do not agree with him at times, as I have noted, but then I don't agree with a lot of my brothers and sisters about a lot of things.

This all comes down to charity, true Christian charity. You can dislike the man's statements, you can accuse him as you wish, but don't be surprised when you meet him in the presence of Christ someday.

Is it possible that we could agree on this much? In conservative white America I doubt it. The well is so poisoned by hate, and by vicious hate speech, that we do not care who might actually be our brothers and sisters. And yet we wonder why the younger generation is leaving the church in droves.

My good friend Jayson Byassee, who speaks for us at our first ACT 3 Luncheon in two weeks (see www.act3online.com to sign up), had an article in Christianity Today yesterday that sums up what I feel very well. I encourage you to read it for yourself.

A Time for Burning: The Missional Church and Race

A Time for Burning was called by The New York Times, “A glowing beauty.” It is a genuinely gripping film, produced at the height of the Civil Rights Movement in 1966. It poignantly captures the mood of those times in ways that would still open the eyes of many who either did not live in the 1960s or who have too easily, and far too quickly, forgotten that era.

The award-winning director of A Time for Burning is San Francisco filmmaker Bill Jersey, who earned his B. A. at Wheaton College and his M.A. in film at USC. This controversial film, which was actually rejected by the three major networks, examines the issue of race through the lens of two primary characters, one of whom is the Rev. William Youngdahl, the pastor of Augustana Lutheran Church in Omaha, Nebraska. The other is a local black barber who tells Youngdahl, in a moving scene that should shout at any Christian who cares about the mission of Jesus deeply, that “Jesus is contaminated.” The pastor encouraged his white, middle-class congregation to reach out to local black Lutherans, from nearby Hope Lutheran Church, in a show of support and friendship. He proposes than ten families from each congregation visit the respective churches and seek to establish a relationship. (A scene where the youth from both churches converse is also included, showing how hard it was even for young people to break down the walls of that time.) Tensions within the Augustana community run very high as members of both races grapple with long-held prejudices.

The film is shot in “cinéma vérite” style, which means it has no script and no narrator. It primarily chronicles the difficult relationship between Youngdahl and his parishioners. Rev. Youngdahl was the son of a former Minnesota governor and federal judge and worked with great patience to help his folk understand what the real issues were for them as a church. At one point an Omaha Lutheran minister from Luther Memorial Church tells Youngdahl that “This one lady said to me, pastor, she said, I want them to have everything I have, I want God to bless them as much as he blesses me, but she says, pastor, I just can’t be in the same room with them, it just bothers me.” A major concern expressed by white parishioners is that blacks will move into the church’s neighborhood and thus property values will decline, a common objection during the Civil Rights era. The attempt to reach out to black Lutherans eventually cost Youngdahl his job.

The film was produced and distributed by the Lutheran Film Associates (LFA), which was begin in 1952. It is a project of both the ELCA and the LCMS. Its first motion picture is the now well-known film, Martin Luther, released in 1953. The success of that movie, still seen by thousands of people each year, led to subsequent films, besides A Time for Burning, including Question 7 and The Joy of Bach. LFA continues to produce and distribute films for U. S. Lutherans. Information is available at: www.lutheranfilm.org.

The newer version of this 1966 film includes an interview that Bill Jersey did with Ernie Chambers, the black barber in the original story. Forty years later the viewer is given a powerful portrait of how the issue of race impacted Ernie’s life from the 1960s on.  Chambers completed law school and ended up being elected to the Nebraska legislature in 1970. By 2005 Ernie became the longest serving state Senator in the history of Nebraska. Ernie represents the kind of anger we have recently witnessed in our wider culture, an anger that resulted from the Civil Rights era and an anger that still abides with us to this day, whether we recognize it or not. Ernie’s very modern, and current, story stands as a sad warning to the Church that a gospel not lived within costly relationships is no gospel and in the end it becomes a gospel that does serious damage to people. 

This black and white film runs for only 58 minutes. I got my copy from NetFlix. I am quite sure that it is available through many library systems. This new (2006) version is available on DVD and includes several important features besides the powerful interview with Ernie Chambers mentioned above. This interview alone will allow many white Christians to better understand how and why a black man can react so strongly against Christianity.

I was encouraged to see this film by a career missionary leader who told me how powerfully it would impact my own missional paradigm. He was right. I thus urge you to see it and to interact with it. Its utter simplicity takes you back to an era that is still very hard to comprehend. The tendency for many of us will be to either not believe this story happened unless we hear it or to conclude that since we have made some real progress since the 1960s we have finished the task the Church still faces in dealing with race and racism. Both conclusions are seriously flawed and deadly to missional Christian theology and practice.