The Color Line.... In The Church?, how are we divided? Options

[princessdi]

I passed by The Amazing facts TV broadcast yesterday, I don't stya long, becuase that close to Sacarmento CA, you are hard pressed to find a black face in Doug's church audience. You might find an asian or hispanic or two......might, but if you see more than one black face, and sometimes that includes JL who is singing up on the stage, you are doing real good. This is something we show to the world. I felt the same way about the Net Series being our denominational evangelistic push, and it having very few black faces(let alone asian or hispanic), and defintiely none preaching, until Walter Pearson a few years ago. Even that was not handled with the usual enthusiastic and agreesive advertising campaign.

I really understand the fact that we each need to check ourselves, but at some point we do need to handle the problem at the upper levels, as that is the "Adventist face" people will see through their Tv sets.

I rarely get into these conversations with folks. But this past weekend, we had personal ministries day. The elder in our church (Bless his heart) show the last day events video series by Doug Bachelor. The animation was spectatcular. But there was NOT ONE BLACK FACE IN THE ENTIRE VIDEO!!

Jesus was white, and so was everyone else. Now I thought perhaps I was the only one who noticed. Well our conference President happen to be in the audience and after the video was over (he was there for our church business meeting) he commented that there was NO black people in the video. So clearly it just wasn't me who noticed. What in the world. Now I wonder if anyone else has called them on this.

Sad to say...Sometimes I wonder if things have changed.

[pmorris68]

Southern has been integrated. But always in low numbers. I think times are changing some but in some areas they are not.

[simplysaved]

Apparently I was not clear: NOBODY can question Pastor Nixon's calling or his passion. He IS missed at Oakwood, but certainly felt that this was what God called him to do. Who can't see how this is a match spiritually? And like you, I am not privileged to all that happened behind the scenes and not comfortable sharing what I do know.

I live not far from from Southern...yes there are some blacks and other ethnicities there--one one my close friends went last year and loved it...but to state that it is truly multi-cultural, it is not--at least not yet. Being mutlicultural is truly being diverse in all areas. Few of ANY of are churches are that.

Sorry... but this was NOT the reason he was called here. Whatever else this call was, it was NOT a "marketing ploy". I am not privy to all that went on behind the scenes. And I do not feel free to say all that I do know. But I will say this much. He was on the first "short list" selected for personal interviews by the search committee. He was not the first one interviewed. A series of circumstances left no doubt but what he was the right man to choose. And time... he has been here a full year now... has proven they were right. Collegedale church is ready to be led by a real leader no matter what his color... and John is a real leader.... and has been warmly received. Black enrollment at Collegedale has been up for some time now... as have the number of black teachers. Southern was already diverse... what we needed was to have a black presence in the pastoral staff. And we needed a strong leader of the kind that causes peole to want to follow where he leads. In John we got both in one person. And we are happy with having him.

As someone told me once when I was persuing an argument past the time when I had really already won it.... "Be a gracious winner". IOW don't be so focused on the many negatives that you cannot graciously acknowledge and even enjoy the "wins".... no matter how few and far between they are.
On this we are fully agreed. Even without the moral imperatives for wiping out racism.... just merely from a cold, hard, business-like view of "marketing" it makes no sense to not take into consideration the demographics of one's target "market". The word for that is not merely "racism"... it's "STUPID".... "Where's that sign, Clay?"

And THAT is my point!

Southern has been integrated. But always in low numbers. I think times are changing some but in some areas they are not.

[Clay]

when it comes to our churches being diverse or supporting diversity, the test will come when a predominately white church begins to morph into a predominately diverse church with whites not being in power or leadership positions will whites run because they are not in control.....

Now I think we haven't gotten to that part in this discussion, but since there is a lull I thought i would throw that into the mix....

[SoulEspresso]

when it comes to our churches being diverse or supporting diversity, the test will come when a predominately white church begins to morph into a predominately diverse church with whites not being in power or leadership positions will whites run because they are not in control.....

Now I think we haven't gotten to that part in this discussion, but since there is a lull I thought i would throw that into the mix....

Well, Southern is as good a test as any. Diversity flies better in educated communities, but that's no hard-and-fast rule.

I don't know that Nixon, but I know another one who I think is his son ... and I wish that guy--the son--were my pastor ...

[Denny]

when it comes to our churches being diverse or supporting diversity, the test will come when a predominately white church begins to morph into a predominately diverse church with whites not being in power or leadership positions will whites run because they are not in control.....

Now I think we haven't gotten to that part in this discussion, but since there is a lull I thought i would throw that into the mix....

I take it the present practise is that a marathon takes place with the above scenerio?

[Clay]

Well, Southern is as good a test as any. Diversity flies better in educated communities, but that's no hard-and-fast rule.

I don't know that Nixon, but I know another one who I think is his son ... and I wish that guy--the son--were my pastor ...

Yes his son is also very good.... and I agree usually in educated communities the idea of diversity is more readily accepted.... but there can be exceptions...

[watchbird]

when it comes to our churches being diverse or supporting diversity, the test will come when a predominately white church begins to morph into a predominately diverse church with whites not being in power or leadership positions will whites run because they are not in control.....

Now I think we haven't gotten to that part in this discussion, but since there is a lull I thought i would throw that into the mix....

I was at Andrews when E. E. Cleveland held two back to back evangelistic series... one in Cobol Hall in Detroit, followed by one in Pioneer Memorial Church at Andrews. Cleveland was the lead Evangelist and in control of the whole thing... in both venues.... the one in Detroit being primarily aimed at the black areas of Detroit, and the one in Pioneer being primarily to the white constituency of that predominately (at that time especially) white church.

I was not privy to all of the negotiations that put it in place. But Cleveland himself reported on his personal reactions to it... both in public comments at Pioneer, and in private organizational meetings, some of which I attended as a minor "worker" in the children's meetings area.

The thing that has stuck with me the most was his description of his own reactions to the proposal... that he didn't think it would "work" to have an integrated evangelistic "effort" with a black man as the leader... for he did not think that whites would agree to work "under" the leadership of a black person. And he reported how difficult it was for him to agree to take the position... but he finally did so agree, and by the time he got to Pioneer he was all aglow with the success they had had and with the newfound knowledge that yes, whites WOULD work under the direction of a black leader.

This was in the late 1960's, and, if his account was accurate, represented an important "first" in the building of black self-image to the place where they believed that is was genuinely possible for them to be the leaders in an integrated church... and also an important "first" in practically demonstrating that was possible.

We now have at least one black Union President in the US (that I know of, there may be more) as well as blacks from around the world in leadership positions of integrated areas. We have many blacks in leadership positions in our Universities and other areas where they are recognized as leaders "in control" over all races... not just merely over other blacks as in the Regional Conferences.

So there is progress... though not as much as one could hope for... and one may have to have long years of accumulated memories to see the movement.


As to what happens when a "white" church morphs into a racially diverse church... I think there are more factors than merely what color holds the lines of "control". To start with, there is an increasing tendency ... though in some ways lagging way behind the business world... to regard models of control and submission as outmoded... and opt instead for leadership models that inspire cooperation rather than mere submission. In this model, whichever "color" held the title of "senior pastor" the pastoral team would be consciously and deliberately made up of the same color mix as the congregation... and they would move together as a team.

But in large churches with many pastors there may also be many nearby churches to which those of a particular worship style or cultural bent will be attracted... thus causing some "flight" from the large church as multiple choices are available. In small churches, OTOH, the "flight" may be caused by a change in neighborhood demographics... a recognition of which might cause a change in pastoral leadership to one more representative of the majority of the congregation.

I think of a specific example in Southern California where they do not have regional conferences, but do have ethnic leadership within the Conference administrative team, and do have churches which are historically of one ethnicity or another. A black pastor friend of mine was faced with problems of this nature with the area served by the church was in process of change from being predominately black to being predominately Spanish. The culture was significantly different from what it had been when he first moved there and he was concerned as to what the future held. I don't know the details of the next few years... but within a very few years he was moved to another position and a Spanish pastor had been installed in the church.

Well, Southern is as good a test as any. Diversity flies better in educated communities, but that's no hard-and-fast rule.

I don't know that Nixon, but I know another one who I think is his son ... and I wish that guy--the son--were my pastor ...

In a sense, Southern is not a "test" at all... since it is not the first to have a black pastor in the college church... though whether John is the first head pastor or not I do not know. But this is not even the first pastorate for John in a multi-cultural church... as he pastored at Atlantic Union College church before going to Oakwood. Andrews also has black pastors, though never a black head pastor. In fact, John's brother has been a pastor at Pioneer Memorial for some years.

Southern is only a "test" because it is in the South, which historically has been more racist than other sections of the country. Southern is also in a very unique position since its close proximity to Oakwood makes it appear to be in "competition" with Oakwood if it attracts very many blacks... who might otherwise go to Oakwood. So success in overcoming racism can ... and will... be seen by some in a negative light... especially by blacks themselves... if it results in "too many" blacks being attracted to Southern.

And the question also might be raised... is there a comparable effort on the part of Oakwood to "integrate" as there is on the part of Southern? Or is this in fact being resisted by the black community?

I take it the present practise is that a marathon takes place with the above scenerio?

I would not characterize it that way. When churches "change color" IMO it has more to do with the racism of the country as a whole... where neighborhoods "change color" when blacks move into a previously all white neighborhood. When these changes affect the Adventist population as well, then the membership of a neighborhood church is going to be affected.

And then there are the die-hard genuine racists among us who will not even go to church with those of another race, much less accept a leader of a different race. So doubtless Collegedale has lost some members with John coming as head pastor and more blacks attending than previously... though not in any significant numbers. But.. people leave for all sorts of reasons.... one former friend of ours left because he couldn't tolerate the "welcome time" which one of our pastors instituded for a short while... in which members were encouraged to turn and greet any newcomes or friends right during the church service. Another one resigned his deacon duties when it became obvious that women were (gasp) going to be allowed to take up the morning church offering right along side the men deacons. Another... well enough of that.... People are people.... and they are not always nice to each other.

So sad.....

But... OTOH... some are loving and kind....

So glad ...... ............. ......

[PeacefulBe]

when it comes to our churches being diverse or supporting diversity, the test will come when a predominately white church begins to morph into a predominately diverse church with whites not being in power or leadership positions will whites run because they are not in control.....

Now I think we haven't gotten to that part in this discussion, but since there is a lull I thought i would throw that into the mix....

While my local church family has room to improve, I am really impressed by much of what I have found there since re-attaching myself to organized religion. The church is very active with many powerful ministries that serve the church family as well as the community.

Click here to visit our church web site.

This approximately 700-member church is the result of the efforts of J.N. Loughborough and other missionaries who settled the first Santa Rosa SDA church building west of the Rockies on October 11, 1869 just a few blocks away from where the current church building stands. Elder James White was responsible for calling for the $1000 in donations that allowed Loughborough and his team to bring the message to the Sonoma County.

The city of Santa Rosa, 150k+ population, is 77% white. While I don't know the actual demographics of our church family, I do believe that it is significantly less than 77% white. If I were to characterize the flavor of the church I would say it is most like an all nations congregation. The senior pastor of our local Northern California church is Cuban-American, the associate pastor is Scandanavian-American. There are many blended-race couples, including both pastors. There are Black Americans, Fijians, Tongans, Kenyans,(we had an associate pastor and his family who were Kenyan also but now have their own church in MN), one young man from the Caribbean, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Hispanic, Filipino and probably more that I am overlooking. Everyone appears to get along and fellowship.

There has been an exodus of some elderly white folk and one asian couple but it has been due to the Praise Worship music and not the color of the folks sitting in the pews.

[HUGGINS130]

Originally, African slaves were not taught Christianity (1986, 132), because some Christians held that Christian baptism required emancipation and there were too many references to freedom in the Bible (Ibid.). But eventually white missionaries convinced the slave masters that Christianity made blacks more docile and obedient. One slaveholder put it this way, "The deeper the piety of the slave, the more valuable he is in every respect." Before the rapid growth of the Methodists and the Baptists in the late 18thand early 19th centuries, African slaves remained outside the belief systems of Christianity.

http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/bc&pc.htm

[Clay]

Of course the reality is that some africans were already aware of christianity before the missionaries arrived... but that is another story for another time...

[princessdi]

WB, There is a difference. When you ask if there a concerted effort to intergrate OC. It is not that whites were not welcome, it is becuase they didn't want to come. At Southern blacks were not welcome, just like GC(at one point), white churches. OC, was established because EGW said that the blacks needed a palce to be educated, and the white schools, were not having it. Once again, the church believed and followed EGW instruction in evangelizing blacks, but did not realize it meant that they needed to turn in thier racist (and far too many KKK cards). So we basically were like every other denom at time. Card carry baptist, methodist, etc. on Sunday mornings, card carry racist the entire time. In fact, using the bible to "support"their hate. They followed her instruction without that necessary heart transplant need to also feel God's love for baiscally any race besides their own at that point.

This is why you see us place more of the burden of any intergration squarely with the whites. The acceptance of blacks is still depndent on the "climate" of a particular congregation. White flight is still an issue.

I was at Andrews when E. E. Cleveland held two back to back evangelistic series... one in Cobol Hall in Detroit, followed by one in Pioneer Memorial Church at Andrews. Cleveland was the lead Evangelist and in control of the whole thing... in both venues.... the one in Detroit being primarily aimed at the black areas of Detroit, and the one in Pioneer being primarily to the white constituency of that predominately (at that time especially) white church.

I was not privy to all of the negotiations that put it in place. But Cleveland himself reported on his personal reactions to it... both in public comments at Pioneer, and in private organizational meetings, some of which I attended as a minor "worker" in the children's meetings area.

The thing that has stuck with me the most was his description of his own reactions to the proposal... that he didn't think it would "work" to have an integrated evangelistic "effort" with a black man as the leader... for he did not think that whites would agree to work "under" the leadership of a black person. And he reported how difficult it was for him to agree to take the position... but he finally did so agree, and by the time he got to Pioneer he was all aglow with the success they had had and with the newfound knowledge that yes, whites WOULD work under the direction of a black leader.

This was in the late 1960's, and, if his account was accurate, represented an important "first" in the building of black self-image to the place where they believed that is was genuinely possible for them to be the leaders in an integrated church... and also an important "first" in practically demonstrating that was possible.

We now have at least one black Union President in the US (that I know of, there may be more) as well as blacks from around the world in leadership positions of integrated areas. We have many blacks in leadership positions in our Universities and other areas where they are recognized as leaders "in control" over all races... not just merely over other blacks as in the Regional Conferences.

So there is progress... though not as much as one could hope for... and one may have to have long years of accumulated memories to see the movement.
As to what happens when a "white" church morphs into a racially diverse church... I think there are more factors than merely what color holds the lines of "control". To start with, there is an increasing tendency ... though in some ways lagging way behind the business world... to regard models of control and submission as outmoded... and opt instead for leadership models that inspire cooperation rather than mere submission. In this model, whichever "color" held the title of "senior pastor" the pastoral team would be consciously and deliberately made up of the same color mix as the congregation... and they would move together as a team.

But in large churches with many pastors there may also be many nearby churches to which those of a particular worship style or cultural bent will be attracted... thus causing some "flight" from the large church as multiple choices are available. In small churches, OTOH, the "flight" may be caused by a change in neighborhood demographics... a recognition of which might cause a change in pastoral leadership to one more representative of the majority of the congregation.

I think of a specific example in Southern California where they do not have regional conferences, but do have ethnic leadership within the Conference administrative team, and do have churches which are historically of one ethnicity or another. A black pastor friend of mine was faced with problems of this nature with the area served by the church was in process of change from being predominately black to being predominately Spanish. The culture was significantly different from what it had been when he first moved there and he was concerned as to what the future held. I don't know the details of the next few years... but within a very few years he was moved to another position and a Spanish pastor had been installed in the church.
In a sense, Southern is not a "test" at all... since it is not the first to have a black pastor in the college church... though whether John is the first head pastor or not I do not know. But this is not even the first pastorate for John in a multi-cultural church... as he pastored at Atlantic Union College church before going to Oakwood. Andrews also has black pastors, though never a black head pastor. In fact, John's brother has been a pastor at Pioneer Memorial for some years.

Southern is only a "test" because it is in the South, which historically has been more racist than other sections of the country. Southern is also in a very unique position since its close proximity to Oakwood makes it appear to be in "competition" with Oakwood if it attracts very many blacks... who might otherwise go to Oakwood. So success in overcoming racism can ... and will... be seen by some in a negative light... especially by blacks themselves... if it results in "too many" blacks being attracted to Southern.

And the question also might be raised... is there a comparable effort on the part of Oakwood to "integrate" as there is on the part of Southern? Or is this in fact being resisted by the black community?
I would not characterize it that way. When churches "change color" IMO it has more to do with the racism of the country as a whole... where neighborhoods "change color" when blacks move into a previously all white neighborhood. When these changes affect the Adventist population as well, then the membership of a neighborhood church is going to be affected.

And then there are the die-hard genuine racists among us who will not even go to church with those of another race, much less accept a leader of a different race. So doubtless Collegedale has lost some members with John coming as head pastor and more blacks attending than previously... though not in any significant numbers. But.. people leave for all sorts of reasons.... one former friend of ours left because he couldn't tolerate the "welcome time" which one of our pastors instituded for a short while... in which members were encouraged to turn and greet any newcomes or friends right during the church service. Another one resigned his deacon duties when it became obvious that women were (gasp) going to be allowed to take up the morning church offering right along side the men deacons. Another... well enough of that.... People are people.... and they are not always nice to each other.

So sad.....

But... OTOH... some are loving and kind....

So glad ...... ............. ......

[Denny]

WB, There is a difference. When you ask if there a concerted effort to intergrate OC. It is not that whites were not welcome, it is becuase they didn't want to come. At Southern blacks were not welcome, just like GC(at one point), white churches. OC, was established because EGW said that the blacks needed a palce to be educated, and the white schools, were not having it. Once again, the church believed and followed EGW instruction in evangelizing blacks, but did not realize it meant that they needed to turn in thier racist (and far too many KKK cards). So we basically were like every other denom at time. Card carry baptist, methodist, etc. on Sunday mornings, card carry racist the entire time. In fact, using the bible to "support"their hate. They followed her instruction without that necessary heart transplant need to also feel God's love for baiscally any race besides their own at that point.

This is why you see us place more of the burden of any intergration squarely with the whites. The acceptance of blacks is still depndent on the "climate" of a particular congregation. White flight is still an issue.

But we all still The true church Marching to Zion right?... right?.... right?

[Johann]

While my local church family has room to improve, I am really impressed by much of what I have found there since re-attaching myself to organized religion. The church is very active with many powerful ministries that serve the church family as well as the community.

Click here to visit our church web site.

This approximately 700-member church is the result of the efforts of J.N. Loughborough and other missionaries who settled the first Santa Rosa SDA church building west of the Rockies on October 11, 1869 just a few blocks away from where the current church building stands. Elder James White was responsible for calling for the $1000 in donations that allowed Loughborough and his team to bring the message to the Sonoma County.

The city of Santa Rosa, 150k+ population, is 77% white. While I don't know the actual demographics of our church family, I do believe that it is significantly less than 77% white. If I were to characterize the flavor of the church I would say it is most like an all nations congregation. The senior pastor of our local Northern California church is Cuban-American, the associate pastor is Scandanavian-American. There are many blended-race couples, including both pastors. There are Black Americans, Fijians, Tongans, Kenyans,(we had an associate pastor and his family who were Kenyan also but now have their own church in MN), one young man from the Caribbean, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Hispanic, Filipino and probably more that I am overlooking. Everyone appears to get along and fellowship.

There has been an exodus of some elderly white folk and one asian couple but it has been due to the Praise Worship music and not the color of the folks sitting in the pews.

Hi PB,

Say hello to my son and daughter-in-law if you see them there this Sabbath! He was born in Nigeria, so some our relatives in Europe were surpriced that this did not make him black! There isn't much we can do to change our color, but we can do a lot to get along and permit divine love to rule among us, and learn to enjoy variations in skin color.

[Denny]

Hi PB,

Say hello to my son and daughter-in-law if you see them there this Sabbath! He was born in Nigeria, so some our relatives in Europe were surpriced that this did not make him black! There isn't much we can do to change our color, but we can do a lot to get along and permit divine love to rule among us, and learn to enjoy variations in skin color.

I shall assume this is a joke or you relatives have low I.Qs