Thank you for sharing this transcript letter, Dr Tisby. It’s sobering to say the least but helps give context to Reverend Dr King’s profoundly moving response. When the “religious” authorities in our midst call for patience and an orderly response from the marginalized, suffering, victims of injustice and racism while waiting for this white world to make “their decision” on an acceptable solution, I can’t help but see Jesus in all his glory, authority and power taking a stand and FLIPPING TABLES! Time to be THAT Jesus in our world!
Christian believers tell me (and I'm a believer, too!) that Jesus of Nazareth died on a cross and then rose again/was raised again by the power of God. That is such a fantastic event! Jesus defeated death, the greatest enemy and opponent of our natural existence.
Why then, do followers of Jesus, the defeater of death, shy away from confronting sin head on and calling it out as what it is? Why do his followers attempt to negotiate with death and destruction, asking for us to slow down in our work to follow Jesus by overturning the power of death and the strength of that threat?
I call out the preachers and teachers to preach and teach us of the power of Jesus, and not to tell us "but of course, this doesn't apply to political or social problems--those we will just have to let happen." Tell us of this fantastic Gospel! Lead us into lives of energized repentance and restoration and conciliation with our siblings!
If Jesus lives within us with the power of Holy Spirit to give us new, energized, lives of the kin-dom, then why settle for less? Why settle for negotiation with those who will continuously try to put us all back into their bondage of hate and sin and racism?
Why not declare the power and lordship of Jesus over this very American sin with the confidence of the one who has snatched the very essence of power away from that sin?
I long for those preachers and teachers to speak boldly and confidently of the Jesus of Resurrection and Resurrection power. Give us hope. Give us clarity. Give us *leadership*.
Jemar, I know much of your desire is to draw a tidy through line from MLK and the Civil Rights movement to much of the Black Lives Matter activism we see today. While I think there are obviously examples of truth in your analysis, even as an everyday Joe (not even close to a PhD of history), I see some major differences that cause me some serious pause.
How do you think MLK's continual calls for self-purification during the Civil Rights movement would be embraced today in today's BLM movement and organization?
How do you think MLK's rooting in a Christian worldview and moral ethic would have lined up with the ideology of the current BLM organization?
What are your thoughts on how MLK would have viewed the violence, rioting, looting and destruction that many of us observed in 2020 (I personally saw it in my own home city)? In particular, how do you think he would he have viewed the destruction of already impoverished neighborhoods, as we saw in Minneapolis, and people justifying it in the name of "fighting injustice"?
I think the current movement has lost steam and failed to convince many explicitly due to what was seen as an unwillingness of prominent voices to address the excesses and injustices being acted out under its banner. Specific examples come to my mind, such as when Nikole Hannah-Jones stated that "it would be an honor" if the riots (not to be confused with the peaceful protests) of 2020 were to be referred to as the "1619 Riots". Or when she said, "destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence." I remember watching this particular interview and feeling a deep sense of disillusionment. Another example is when Kendi wrote off violence, destruction, and looting by saying, "let’s not equate violence against property to violence against people. These demonstrators primarily engaged in violence against property."
I understand what NHJ and IXK are tying to say, but I think they are wrong. Their words seem like a far cry from MLK's convicted calls for personal reflection, and for those sensing bitterness and violence in their own hearts, to sit out their demonstrations. I find examples like NHJ and IXK's willingness to write off violence and destruction as a reasonable reaction to violence and injustice counter to MLK's message, and ultimately a striping of agency and dignity of those involved in the movement as a whole.
In fact, MLK spoke to this exact issue, stating;
"A riot ends up creating many more problems for the negro community than it solves. You can, through violence, burn down a building, but you can’t establish justice."
and
"If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle, unborn generations will be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness, and your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos."
MLK did not make excuses for, and lower his standards for, Civil Rights marchers because had experienced violence and mistreatment. Quite the opposite. He explicitly called for them to meet violence with ever increasing moral righteousness of their own, not less.
"But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.
We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force."
While MLK admonished demonstrators to expose the unrighteousness of the opposition through an unflinching and deepening righteousness of their own actions. Current leaders like NHJ and IXK are preaching a message that our "oppressors" must repent and become righteous before we should be expected to demonstrate righteousness of our own.
Justin Giboney puts it so well;
"But gospel-driven compassion doesn’t conceptually refashion or normalize our brokenness in vain attempts to evade categories of sin. True justice isn’t inclusive of sin, because sin leads to moral disorder, and moral disorder is where injustice thrives...
This moment calls for leaders who are compassionate and brutally honest. Those willing to make arguments against their immediate self-interest if it means dismantling false narratives and healing the nation. Those who are willing to admonish their side publicly when necessary. Those who aren’t looking for validation from any ideological tribe and don’t melt in the light of examination and transparency. Those willing to forgive, listen intently and be truthful."
I think brutal honesty is what so many are deeply desiring, and many don't feel like they are getting it from those claiming that this modern-day movement is simply a continuation of MLK's fight. I get it, there is a bias in all of us to want to shield "our tribe" from criticism, but that shielding seems to be incredibly corrosive to interpersonal trust in my personal observations.
Thank you for sharing this transcript letter, Dr Tisby. It’s sobering to say the least but helps give context to Reverend Dr King’s profoundly moving response. When the “religious” authorities in our midst call for patience and an orderly response from the marginalized, suffering, victims of injustice and racism while waiting for this white world to make “their decision” on an acceptable solution, I can’t help but see Jesus in all his glory, authority and power taking a stand and FLIPPING TABLES! Time to be THAT Jesus in our world!
Christian believers tell me (and I'm a believer, too!) that Jesus of Nazareth died on a cross and then rose again/was raised again by the power of God. That is such a fantastic event! Jesus defeated death, the greatest enemy and opponent of our natural existence.
Why then, do followers of Jesus, the defeater of death, shy away from confronting sin head on and calling it out as what it is? Why do his followers attempt to negotiate with death and destruction, asking for us to slow down in our work to follow Jesus by overturning the power of death and the strength of that threat?
I call out the preachers and teachers to preach and teach us of the power of Jesus, and not to tell us "but of course, this doesn't apply to political or social problems--those we will just have to let happen." Tell us of this fantastic Gospel! Lead us into lives of energized repentance and restoration and conciliation with our siblings!
If Jesus lives within us with the power of Holy Spirit to give us new, energized, lives of the kin-dom, then why settle for less? Why settle for negotiation with those who will continuously try to put us all back into their bondage of hate and sin and racism?
Why not declare the power and lordship of Jesus over this very American sin with the confidence of the one who has snatched the very essence of power away from that sin?
I long for those preachers and teachers to speak boldly and confidently of the Jesus of Resurrection and Resurrection power. Give us hope. Give us clarity. Give us *leadership*.
Jemar, I know much of your desire is to draw a tidy through line from MLK and the Civil Rights movement to much of the Black Lives Matter activism we see today. While I think there are obviously examples of truth in your analysis, even as an everyday Joe (not even close to a PhD of history), I see some major differences that cause me some serious pause.
How do you think MLK's continual calls for self-purification during the Civil Rights movement would be embraced today in today's BLM movement and organization?
How do you think MLK's rooting in a Christian worldview and moral ethic would have lined up with the ideology of the current BLM organization?
What are your thoughts on how MLK would have viewed the violence, rioting, looting and destruction that many of us observed in 2020 (I personally saw it in my own home city)? In particular, how do you think he would he have viewed the destruction of already impoverished neighborhoods, as we saw in Minneapolis, and people justifying it in the name of "fighting injustice"?
I think the current movement has lost steam and failed to convince many explicitly due to what was seen as an unwillingness of prominent voices to address the excesses and injustices being acted out under its banner. Specific examples come to my mind, such as when Nikole Hannah-Jones stated that "it would be an honor" if the riots (not to be confused with the peaceful protests) of 2020 were to be referred to as the "1619 Riots". Or when she said, "destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence." I remember watching this particular interview and feeling a deep sense of disillusionment. Another example is when Kendi wrote off violence, destruction, and looting by saying, "let’s not equate violence against property to violence against people. These demonstrators primarily engaged in violence against property."
I understand what NHJ and IXK are tying to say, but I think they are wrong. Their words seem like a far cry from MLK's convicted calls for personal reflection, and for those sensing bitterness and violence in their own hearts, to sit out their demonstrations. I find examples like NHJ and IXK's willingness to write off violence and destruction as a reasonable reaction to violence and injustice counter to MLK's message, and ultimately a striping of agency and dignity of those involved in the movement as a whole.
In fact, MLK spoke to this exact issue, stating;
"A riot ends up creating many more problems for the negro community than it solves. You can, through violence, burn down a building, but you can’t establish justice."
and
"If you succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle, unborn generations will be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness, and your chief legacy to the future will be an endless reign of meaningless chaos."
MLK did not make excuses for, and lower his standards for, Civil Rights marchers because had experienced violence and mistreatment. Quite the opposite. He explicitly called for them to meet violence with ever increasing moral righteousness of their own, not less.
"But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.
We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force."
While MLK admonished demonstrators to expose the unrighteousness of the opposition through an unflinching and deepening righteousness of their own actions. Current leaders like NHJ and IXK are preaching a message that our "oppressors" must repent and become righteous before we should be expected to demonstrate righteousness of our own.
Justin Giboney puts it so well;
"But gospel-driven compassion doesn’t conceptually refashion or normalize our brokenness in vain attempts to evade categories of sin. True justice isn’t inclusive of sin, because sin leads to moral disorder, and moral disorder is where injustice thrives...
This moment calls for leaders who are compassionate and brutally honest. Those willing to make arguments against their immediate self-interest if it means dismantling false narratives and healing the nation. Those who are willing to admonish their side publicly when necessary. Those who aren’t looking for validation from any ideological tribe and don’t melt in the light of examination and transparency. Those willing to forgive, listen intently and be truthful."
I think brutal honesty is what so many are deeply desiring, and many don't feel like they are getting it from those claiming that this modern-day movement is simply a continuation of MLK's fight. I get it, there is a bias in all of us to want to shield "our tribe" from criticism, but that shielding seems to be incredibly corrosive to interpersonal trust in my personal observations.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for posting. It is surprisingly hard to track down this document.