Two nondenominational churches ”“ New Beginning Christian Church and The Sanctuary of Wilmington. Each values tithing. Each congregation claps and sings in worship. And each congregation enthusiastically responds to the preaching.
But the main difference in these churches is the people sitting in the pews.
Most of the members of New Beginning Christian Church are black. Most of the members of The Sanctuary are white.
Another in the long line of should-have-been-already-posted. An uncomfortable but important topic.
[i]Birds nest with their own kind, and fidelity comes to those who live by it.[/i]
(Sirach 27:9 NAB)
I would argue that this has a lot less to do with racism/bigotry than it did 50 years ago. All congregations have tastes – in music, tone, style, and culture – and these things vary by race. I have been to heavily black Episcopal churches where I felt very comfortable because those churches had a style I was used to. But I would probably not belong to a church which did nothing but gospel music, or where cheering during the sermon was considered appropriate.
That said, the fact that these sorts of tastes vary by race is not good.
I agree with #1, however, there is still a problem.. When an announcement comes that this, or that, bishop will visit the “Black Churches”, and even TEC has special ministries for “Black Churches”, what would one expect to have?
Last I heard, we were all “anglican/Episcopal”, very interesting that some are designated (even by those in higher places) as BLACK churches.
Please tell me why the above is OK, and segregation is not!
Grandmother in SC
Minorities are welcome in our mostly Caucasian Church. We have a smattering of Indian immigrants and an immigrant family from Peru. The simple fact is, most minorities prefer to be in their segregated Churches. Just looking at the African-American Church, African-Americans constitute about 12% of the population. Churches in the area that are made up of mostly African-Americans are self-segregated. They are welcome to come to almost any Church, yet they choose to congregate almost exclusively with others of their own ethnicity. When it comes to Church, they are “black” separatists. They don’t go over to the Hispanic Church, or the Korean Church, or to the Caucasian Church. They group together. Is it racism against us? I don’t know. I am not offended if it is. I just think it is sad that they seem to be more concerned with being with their fellow African-Americans during worship and it results in segregated Churches. I don’t feel any particular guilt about it.
I think that it is interesting that “Martin Luther King, Jr. shamed his Christian brethren in 1963 with the words ‘we must face the fact that in America, the church is still the most segregated major institution in America. At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing and Christ has no east or west, we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation.’â€
I wonder if anyone in the African-American community is actually still listening to the words of Dr. King. If they are, I wonder if it makes them ashamed today that they still clump together in their self-imposed “black” Churches.
That was my point S&ToN;. Probably made poorly.. But, as long as we insist on designating “black” clergy, churches, etc even in the hierachy
nothing will change.
A church might be described by denomination, but “color” ?? I think its a bad example to set.
Grandmother
“The simple fact is, most minorities prefer to be in their segregated Churches.” (And probably the majorities do too, eh?) But hmm. What does God prefer, do you think?
T
Dog bites man! I went to a funeral at the Damascus Missionary Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas Monday, a black church and it was the most up-lifting funeral I ever have been to. Absolutely non-anglican and refreshing. Fine Christian preaching by a COGIC minister from Denton, with an altar-call at the end (good preaching style at a funeral service). Fabulous spirit-filled music – nobody plays a hammond organ like that. The crowd was about 60-40 black/white. I like gospel services. I also like the 7:45 am Sunday said-eucharist at my Episcopal parish. People stick with their own in their own neighborhoods, and in Dallas, a lot of the areas are still segregated. That’s just the way Sundays are. Thank God we’re all in church, though!
What’s the problem? Do we have freedom of association or not? There is no force at work here. Black churches are what they are because their congregations choose them so. Are they not free to do so?
I don’t like happyclappy churches so I don’t go there. Nor do I go to kiss-of-peace churches because I prefer to keep my viruses to myself. Nor do they want me there. Some like them and they gather therein. Shall we sorrow over their segregation? LM
The problem is that we become insular and only get to know others like us. This leads to us knowing less about God and about our bothers and sisters.
There are legitimate reasons for the segregation and there are illegitimate reasons. Can we be so sure of our own motivations in this matter? The question is what can we do about it? Perhaps we could work together with a congregation from a different ethnic/racial background to worship together in both styles and to work together in some form of mission or outreach.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
My parish is approximately 60-40 black-white; we represent over twenty countries from Africa, Europe, Canada, the US, the Caribbean and Asia; and I am white.
This article was well intentioned but appears to me to be a bit too simplistic. I accept as fact that many people choose their churches because the parish is “my kind of people.” They are members of the same school, club, neighborhood, education, even political party. We pick up on subtle clues and cues as to whether we belong or not. Most congregations send out messages about what people are not welcome. Ah, I hear someone saying, “but everyone is welcome in our parish.” Really? What signals does your congregation send to a child-molester? Our Child Safety Course posted on the bulletin board quietly says that we will not tolerate misbehavior. Actually we send out all kinds of messages of welcome and not welcome. My parish is currently try to identify and change those messages that say children are not welcome (e.g. the rusted and falling down fence around the playground.)
I know our parish is unique (I think it’s the best in the diocese), and our diversity is a gift to the neighboring parishes which are mono-cultural. When I tell folks that we have more than twenty countries represented–they often ask something like, “How do you all get along?” Our parish life communicates something of what heaven will be like when all peoples, tongues, tribes and nations shall be present. Our parish life challenges us to put that Gospel hope into action, and our parish life indeed inspires the hope that heaven will be worth it. But for as excited as I am about our parish, I know that we will not be able to reach or bless some people. I have no one who speaks Arabic–so even though we have an Arab community in town, we currently have no ministry among them. Likewise, there are some whites and some blacks who need something different, and I am okay with that. But the very nature of our parish inspires me to keep on reaching out to all sorts of folks and to wonder who the Lord will bring into His kingdom next.
It’s not “segregation,” which was forced separation of races. It’s voluntary separation by ethnicity and culture. As long as it’s voluntary, and the majority churches welcome those minorities who choose to attend, I don’t see a problem. Area charitable ministries in which congregations combine efforts would be a good idea.
Is anybody fussing about Korean churches or Chinese churches? Where there is theological agreement, the immigrant churches gradually merge as their children become more “American.” Because we are just one generation out from legal segregation, perhaps we can view the American black culture as semi-immigrant in its outlook, and still wary. I think this will pass in time.
I am really impressed with the comments here, especially with LCF+ and Katherine. I attend a predominately white Episcopal church and it has been a great experience. In fact, it’s the first predominately white church I have been a member. However, the situation is different here in our diocese. Our church is the only conservative church in diocese. So, if I were to stay with the Anglican tradition it would mean attending my current church.
I have invited black friends to my church and they enjoy it, but wouldn’t become members. The church isn’t “black enough†for them. They don’t mean the church has to be all black, but have more cultural black elements (preaching, singing, dancing, etc). I have considered converting to Eastern Orthodoxy as I agree with most of their doctrine, however; the church is not culturally relevant to me. I listen to Orthodox music, I’m a big fan of Ancient Faith Radio and I have lots of books by Schmemann, Meyendoff and Zizioulas. Yet, I will not join an Orthodox church. It’s the same as many whites will listen to gospel music and preaching, but will not join a black church.
Blacks and Whites worship differently. Black religion is an emotion based religion. White religion is more intellect based. Black religion is a combination of various African religious traditions and the Baptist/Methodist camp revival tradition. Enslaved blacks saw a commonality between their past African traditions and the enthusiasm of the camp revivals. Blacks also were not allowed to be educated during slavery so religion based on catechism, readings, etc for the most part failed. Also, you had class distinctions in Christianity. Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists tended to be upper class, while Methodists and Baptists were from the lower classes.
Albert Rabateau, a professor at Princeton, has done a lot of research in the area of African American religion history. I would suggest picking up one of his books to learn more about this subject.
Vincent
Vincent, in my home city, the only traditionally black Episcopal parish is liberal, as is our (black) bishop. We have a black member at our traditionalist Anglican parish, have had visitors, and would certainly welcome more. But it is different, no question. It must present a real problem for those who are concerned about the liberal trend of the church. I do think that culture and the type of worship we’re used to governs where many of us worship. I agree with you that joining Orthodoxy would be a major cultural shift, as would Catholicism.
I should say, “their” bishop; not mine any more.
Permit me a memory if you will bear with me. I was in college – 50’s – and hitchhiking – it was safer then – to the Virgin Islands. (sigh) I was broke, and in Augusta Georgia on a Sunday morning in July. The gods of summer had removed all breathable oxygen and it was HOT. So here’s a New Englander, rarely ever outside New England, out on his own in a strange world. There was a big brick church – I think it said Something Abyssinian church, the door was open, it looked so much cooler, so I went inside. My, it was dark after the street. I walked to the church doors proper and what did I see? I had walked into a black church; not a white face anywhere, and I was some taken aback. I just stood then, non plussed, when the pastor caught sight of me and said in thunder, “Y’all come in here now, and join us!!!!!” I was rattled but I sat – right near the prettiest black girl I could ever hope to see. See looked at me and smiled. Ok. I was up for this.
But I wasn’t. The pastor walked up and down the aisles, his voice shook the bricks, he spoke of fire and brimstone and sinners OhYES the audience cried out AMEN AMEN! whenever he touched a nerve.
Then the choir, all women, broke into song (to a piano) like a tornado. I had never heard black gospel, just lovely hymns in an Episcopal church, very polite, never loud; no choir member ever bounced and jiggled three hundred pounds right down in front of the alter and stamped up a christian fervor that would melt stone. The rest of the choir was right behind her and I learned then and there what it meant to to BELIEVE. I was stunned. There was clapping and swaying, waviing of arms and antiphonals – Do You HEAR ME!
Oh yes, I hear you. DO YOU REALLY HEAR ME! Oh yes oh yes I hear you WELL NOW MAKE AJOYFUL NOISE!!!!!!!! ANd did they make a joyful noise?
And then the pastor took on sin and the devil again and I tell you, the Old Bad Guy never had a chance. And more jubilation. And more music. I sat there and sweated and listened. Nothing I had ever heard or seen in my like was like this. I was sort of numb, I guess, except when the pretty girl next to me grabbed my hand and raised it in the air with hers. And then church came to the end, and I had been instructed in the most perfect sense of the word. The pastor shook my hand, breaking all my five fingers, all sorts of people gave me invitations to various meals, and I lost the pretty girl in the crowd, never to see her again. Larry
I grew up in a LCMS church with first and second generation Germans. With the last name “Scott” I was decidedly a misfit culturally. The people were very welcoming and I never had to sit alone as a child; it helped that the community was rural and most of us were poor. The music for the Hymns are mostly Bach based or old German drinking songs. We had no blacks in our community so blacks in our congregation. We were taught in the school that God has made all people of one blood and that we are equal in the sight of God. I’ve been in other congregations since where the number of black memeber reflects the percentage of blacks in the area and found that they are LCMS first and black somewhere down the list.
Moving into an area where the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch first and second generation immigrants) was nearby, easy to get to and not terribly different theologically, I attended there. People were very accepting and much more physical in showing that. Germans don’t generally hug each other in public; Dutch do. Food at Potluck suppers was different. Accents were different, the music was livelier. I taught the Adult Bible Class, just as I had in the LCMS. No blacks, no blacks in the neighborhood.
Another move and I found myself in a Swedish Covenant Church (mostly second & third generation immigrants). Again, the theology was much the same, but more emphasis of the personal relationship with the Lord, I was a substitute teacher for the Adult Bible Classes. The accents, food, interpersonal relationships, music was a bit different. No blacks in the community; no blacks in the congregation.
Another move and my only choice was the Episcopal Church. Many people still had very proper English ways and there were things one just did not discuss. My acceptance was tenuous, I talk like a “Yankee.” I taught the Adult bible class. Although the church was deep behind the magnolia curtain, there had always been a few (very few) balck members. The food was different, the music unsingable for the most part, but the liturgy (old book of prayer) was almost identical to what I had grown up with.
Because I was with Habitat for Humanity and was Director of Family and Children’s Services, I was often invited to worship with the families in the Black Churches. I was always warmly welcomed and invited to make that church my church home as long as I remained in the community. The food was different, the music had a flavor of it’s own, there were no hymn books and few Bibles because most of the adults and teens were at least functionally illiterate.
I suspect that too much emphasis is placed on skin color simply because it is so obvious; it takes a while longer to become aware of cultural differences that divide just as surely as skin color. It is faith in Jesus that makes us “one”, all the other stuff just makes it more interesting.
We have been discussing this in my congregation for the last year or so. Out of 85+ ASA, we are white, black, Caribbean, Hispanic, African, Asian, and Native American with no majority. We’ve been that way for 40 years, which is highly unusual. For anyone walking in our doors, they would find a Prayer Book center of the road liturgy with music taken from the three main authorized Episcopal hymnals. Regardless of color or ethnic background, everyone likes the worship the way it is. It makes me shudder when anyone says this or that group worships differently so needs to be separate. It’s just not true. Worship preference doesn’t know racial boundaries.
As for why there are segregated churches still in TEC, I think it’s a complicated legacy. I’ve come to understand that the sins of the fathers do visit their children as personal and institutional decisions made 150 years ago still shape us today.
Absalom Jones chose the Episcopal Church because he believed “Church of Englandism” could best meet the spiritual needs of the black person. Frank Allen disagreed, and thus we have the AME.
Eighty percent of Virginia clergy owned slaves at one point. In the early 19th century a low-country parish in South Carolina was heavily integrated. After the Civil War, it was almost exclusively white. Black were evangelized after the Civil War but not welcome in white parishes.
Black clergy were ordained, but to serve only black congregations. They were not permitted to participate in diocesan convention or in clergy gatherings of their fellow priests. In the South, this could be blamed on segregation laws barring black and whites from socializing in public venues. Yet in the North, like Massechusetts, black clergy still couldn’t attend Convention, etc. (See Alexander Crummell)
Blacks were made suffragan bishops for black churches. Yet the black priests of the late 19th century strongly disdained the emotionalism and lack of education found in “black denominations” and were loyal Episcopalians despite the discrimination they faced on a regular basis. Initial frustration with segregation led to a sense that segregated churches were a place where blacks could develop their leadership skills and thrive since the larger white communities refused to recognize those skills and abilities.
All of that puts in place a legacy that is hard to overcome, and certainly won’t be overcome with the snap of fingers. Black congregations face other hurdles, too. Many urban black churches were founded by white churches to keep ‘those people’ out (though it was understand as planting mission churches for black congregations). Yet, they used substandard building materials and took construction shortcuts, so those buildings are in far worse shape today than their white counterparts (see Philadelphia).
Another problem is the question of clergy. None of the black seminarians I knew in seminary serve black churches. They are all in white churches or mixed congregations. In Dio NJ, every congregation in an interim period has to have an anti-racism workshop led by speically trained diocesan reps. It is actually very well received and has resulted in white congregations expanding their search to include black clergy and actually calling them.
If you have the choice of serving a congregation of your color half time or at the bottom of the pay scale, or the choice of serving a congregation that offers more opportunity, etc., all things being equal – what would you choose? Of course prayerful discernment goes into it – but now black clergy have the choice of adding white congregations to the discernment option, when even 15 – 20 years that was not very likely.
It has only been in the lifetime of priests now retiring that blacks were allowed to go to the white seminaries. I believe the late John Walker, Bishop of DC, was the first to integrate – choosing VTS (at the insistence of his bishop) over Bishop Payne Divinity School (the only, or largest, black seminary). The history of the integration of Sewanee is a mess and blight on the Gospel that with the internet would have been every bit as controversial as today’s issues facing the Church.
The only way to end the segregation is to build partnerships, learn one another’s stories, and truly try to move beyond the issue of race. One of my parishioners is head of the African American Studies at The College of New Jersey. He keeps reminding us that race is an artificial construct – one of our making. As long as we continue to operate under the assumption that race is real and defining, there will be segregation.
Sorry for the long post, but this has been fresh on my mind from the very stimulating conversations I’ve been having with my parishioners.
Dirk+
But why end this voluntary segregation? Put everyone all together and what happens? Homogeneity. Soon all particular cultural identities are lost. It would be a great shame to lose that church in augusta. ( Incidentally, I think its name was something very like Abyssinian Methodist Episcopal church. Is that even possible?) I was some shaken after THAT service, but I wouldn’t have missed it for the world.
It was a grand service, vital, throbbing, joyful; and sin and wickedness were thrashed into a pulp. I am too much white toast to want that church for my own, but it was memorable, distinct, shining and fresh, and I needed what it gave me. (And she was so beautiful. Oh, to be young and poor and randy and alone! Do you remember?) I would hate to have it become oatmealed. Larry
Larry, I don’t think forced integration is any better than forced segregation. However, the uncomfortable reality we have is that the segregation we have is because whites didn’t want to worship with blacks or let black share in spiritual leadership – not the other way around.
Part of being catholic is that we reflect all sorts and conditions of humankind, not just those who like, sound, and think like me. If Augustine is right and life in this world is a training ground for life in the next, I believe or churches should look something like the communities in which they ‘live and move and have their being’ as well as the community that, by God’s grace, is the destination of all its members.
Besides, who says that inegrating a congregation means it can’t look like that Church you admire?
(Incidentally, another uncomfortable reality is that part of reason our churches are segregated is because our neighborhoods are also segregated.)
Dirk
I dunno, Dirk. I guess I just don’t you’re right. Blacks would be quite welcome at my church. Heck, we even let some southern Baptists in, people who shout AMEN in the middle of the homily. Where is this, that whites do not want to worship with blacks? I don’t know such a place, but then, I m pretty parochial, out here where the temp doesn’t go above 30 on Nov. 21. Besides, I still favor letting good enough alone. Are black churches happy with the way their church is constituted? If if ain’t busted, why fix it? Go sing those gospel songs, people, and shake the rafters! If they don’t feel segregated, they aren’t. ( I wonder where she is now, what happened to her.) For heaven’s sake, stop trying to fix black lives. If it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for me. Larry
20. Larry, I may have been understated. I said white DID NOT want to worship with blacks (past tense), not DO NOT.
I think there is also a distinction between historical black churches like AME, AME-Z, CME, the various Baptists groups and so forth and black Episcopal/Anglican congregations. The historical black churches exist because white churches either wouldn’t evangelize blacks in the 18th and 19th centuries, or insisted on them being separate. In the Episcopal church, black congregations exist because blacks were not allowed to be a part of white churches in any meaningful way, and black leadership was not welcome among white Episcopalians. That’s not true anymore (sort of), but we’re stilling dealing with the sour fruit that those seeds bore.
At the end of the day, it’s not about worship style. It’s about acceptance, respect for cultural differences, and a commitment to diversity and inclusion (because the Gospel is for everyone, and everyone is invited to the same wedding feast).
There are also sociological factors at work. A black person looking in the door of an all white congregation is not going to feel as welcome or as comfortable as a white person looking in the door of the same congregation. I’ve been told that church development studies also show that once a congregation reaches about 30% of an ethnic group, it tips in that direction. There are a few exceptions. Mine is one of them and someone else mentioned there’s as an example in an earlier post. However, if that is the statistical norm and 30% of a group can tip a congregation in that direction, then there are other factors at work.
Incidentially, I know of several white charismatic Episcopal congregations that are far more exuberant than some black congregations, Caribbean congregations, and African congregations. Again, style of worship isn’t defined by skin color.
Dirk
I wanted to add – one of the reasons the Churches Uniting in Christ proposal didn’t work was because of the resistance of historical black church being seen as having to receive ‘approval’ from white hands. The CUIC was about reconciling ministries among 9 denominations, 4-5 of whom were historically black. In order for them to receive the historic episcopate (bishops consecrated through laying on of hands by other bishops back to the early church), it would have had to come through the Episcopal Church (the only church in CUIC that had it) – the black leadership rightly questioned the appearance of yet once again needing white approval to be considered ‘in the club.’
There were other issues of course (after all, Presbyterians and their presbyteral/elder order were also in the mix), but that was a part of the story.
Dirk
“…whites didn’t want to worship with blacks or let black share in spiritual leadership…”
That may have been true 40 years ago, but I see no evidence of that in my experience [I’m 44]. In fact, in my experience, just the opposite is true. Most folks in the Churches I have attended would have been pleased-as-punch for any minorities to participate. We treasure the Peruvian and Indian families in our Church. BTW, the Peruvian family is involved in an outreach to Spanish speaking folks, and we sponsor an Indian bible study/fellowship group that our Indian familiy is affiliated with.
I think an awful lot of people are living in the past when it comes to racism, especially alleged racism in Caucasian Churches. Are most Churches predominantly one ethnicity or another. I believe that the evidence would support that they are. Is that evidence of deliberate segregation? I don’t thinkg so. Perhaps it is more an indication that certain minority groups prefer the company of folks from their own ethnicity rather than stepping outside their comfort zones to participate with the larger ethnic groups. Is that racism? You would have to ask them.
#22, Again, I’m not saying that’s true today. I’m 43. However, I know the church I worshiped at in Columbia SC had ushers that deliberately encouraged people of color to worship elsewhere as late as the late’ 70s. That same church would NEVER do that today (nor in the early ’80s). My point is that the legacies of such actions and attitudes are still with us.
Gardiner Shattuck’s book on race and the Episcopal Church and Harold Lewis’ book ‘Yet, with a steady beat” both do a good job of documenting the past in order to understand the present.
I do agree that many congregations these days would delight in diversity, but active outreach to others has to be a part of getting that to happen. That’s where many congregations stumble. After all, the Episcopal Church Welcomes You (or the more anemic “Is here for you”) with the unstated message, “if you find us, we’re happy to have you. Otherwise, Oh well.” 🙂
(Incidentally, I want to be clear that I do not equate this with a reappraiser/reasserter divide. I know there are good and bad examples representing both categories, and ethnic background is only one means of segregating.)
Dirk
[Formatting corrected – elf]
I thought I used a closed /b tag. Sorry.