Search Urban Youth content: Reconciliation & Culture

Kelly, B. & Jaffe, H. (1990, January). The Farrakhan fiasco. Regardie’s Magazine, p. 46.

OVERVIEW

Not realizing the disturbance it would cause, a Washington, D.C. council member proposed to honor the Nation of Islam with a ceremonial resolution. The dilemma over the passing of the resolution is summed by council member Jim Nathanson, a Jew:

If I vote no, I’m a hero in my own community. But then the blacks would perceive it as the white community refusing to let them honor people who’ve done some good things. I’m very aware that parts of this town are under siege and that the Muslims have made an improvement.

When Harry Thomas made the proposal, he did not weigh it on a political level. His main concern was saving his community from a crack epidemic tearing it apart. Thomas was quoted as saying, "I’d honor the Devil himself if he’d help get rid of drugs."

The proposal was passed, and the decision was front-page news in The Washington Post. The situation ignited great hostility between blacks and Jews. One line of the resolution was especially controversial:

Minister Louis Farrakhan has inspired courageous, committed, and dedicated men and women to address truthfully the evils that plague our communities through economic and spiritual leadership.

The article explains that, in the past, blacks and Jews were allies because they had both experienced endless suffering. The relationship began to unravel in the late 1960s, a result of numerous riots in which hundreds of Jewish merchants lost their stores. South African and Palestinian situations have only aggravated the relationship:

The point is made that "some Jews refuse to concede that Farrakhan’s hateful words can be separated from the Nation of Islam’s positive deeds." But many blacks, while applauding Farrakhan’s results, still reject his negative remarks. Still, as one Jewish speaker is quoted, "There isn’t such a thing as being partially pregnant, and that’s how we see Farrakhan."

The authors of the article do not view the Nation of Islam as a "major force":

But the true significance of the Farrakhan episode isn’t the Nation of Islam’s power or potential power but the desperation of the city’s black community that it reflects.

The authors also believe that the dilemma over the resolution may have positive results:

At its root, the black community’s support of Farrakhan is a scream of rage. The fact that it’s directed at Jews makes it all the more powerful, and the situation all the more troubling, because blacks and Jews here have had a kinship for years. The harmony can only be restored if the Farrakhan resolution provides and opportunity for dialogue.

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION

1. How powerful a force is the Nation of Islam? Should others fear their racial views in which the white person is evil? Is it merely rhetoric?
2. If the majority of those responding to Farrakhan do not follow all of his theological or racist views, is there still a danger in the negative aspects of what he preaches? Explain.
3. The article weighs the power of the Nation of Islam’s rhetoric. Council member Nathanson states:

Jews understand that at first Hitler didn’t hurt anyone, but his rhetoric laid the basis. This kind of rhetoric can lead to only one thing: some kind of harm. These spasms of hate lead to a physical response.

IMPLICATIONS

1. If youth workers work with members of the Nation of Islam in any capacity, they need to understand each other. Both must share the best of both faiths and exhibit a real desire to care for one another. The controversial beliefs of the Nation of Islam must be addressed. If followers truly believe that the whites (and others) are evil, then how can there be trust? If we can give them a positive example of someone who is willing to be their friend, then perhaps trust can develop.
2. The article ends, "But racial hostility won’t stay where it is. It’s a cancer, and unless people come together, it will spread." The Nation of Islam expresses the anger of people who have been and are victims. They are crying out, and they must be heard. The only way to stop the anger from exploding is to address what lies behind it. People must join together.

Paul Paris cCYS

Marshall, J. Jr. & Wheeler, L. (1996). Street soldier: One man’s struggle to save a generation—one life at a time. New York: Delacorte Press.

OVERVIEW

Joe Marshall is well known through national television documentaries, speaking, consulting, and his own radio talk show. Born in St. Louis, Joe grew up in South Central L.A. In Los Angeles, he attended Catholic Loyola High School, where he first experienced serious racism personally. Something in his strong home and his nature drove him to stand against violence, even when drawn into fights he could not avoid. His choice of college was based on figuring that there would be many blacks at the University of San Francisco, because its basketball team was all black. Realizing his mistake, he joined a black Omega Psi Phi fraternity at San Jose State University some fifty miles away. Back at USF he organized the first Black Students’ Union, despite resistance from the administration. That responsibility created his strong sense of African American identity and pride.

After college, Joe Marshall began teaching at San Francisco’s Woodrow Wilson High School:

When my daksiki and I showed up at Woodrow Wilson in the fall of 1969, my mission—my purpose in life at that moment—was to impart the knowledge I had gained to the high school seniors of my civics, U.S. history, and black history classes, many of whom looked older than their skinny hustling teacher.

I not only looked young and was young (twenty-two): I taught young. In civics, for instance, the assigned topic was communism, but I disregarded that and focused on issues that I thought imminent high school graduates needed to be informed about—marriage, raising a family, employment, current events, and the like. At night I opened a book on the Watts riot and read aloud into a tape recorder, which I played in class the next day as I made my rounds of the room. I also spent a good portion of my negligible paycheck to buy books that I thought the kids ought to know about, such as Before the Mayflower and Rivers of Blood, Years of Darkness.

I practically lived at that school, devoting most of my extra-curricular time to the BSU. We had fundraisers, dances, barbecues, plays, and assorted ‘days of consciousness,’ such as one dedicated to all the black girls at Woodrow Wilson (we game each of them a black balloon filled with helium; I can still picture the black could we created that afternoon when the girls released their balloons at three o’clock) and an African festival, for which the students built tribal huts in the schoolyard. (pp. 33-34)

Black pride was raised through instruction and experiences such as peaceful protests—and whites learned important lessons as well. Gradually, however, Marshall watched more and more promising students falling to gangs, drugs, and crime.

One of the finest boys I taught had trouble staying awake during class becausse he didn’t have a home. He held a job in order to feed himself, and the only place he could sleep at night, when he got off work, was his aunt’s basement. Years later, I ran into him during a visit to the San Bruno Jail, where he was doing time for selling drugs.

I can’t count the times I’ve been fooled by kids whom I presumed to be free from the snares of street life. One of my favorite students at Apos was a quiet, sweet twelve-year-old girl names Shirley Brown, who had an equally cute and well-mannered older sister, Vanessa, who was fourteen. At lunchtime one day, I was talking to another teacher about the Brown girls and happened to mention how nice they both were. He looked at me curiously for a moment and said, ‘You know they’re prostitutes, don’t you?’ I didn’t believe it until he offered to take me to MacArthur Avenue in Oakland., where they worked. I declined the invitation. When later I started asking around about the girls, fishing for information on how I might get them off the streets, I was advised that if I interfered, I would have to content with their pimp. Afterward, when I looked at Shirley or Vanessa sitting so attentively in my math classes, I often wondered if they knew what I knew. I could only assume that they did. (p. 37)

As I grimly watched the kids of San Francisco slipping away one by one, it was furthermore obvious that the situation was not restricted to my city and school district. The same things were happening at an even more alarming pace back in South Central… (p. 38)

Neither the justice nor educational system seemed willing to confront the challenge of these students who were falling by the way. By the 1980s, he felt compelled to jump over these ineffective systems and co-found the Omega Boys Club, based on the belief that inner-city young people want something more than the streets but don’t know the way out. From a small basement community center, some 600 kids have moved out of gang-banging and drug dealing. Some have joined his small but strong army of street soldiers (street workers), and more than 140 young people have gone on to colleges around the country.

Listening to the stories of homies espcially after the escalation of violence that took place after the release of the movie, "Colors," is chilling. These are heart-wrenching personal stories, and they involve bitter disappointments for the street soldiers trying to reclaim lives and turn them in a positive direction. Joe Marshall is a man of courage, and there are challenging confrontations between him and his homies here.

Joe Marshall is host of a gutsy radio talk show, "Street Soldiers," that challenges gangs and street life with prospects of a life that is not dead end. This book includes letters from listeners touched by the radio show.

Marshall’s program highlights "three crucial steps to freedom" (from the destructive ways of the streets):

• Acknowledging the problem, which is a matter of identifying the behavior that has placed them at risk.
• Coming to grips with the anger, fear, and pain that’s behind their behavior.
• Adopting a new way of doing things; that is, new rules for living.

Marian Wright Edelman, President of The Children’s Defense Fund, describes this book, "The stories here will wrench your soul and Joe Marshall’s life will warm your heart. You’ll cry from the pain, and the promise, in this book." Denzel Washington’s comment is simply: "Joe Marshall’s Street Soldier is a revelation!" Spike Lee says, "As much as the Million Man March was an impressive vision of the power of many, Joe Marshall serves as an inspiring reminder of the power of one. Every black man in America should read this book, and then do something." This book is a challenge to every one of us to contribute something toward shaping the future of a generation at risk.

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION

1. What most impressed you in reading this article? Do you plan to read this book?
2. Is it possible for an individual, a program, a church to take back the streets? If not, why not? If so, how so?
3. Could you use the three crucial steps to freedom in your relationships and counseling of young people? What, if anything, would you add?
4. How could you use this book in your work, teaching, or training?

IMPLICATIONS

1. "Of the black men between ages twenty-five and thirty-four who have dropped out of high school, 75% are in prison or on parole or probation." This fact alone should be enough to let us know that all of us as a society must act effectively.
2. We must study books and programs with measurable success in this area.
3. To Joe Marshall’s strong programs and fine book should be added other available resources needed by urban programs and workers. The Youthworkers’ Encyclopedia is a rich and growing resource for such work and study.

  

A diversity workshop designed to facilitate multiculturalism within groups.

OVERVIEW

Note: The names of the church and all individuals mentioned have been changed in order to protect confidentiality, however the facts cited below are true. The background story helps to explain the need for diversity workshops within any growing group.

The ABC Church was founded 70 years ago by a small group of recent immigrants from Barbados. Having come to America in search of a better life for themselves and their families, many of them settled in the Boston area, working as domestics and factory workers. During the week, they dealt with the harsh reality of trying to make a living; on the weekends, they sought the church as a place of refuge. Desiring to maintain the style and traditions of the worship they experienced "back home," they began to meet in the home of one of the members. As the church grew, they moved to small rented spaces, eventually purchasing the building where they currently worship.

For the first 50 years of their existence, the church family grew very slowly, with new members either coming directly from Barbados or being of Bajan descent. The worship style reflected their Caribbean roots, and there was a definite family atmosphere. During the 1970s, the church experienced more rapid growth and, for the first time, there was diversity among the membership. However, this was not racial or ethnic diversity—the new members were still Caribbean, just from different islands. Jamaicans and Trinidadians were now among the numbers. This change happened almost without notice, since the basic worship style remained the same. The common struggle of living in America bound the worshippers together.

In the late 1980s things began to change. The first white person became a member of the church. Patricia was a friend of one of the members who came to church one night; she accepted the faith during that visit. The church literally "nurtured" this new babe; her presence did not seem awkward or strange to the membership, and for many years, she remained the only white member of the church. During this same time, a Hispanic family and 2 Liberian families also became part of the congregation.

After a change in the Pastorate in 1995, the church experienced rapid growth, and with this growth came much more racial and ethnic diversity. Brazilians, Portuguese, Chinese, Nigerians, Caucasians, Puerto Ricans were all welcomed. There is no explanation for how or why this diversity occurred; people were just drawn to the church. And once they came, they found a welcoming atmosphere.

Initially, even with the addition of new members of different backgrounds, the leadership remained completely African American. However, as the new members became settled into the church, their gifts and talents have been recognized, and they now hold prominent positions within the church as ministry leaders, musicians, and worship leaders.

From the outside looking in, this church is a model for how to build a diverse group of any kind. But it is important to remember that this was not necessarily something that the ABC church set out to do. After all, worshipping together for 2 hours on a Sunday morning does not eliminate the possibility of racism and prejudice existing among the membership. In the words of Perkins and Rice in More Than Equals, this church seems to have achieved integration, but not necessarily reconciliation. In order to address these issues, it would be a good idea for leadership team of the church to participate in a one-day diversity workshop. The following workshop could be modified to meet the needs of any group seeking diversity training.

GROUP PRESENTATIONWORKSHOP OUTLINE

At the end of the training session, the participants will:

• Understand the value of diversity and racial reconciliation.
• Have a fuller understanding of the many dimensions of diversity.
• Recognize our own filters, beliefs, values, and stereotypes.
• Examine how we reinforce behaviors and beliefs that devalue others.
• Begin to build a common ground by recognizing and valuing both our differences and our similarities.

AGENDA AND OUTLINE

  Thank participants for coming. Stress importance of this workshop to the group. Introduce facilitator.   Review workshop agenda. Have participants break into small groups to record their wishes and worries for the day, using the alphabet. Ask each group to develop a story using the words they’ve just brainstormed. With the group, develop ground rules for the day (e.g., confidentiality, honesty, timeliness).   The church at Antioch. The Good Samaritan. Philip and Stephen. Peter.   Ask the participants to come up with as many scriptures—or other sources—as they can that address the issue of diversity or racial reconciliation. Have the participants read the reasons aloud. Record key phrases on a flip chart. Review the flip chart and ask the participants the following questions: What do you think the scriptures (or other sources) are saying about diversity? Are these messages still relevant today? If not, why not? Do you see areas in this group where we could make improvements in order to live up to these principles? What can you as an individual do to make a difference?     Now that we have established the importance of addressing diversity and racial reconciliation, we can begin to establish a definition of diversity. Ask the group: What is diversity? What are all the things that make us similar and different? Record these answers on a flip chart, and ask each person to pick the five dimensions of diversity that have had the most profound effect on their life. Ask volunteers to share their lists and discuss how these things have shaped them. Define diversity as "All the ways in which we differ." Stress that diversity is not just about race. We are all unique individuals and we all have value. Ask the participants to think about what the group would be like if everybody were like them. (Hopefally, this will elicit an humorous response.)     The purpose of this module is to build awareness of our personalities and how they impact how we interact with others. Lead the group in the "Find the Fs" activity. Distribute the following paragraph on a slip of paper to each participant: (use a font that lines up the letters as evenly as possible. Filters and Stereotypes (1:00 p.m.)Lunch (12:00 p.m.) Encourage the participants to sit with people that they don’t know well.Defining Diversity (11:00 a.m.)Break (10:45 a.m.)Scripture Mania (If in a secular group, call this part Defending Diversity) (10:15 a.m.)Models of Racial Reconciliation (9:45 a.m.) (The following models are biblically based; seek other secular ones as is appropriate to your group.)Agenda/Expectations/ABC Exercise/Ground rules (9:15 a.m.)

Welcome (approx. 9:00 a.m.)

FAIRNESS IS THE FINAL RESULT OF YEARS OF EFFECTIVE EFFORT COMBINED WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF DIVERSITY

• Ask participants to read it and make sure they understand it. Then ask them to read it again and to count the total number of the letter Fs they see on their paper, and keep that number to themselves. They should not say it out loud. Only give them one minute to do this. Ask if they are sure, then give them 30 more seconds to double check their total.
• Ask participants to raise their hands when you call out the total number of Fs that they see on their paper. Start with 1 and count up to 10 Fs. (There are really a total of 9 Fs).
• People will raise their hands for 6, 7,8, and 9 Fs. Act confused, ask them to count again. Some people with change their count. Give them one more chance. Finally, tell them there are 9.

Ask the following to the entire group:

• Ask the group: What happened? What explains this? Participants will likely say that they missed the small words, like "OF." They will use adjectives like "unimportant," "meaningless," and "trivial" to describe "OF." Some will say they missed "OF" because the "F" in "OF" sounds like a "v" ("Different than the other Fs!"). Others will say that they were taught to not look at "OF." Others say that they were distracted by the content of the paragraph.
• Ask those who saw 6 Fs: Were you sure about the number you found? What did you think when you saw others raise their hands for 7, 8, or 9? How did you explain it to yourself? There tend to be three explanations: I must have missed something (I’m wrong, they’re right); I know there are 6 Fs—they miscounted (I’m right, they’re wrong); I know I have 6, but maybe they have different papers (We’re both right).
• Everyone saw all the Fs, so why were some Fs invisible?
• What does this have to do with diversity? Why would we use this activity in a diversity workshop?
• Are there different groups of people in society that are treated like Fs? Are some people defined as more important than others, and they become disregarded or even invisible?
• Ask the people who saw 7 or 8 what happened for them. Even though they noticed almost all of them, they still made mistakes and didn’t see them all. We all miss things even when we are looking for them. In light of diversity, even when we work hard to expand our awareness, we may still not see the full picture. There is always more to learn.
• Did you continue to look for 10? Why?
• Discuss how certain people were about how many Fs they saw, and how difficult it was to change their views. How do we react when people tell us that there are more Fs than we think there are? Some are open, while others become defensive and disregard the new information. Make the analogy to how the opinions and perceptions of women and people of color are often trivialized and ignored.
• How do you respond when others point out Fs to you that you have missed?
• Did anyone deliberately miss or disregard the Fs? In fact, people were actively looking for them, but the omissions still occur. Use this to discuss the difference between intent and impact. It may have been an accident or an unintentional offense, but we are still responsible for our behavior—especially once new Fs in any situation have been pointed out to us.
• Finally ask, What are the implications for our group? And who are the little Fs?
• Class Divided Video (2:00 p.m.)
  • Give background of film referring to Jane Eliot and her class.
  • Show "blue eyes privileged" section of video; stop the tape.
  • In small groups, ask participants to discuss the impact of stereotypic thinking, including:
    • privileges/opportunities of the blue-eyed;
    • unwritten rules;
    • postures or behaviors that reinforce the status quo.
  • Show the rest of the video.
  • Divide groups into triads to discuss:
    • Who wears the collars in our church? In our community?
    • What are the unwritten rules of conduct within our church?

  Ask the group to brainstorm two lists: Actions that the group can take to make sure that each member feels valued and appreciated. Actions that individuals can take to do the same.   Divide the large group into small groups of four. Ask them to record words that describe how the workshop has influenced their thinking, using the letters D I V E R S I T Y as a guide. Closing Remarks (out by 4:00 p.m.)Closing Exercise (3:30 p.m.)

Strategies for Change (3:00 p.m.)

 

 

Shelley E. Bland, “White Privilege: Review of Peggy McIntosh’s ‘Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack’”, CYS, May08 OVERVIEW   (Download Unpacking the Invisible overview as a PDF) Peggy McIntosh, author of “Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack ,” (1989) writes about a convicting and challenging notion of racism in white privilege. Her studies in this field were rooted in findings of men’s unwillingness to grant their over-privileged status, though they would admit the disadvantaged state of women. These denials, in essence, protected male privilege from being acknowledged, decreased, or curtailed. Calling out this unacknowledged male privilege phenomenon, McIntosh knew that since hierarchies in the society of the United States were interlocking, her finding of unattended white privilege might be a key to racism as well. For McIntosh, racism is taught as something which puts another at a disadvantage. In light of the preceding, she realized an erroneous omission in the teaching of racism: if some are disadvantaged, a significant corollary must be that another is placed in a position of advantage. Specifically, white privilege must be the translated position of advantage. McIntosh describes white privilege vividly and powerfully as the idea of an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions and more. In other words, a white person in the United States has on his or her back an invisible weightless knapsack granting favored positions, status, acceptance, and more. Following up on how racism is taught, McIntosh finds that whites are taught “to think of their lives as a morally neutral, normative, and average ideal, so that when [we] work to benefit others, it’s seen as work allowing “them” to be more like “us.” This kind of teaching establishes a silent, but strong belief that the white is superior, even deserving our advantages. FINDINGS   In wading through the disillusionment the reality of realized white privilege brings upon one’s life, McIntosh understood that it then made one newly accountable. McIntosh began working through this issue first in herself through accountability in counting the ways in which she enjoyed “unearned skin privilege;” possibly even more grievous, she noted that she had been conditioned into oblivion of its existence.  Likely, many whites operate in such oblivion. Here are some of the items that she found to compose an invisible white knapsack:   1.   I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time. 2.   I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed. 3.   I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. 4.   When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. 5.   I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race. 6.   I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions … 7.   I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty, or the illiteracy of my race. 8.   I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race. 9.   I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.      10. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider. 11. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to “the person in charge,” I will be facing a person of my race. 12. I can easily buy posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children’s magazine featuring people of my race.  13. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, or feared.  14. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of race.      15. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in “flesh” color and have them more or less match my skin. These few components of the invisible white knapsack encompass social, emotional, mental, and physical aspects of one’s life. This means, therefore, that the invisible white knapsack serves holistically for the unearned privilege of one, and contributes towards holistic injustice of another. CONCLUSIONS After such discoveries, McIntosh’s realizes how short the word “privilege” fall. We are really talking about “power.” The conditions above allow for the systematic over-empowerment of certain groups. In short, such privilege “confers dominance because of one’s race or sex.” Such dominance, whether intentional or unintentional, is embedded in white privilege. McIntosh goes on to say that disapproving of racist systems will not be enough to change them. However, systemic change can begin with the acknowledgment, identification of, and teaching of white privilege for oneself and then others. Late, after persistent and patient work, may one hope for system changes. QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION   1.   Do you agree with McIntosh about the concept, and reality, of the ‘invisible knapsack?’ Do you see how this invisible knapsack can also express itself in terms of religion or age? If not, how would you interpret her findings? 2.   Have you listened to the stories of people of color disadvantaged when they drive, when they go into a store, and in may other daily experiences? 3.   How does the matter of an unfair playing field make you feel if you are a ‘wearer’ of such a ‘knapsack’ - Distressed? Outraged? Indifferent? Hopeless in bringing change? If you are one oppressed by the ‘knapsack’ others seem to have, what are your feelings: – Angry? Saddened? Justified? More isolated? 4.   What are some things you can add to McIntosh’s list as examples of your own ‘invisible knapsack’ if you believe yourself to wear one? 5.   How were you taught about racism, through your family, peers, media and educational system? 6.   What can you do to lessen the effect or remove the ‘invisible knapsack’ if you believe yourself to wear one? 7.   Will you continue to identify how unearned race advantage and conferred dominance affects your daily life if you are in such the position of ‘favor?’ 8.   Do you think others in your surrounding sphere understand this view of racism? Are there positive ways you can discuss it with them? IMPLICATIONS   1.   Despite all talk of “the end of racism,” people of color experience, on personal and systemic levels, the powerful effect of something. 2.   Difficult as it may be, we deal best with racism and other kinds of discrimination by listening and responding to one another. Shelly E. Bland c. CYS

Cobbey, N. (1992, July). Racism Report Calls Task Formidable (Editorial and letters to the editor). Episcopal Life

.

OVERVIEW

 

(Download Racism Report overview as a PDF)

In July of 1991, The General Convention of the Episcopal Church

called its delegates to complete a 66-question survey as an institutional audit to determine the extent of racism in the Church. Of 104,808 in attendance, 1,588 responded.

 

Several patterns emerged in the findings of this survey:

• Blacks and Native Americans say they experience the highest degree of alienation and disrespect from the Episcopal Church.
• Ordained members more than lay members perceive difficulties with racial and ethnic issues, see more opportunities for change, and report more efforts to facilitate change.
• Bishops tend to see more need for change than clergy and lay members, although the difference is not great.
• People from the Northeast and Far West see more need for change on matters of race and ethnicity than people from the South and Southwest.
•  

• Women tend to see more reasons for changes in race and ethnic relations than men, but men report actually taking more action to reduce racism than women do.

At the Convention, Lennox Joseph, chief executive of the consulting NTL Institute

, offered an initial interpretation of the results. He declared that the audit showed "a clear pattern of institutional racism" as well as "a mandate that the church move forward" in its attempts to confront racism.

 

Joseph further noted five areas of institutional racism in the Episcopal Church: resource allocation, leadership, interpersonal communications, status, and mission.

 

Seven recommendations were presented for dioceses and the Convention by its consultants:

• Acknowledge and respect resistance to change as a natural human part of the process.
• Communicate a vision of acceptance of complexity of one’s own ethnic group and others.
• With consultants, design a process to address and resolve differences between lay and ordained members about the centrality of changing racial and ethnic relations.
• Bring lay and ordained members of different racial and ethnic groups together to work through differences.
• Acknowledge the inevitability of stress and deal with it, avoiding condemnation, denial, and suppression.
• Encourage local units to use the audit only after a group of lay and ordained members receives training in race relations and uses of the audit.
•  

• Administer the audit at future General Conventions.

 

By July 1992, The Diocese of New Jersey had conducted an institutional racism audit, and sixteen other dioceses were in the process of preparing one.

 

The editors of the paper took the consultants to task for their report ("Clear Advice Clouded by Hazy Language"):

Given its importance, it’s disturbing the report took 11 months to complete.

 

Racism in the church is a vital issue and major changes are necessary. But this report is too bound up with statistics, scientific method and jargon. Rather than risk turning people off, the authors should have supplemented their advice on HOW to proceed with some no-nonsense suggestions on WHERE to go from here.

 

Two letters in this issue of Episcopal Life show the diversity of opinion in the Episcopal Church today:

I resent the self-flagellating tone of your June issue suggesting that the church and Episcopalians somehow bear a share of responsibility for recent events in Los Angeles.

Responsible, tax-paying, voting Episcopalians should pressure the authorities to act with more dispatch, vigor and decisiveness to put down such disorders firmly and quickly using whatever force is necessary, and insist that Washington stop giving the impression that looters, arsonists and rioters will be rewarded by being handed another welfare check.—James Bailey, Parker, New York

This mindless indirect support of illegal immigration (on the part of the Church) is, or was, an activity fostering the primary cause of the riots.

In effect, the U.S. is no longer a melting pot but a dumping ground for people who adulterate our society, cheapen our goals and who, unfortunately, do not have the background to understand nor appreciate a system of free enterprise and democracy.

 

No, this is not a problem of racism but a problem of judgment within our federal bureaucracy supported by unthinking groups.
—John L. Burwell, Jackson, Mississippi

 

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION

1. What do you consider to be the main causes of the riots in Los Angeles in the Spring of 1992?
2. What do you think are the differences between personal prejudice and institutional racism?
3. In your opinion, what do you think churches should have said and done in response to those riots?
4. Do you believe racism exists in your Church at an institutional level? If so, to what degree do you consider it is present and how much damage is it doing?
5. Would you recommend that your local church and denomination invest the necessary time and money to undertake an audit of its institutional racism?
6.  

1. Do you think racism is diminishing or growing in the U.S. during the 1990s?

 

IMPLICATIONS

•  

• A definition of racism, some ways of measuring its existence, the willingness to deal with it, and some sense of the priority of the issue are needed if racism is going to get attention from the Church and society and be discussed profitably.

•  

• Racism was a fashionable topic and issue in many circles during the 1950s and 1960s. The U.S. public tends to tire of problems unresolved in a reasonably short time frame.

•  

1. The riots of 1992 and rap music have brought the issues of prejudice and discrimination to the attention of the American public—especially in the minds of children and young people.

Dean Borgman cCYS

Pannell, W. (1993). The Coming Race Wars? A Cry for Reconciliation

. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

OVERVIEW

 

(Download Coming Race Wars overview as a PDF)

William Pannell is a professor of preaching and practical theology at Fuller Theological Seminary

in Pasadena, California. Pannell sees the 1992 riots as a warning sign of things to come if we as a country, and as white evangelicals particularly, do not change.

 

Pannell notes first the resurgence of racial unrest in the nineties, which he attributes to frustration and lack of change. In the fifties and sixties, blacks rallied for change; in the nineties, they rally out of frustration and anger. He points to evidence all around that the black male is still considered (or at least treated as) less than human, and that white Americans, consciously or subconsciously, want to keep America "white": "And as Gary Wills observed in the late sixties ‘Americans do not like to think of their country as being white, but they are careful to keep it that way.’ A great line, and fully applicable to the turf occupied by early-nineties evangelicals." (p. 57) This is Pannell’s main indictment: White Americans (especially evangelicals) operate in a system that vocally desires to be integrated, but subtly wishes to retain its white dominance. This is apparent in the media, in politics, in the growing incidence of violence, and in church and parachurch circles as well.

 

One reason for racial tension in our country is self-segregation, mostly due to white middle class Americans (and later black middle class Americans as well) fleeing the cities for the safety and comfort of the suburbs. Not only is this division characterized by color, but by class: "Everywhere one looks, modern evangelicalism is becoming increasingly elitist." (p. 114) This separation has forced new dynamics on urban churches, and the black urban church faces a new set of challenges:

• Needs a new style of leadership, less hierarchical.
• Better training for its leadership ("Whence this training will come is a question that ought to challenge theological centers across the land, and especially evangelical seminaries because of their more focused emphasis on evangelicalism." [p. 119])
•  

• Must learn how to appeal to the urban black male, who is largely absent from urban churches.

 

The final chapter, "Where do we go from here?" spells out the challenges to white evangelicals in response to the current racial crisis: "My [Sam Fullwood III quoted by Pannell] generation...is so disillusioned by the persistent racism that continues to define and limit us that we are abandoning efforts to assimilate into the mainstream of society. I see no end to this trend." (p. 125) Among the suggestions:

• White evangelicals must focus more missionary efforts on this country, in balance with international evangelism.
• The church must be revived.
• More evangelization should be done by the laity.
• Spirituality must strive to inform evangelism and social transformation.
•  

• White evangelicals need to "be reconnected with brothers and sisters downtown." (p. 143)

 

However, the most pressing need is for friendship: "The fact is that most Americans are people of good will. Most of us really do like other people, even those who are not like us. We prefer that they not be too close, however. We like those people in the abstract, not in the concrete. That is how black people view Koreans; how Koreans view Latinos; how Latinos view anglos; and on and on. Yet, in spite of this peculiar sociology, many Americans will admit to having a friend who is ‘one of them.’ Usually we explain, ‘but he’s different.’ At least it is a beginning. It is a good first step to have friends from these odd tribes, friends whom we often love and admire, who are concrete, who have names." (p. 135-136)

 

Pannell’s book is written from his heart, and is at times both biting and poignant. It is sure to stir up discussion; this is its strength. Although not everyone will agree with him, Pannell offers concrete steps toward reconciliation, the strongest and most basic of which is to become friends. This is the most powerful combatant we have against racism; the best thing we can do for youth is to let them get to know each other. This can be done informally, by kids on their own, or formally, by maybe collaborating with an area church youth group composed of a different racial background.

 

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION AND DISCUSSION

•  

• Pannell has a broad definition of racism; it is both conscious and subconscious. Do you agree with his understanding?

•  

1. What do you think of his criticism of white evangelicals? Are whites too elitist? Racist? Separatist? How can whites change? What can you do?