This week, the “Jeremiah Wright” episode finally came to a head. Rev. Wright “went off” at the Press Club and Obama did what his white supporters have wanted all along, he clearly disassociated himself from his former pastor. My feelings about Dr. Wright are posted below in older postings and they remain the same, Monday’s episode notwithstanding. The concern for today has more to do with the comments made by Sen. Obama on Tuesday when he reiterated his desire to serve as a “bridge” between the different races. While Obama’s goal is truly a noble vision, the facts of history suggest that closing the gap is easier said than done. In defining this gap between black and white people, David W. Wills says that “it is the story of a persisting and seemingly intractable gap or distance. Recurrent and sometimes heroic efforts have been made to overcome this gap, but in the end it seems always to endure” (African American Religion: Interpretive Essays in History and Culture, Fulop and Rabetou, eds.). Wills argues in his essay that since the days of the Great Awakening, through the period of Reconstruction, and up to the Civil Rights Movement, there have been periods of time when this gap was narrowed, but never closed.
Although Wills wrote over 10 years ago, the closing words of his essay are troubling and prophetic: “Since the late 1960s, there has been a clear retreat from a direct facing of the gap between black and white… Acknowledged or not, however, the gap between the races—a gap involving both the interpretation of the American experience and the degree of empowerment within it—remains one of the foundational realities of our national religious life. And however much members of both races might sometimes wish it were otherwise, the painful encounter of black and white is likely to remain in the future what it has been in the past—one of the crucial, central themes in the religious history of the United States.”
As members of the African Methodist Episcopal Church [AMEC], we need look no further than the Methodist Episcopal Church [MEC] (our mother denomination), for evidence of this fact. Prior to our founding in 1787, the MEC had opened its doors wide to black members. In fact, Bishop Francis Asbury in 1785 invited a former slave, Richard Allen, to join him on a preaching tour in the south. Allen’s decision to decline the offer set in motion a set of events that would eventually lead to the founding of the AMEC 2 years later. This invitation of a black preacher to join this white bishop on this evangelistic tour, however, was not considered rare in the early days of American Methodism. There were widespread reports of blacks and whites joining the same churches, worshiping side-by-side, and even blacks preaching to whites.
In fact, American Methodism began its journey on this soil heavily influenced by the anti-slavery sentiment of English founder John Wesley (see his book Thoughts upon Slavery by clicking here). So it is not surprising that they were decidedly anti-slavery in their rhetoric and their policies. (I am indebted to the work Paul Ernst, one of my former students at Methodist Theological School of Ohio. His research on this subject for his final assignment in our class on the history of black religion in America dealt with the following subject matter.) By 1784, the MEC had adopted the following stance on the issue of slavery:
“Every member of our society who has slaves in his possession shall, within twelve months after notice given to him by the assistant (which notice the assistants are required immediately and without delay to give in their respective circuits), legally execute and record an instrument whereby, he emancipates and sets free every slave in his possession...In consideration that these rules form a new term of communion, every person concerned who will not comply with them shall have liberty quietly to withdraw himself from our society within the twelve months succeeding the notice given as aforesaid; otherwise the assistant shall exclude him in the society… No person so voluntarily withdrawn or so excluded shall ever partake of the Supper of the Lord with the Methodists till he complies with the above requisitions.” Beams of Light on Early Methodism in
Talk about closing the gap! There was no ambiguity about where the church stood on the issue of slave holding. If you held slaves, you were not welcome in the MEC. Simply find a new church.
Quest. 12. What shall we do with our friends that will buy and sell slaves?
Ans. If they buy with no other design than to hold them as slaves, and have been previously warned, they shall be expelled; and permited (sic) to sell under no consideration.
Quest. 13. What shall we do with our local preachers who will not emancipate their slaves in the States where the laws admit it?
Ans. Try those in
Quest. 22. What shall be done with our traveling preachers that now are, or hereafter shall be, possessed of slaves, and refuse to manumit them where the law permits?
Ans. Employ them no more.
Unfortunately, the narrowing of the gap did not last. Pressure from influential slave holding members, the concern for lost revenue, and the fear of a church split led to a compromise of the newly enacted law. In the end, white racism and the power of the pro-slavery forces prevailed. As a result, racist attitudes were tolerated and discrimination was openly practiced in the local churches. Thus, just a few years later, Richard Allen and Absalom Jones found themselves being pulled up from their knees in prayer as they dared pray in the “whites only section” of St. Georges MEC in
How does a church move from a place in 1784 where it would put members out of the church for holding slaves to a place 3 years later where Jim Crow, apartheid like practices had taken hold? How did we move from a place where the gap was almost closed at one moment and then in 3 short years the gap was reopened to a place where it has not budged in over 221 years? More importantly, what will white Americans do this time, in this 2008 version of the same old story?
Yes, I said white Americans. This gap does not exist because blacks want it, but because blacks have had little other choice but to accept it. A white gentleman once asked me why our church was called “African” and sarcastically asked me if he would be welcome to attend. After a short history lesson on our founding, I then informed him that he would feel right at home if he were to visit and he would be welcome to join. I am not suggesting that blacks in
Blacks in
However, I am still encouraged. I heard a sermon last week by the Rev. Dr. Eric Brown, entitled “You are not bound by your past.” Presiding Elder Brown reminded all of us that we are not bound to the mistakes of yesterday, but free to break the destructive cycles that often bind us. And for that, I am grateful. And so I ask my white brothers and sisters who are headed to the polls, “Where do we go from here? A full fledged retreat to the fear-mongering of the 1700s, or into Martin Luther King’s vision of a Beloved Community where people are actually judged by more than their race? The world is watching and waiting.
