Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
203
Evaluating
From Azusa to
Memphis: the Racial Reconciliation
Among
Pentecostals
Dialogue
Frank D. Macchia
We cannot speak except as equals and we cannot become equals unless we speak.
These words of Leonard
Lovett, quoting
Dean
Terry Balcomb,’
best summarize the
major challenge
involved in the most
important meeting of the now-defunct Pentecostal
Fellowship
of North America
(PFNA) since its
founding
in 1948. The all-white PFNA
gathered
for three
days last October at
Memphis
to admit its racist
past
and to
dialogue
with African American Pentecostals
concerning
the establishment of an integrated
association. The result was the dissolution of the PFNA and the establishment of the Pentecostal/Charismatic Churches of North America
(PCCNA),
with a
governing
board of six whites and six African Americans.
Bishop
Ithiel Clemmons of the Church of God in Christ serves as
Chairperson.
The
only
woman chosen to the board was Bishop
Barbara Amos of the Mt. Sinai
Holy
Church of America. As the name of the new association
suggests,
the Charismatics were also included,
and Mexico was
explicitly
mentioned as
part
of its geographical region.
Lovett’s dictum
given during
his
presentation
at the
meeting
seemed to summarize the
struggle implicit
in the effort of white and black Pentecostals to
dialogue
at
Memphis
last October. Lovett makes one pause
to consider whether or not the black Pentecostals were able in all good
conscience to come to the table of
dialogue
with the PFNA before racism in its member churches was
significantly
eradicated and some
meaningful degree
of
equality
affirmed
by
white Pentecostals in relation to their African American brothers and sisters. Since the PFNA and its member churches had not made such
steps
toward
repudiating racism and
affirming equality,
the black Pentecostals could have decided
justifiably
that there was no
just
basis for
dialogue.
But had they
withheld
dialogue,
how would the PFNA have the
necessary foundation from which to
begin fighting
racism in its member churches? Hence,
one confronts the reminder that we cannot
speak except
as equals
and we cannot become
equals
unless we
speak.
The
theological question
raised
by this paradox
concerns whether or not
repentance
and forgiveness
can
open
the door to
dialogue
even before the white
‘ Leonard Lovett, “The Present: The – 1 < Problem of Racism in the Pentecostal Contemporary Movement,” a paper presented at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” (Memphis, TN: October 17-19, 1994),2. 1 204 Pentecostals have made the kind of institutional that would demonstrate denominations authentic dialogue partners. Or, changes in their their moral credibility as is it to be assumed that such repentance prior to significant eradication of racism among white Pentecostals represents merely an expression of cheap grace? The Road to Memphis that led the Pentecostals newly-established ways administration of black Pentecostal churches membership.2 in To answer such difficult questions, one needs to look first at the road PFNA to its willingness to join with African American in a new show of unity. Founded as the counterpart to the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the PFNA defined its cultural identity and agenda from the beginning in that were insensitive to the voices of the poor and the oppressed. At its founding, the PFNA did not invite any African American Pentecostal groups to participate, and, in the decades that followed, the the PFNA rejected “by agreement” any inquiries from concerning possible Moreover, the PFNA remained insulated over the years from the ethical issues being raised by minorities and feminist groups. Consequently, the history of PFNA was in direct opposition to the work of the Holy Spirit experienced in the integrated fellowship various racial groups in the early years of the Azusa Street numerous times in the meetings at the integrated fellowship of Azusa Street once felt that, perhaps, white Pentecostalism is being given a such ethical contexts, among revival. The desire was expressed Memphis to experience more. Many “second chance.” in meetings of the PFNA has this white, male-dominated, diverse landscape of urban, its toll on the In recent years, active participation declined.3 It seems that the insularity of from the increasingly particularly life took even wonder if the increased interest in urban North American white Pentecostalism part, a reaction to declining numbers in its suburban churches. One wonders what would have happened to the PFNA and its member Pentecostal association American cultural, organization. One might missions throughout Robeck, Jr., Pentecostalism,” reported that, is not, in 2 As admitted by R O. Corvin, who served for some years on the Board of Administration for the PFNA, “News Notes on Religion,” Spirit: A Journal Issues Incident to Black Pentecostalism 3/1 of 37; citation from Cecil M. “The Past: Historical Roots of Racial (1979): Unity and Division in American a paper presented at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” (Memphis, TN: October 17-19, 1994), 42-43. It is at some point, the PFNA finally contacted the Church of God in Christ about membership but was understandably rejected. Wayne E. Warner, “Pentecostal Fellowship of North America,” in Pentecostal and Charismatic Afovements, eds. M. Dictionary of Stanley Burgess and Gary B. McGee (Grand MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988), 704. ‘ Warner, “Pentecostal Fellowship of North America,” 704. Rapids, 2 205 churches had it not opened its doors to African American groups and their concerns for urban ministry. One must wonder if the willingness of the PFNA to dissolve and to reorganize with the participation of black Pentecostals did not occur, in part, from the need for survival. Bishop B. E. Underwood of the Pentecostal Holiness Church is reported as having helped to pave the road to Memphis with the following statement concerning the PFNA: Look, the way we’re going, we can only die. We have to go back and deal with our sins and repent of them, know that we go back to our black brethren and let them began wrong and want to get right-that whatever hurts we’ve caused, we want to change that.’ 4 Aside from the gender bias of this remark, there are elements of honesty and desperation that provoke an ambivalent response. A critical evaluation of this aspect of the road to Memphis can express gratitude for the honesty and for the sincere convictions that were operative but also regret that a major impetus which seems to have led the PFNA to Memphis did not occur on a higher moral ground than the effort to combat the threat of extinction. One would have been much more impressed with the move of the PFNA toward racial reconciliation had it occurred two or three decades ago before cultural diversity was necessary for survival. The witness of the PFNA to a just integration in Pentecostal fellowship while such was still largely unheard of in American cultural life would have been a cause for rejoicing. Now that the PFNA has made a move that the secular media has long since blessed as sacrosanct, the celebration seems somewhat anticlimactic. One wonders if Jack E. White’s recent response to racial reconciliation among Southern Baptists as being “too little, too late” does not apply to the Memphis meetings.’ Only the African American Pentecostals can make this judgment. At any rate, the least that must be said is that the celebration of the meeting at Memphis should be sober and based on an ongoing realistic evaluation of its significance. The same could also be said of the recent move of the NAE toward racial reconciliation.’ The Meetings at Memphis The meetings at Memphis did represent at least a potential first step in the direction of ending a history of racism and segregation in white Pentecostalism. Two hundred white and black participants gathered along with hundreds of observers for talks, prayer, and the ‘ As told by Ithiel Clemmons, “Racial and Spiritual Unity in the Body of Christ: An Interview with the Chairman of the Newly Formed PentecostaUCharismatic Churches of North America,” Advance 3 ‘ Jack E. Our I (Fall 1995): 67. White, “Forgive Us Sins,” Time, 3 July 1995, 29. 6Helen Lee, “Racial Reconciliation Tops NAE’s Agenda,” Christianity Today, 3 April 1995, 97. 3 206 establishment of a biracial association of Pentecostal churches and denominations. The talks evolved around four principal lectures: the past roots of racial unity and division (Cecil M. Robeck, Jr.), the present problem of racism and discrimination in the Pentecostal movement (Leonard Lovett), the ideal, biblical pattern of unity (William Turner), and the future strategy of reconciliation (Vinson Synan). Each presentation was followed by two respondents, one white and one black. Following the respondents, the observers prayed while the participants met in small groups to discuss the issues raised. Then a representative from each small group summarized the general contents of the small-group discussion for the broader audience. The times of prayer and discussion were interrupted several times by spontaneous choruses of repentance and praise, including a message in tongues and foot washings among several white and black Pentecostal leaders. The meetings concluded with a communion service. The major difficulty with the logistics of the talks was the rather awkward matching of speakers with respondents. Oliver Haney of the Church of God in Christ and Lamar Vest of the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) responded to Cecil M. Robeck’s paper, even though his major topic had to do with the history of the Assemblies of God concerning racism and segregation. On the other hand, General Superintendent Thomas Trask of the Assemblies of God, naturally the most appropriate respondent to Robeck, responded to Leonard Lovett’s paper. The result was that most of the respondents seemed at times to step around commenting on specific allegations of racism in order not to imply disparaging judgments concerning a sibling denomination. Consequently, most of the respondents tended to give independent speeches of their own. The desired dialogical give-and-take of the meetings was thereby hampered. Remembering the Past Fortunately, the Memphis talks were quite candid at times about the past racism of white Pentecostalism. Indeed, memory of the past is vital to an eventually just reconciliation between white and black Pentecostals. As one African American historian said of those who came out of slavery, at great inner cost they were calling for a new beginning-not forgetting the past, never forgetting it, but seeking to overcome it, to transform its meaning through the creation of a new future.’ 7 Elie Wiesel is convinced that memory of the past is the key to keeping faith among those who have suffered as they attempt to come to terms ‘ John Cartwright, Annual Meeting for the Society of Christian Ethics (Savannah, GA: 10 January 1993), 328; quoted in Donald Shriver, An Ethic for Enemies: Forgiveness in Politics (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1995). 176. >
4
207
with what has
happened
to them.’
Furthermore,
Donald Shriver maintains that
remembering
is essential to a just reconciliation of the oppressed
with their offenders. Not
“forgive
and
forget”
but “remember and
forgive”
is the more relevant
slogan
for
forgiveness
in politics.
In the
memory
of
wrongs suffered,
the
forgiveness
and reconciliation can be based on a
responsible
moral assessment of
past social
relationships
and a genuine commitment
by
both sides to a new, just
future.9 The
oppressors
can
meaningfully repent
and
repudiate injustice.
The offended can use such
memory
to commit themselves to a future in which
they
will no
longer play a
subservient role. Reconciliation,
and not
assimilation,
can be the result.
The
important
role of
memory
in reconciliation
provides
a meaningful
context for
evaluating
the racial reconciliation talks at Memphis.
Leonard Lovett and several other African Americans made candid remarks about the
past
racism of white Pentecostalism in North America. For
example,
Lovett
compared
the token use of “safe Negroes” by
Pentecostal and Charismatic leaders to the domestication of house slaves “who are so
glad
to be on Massa’s
show, they just
sit and
grin.”
Lovett claimed
concerning
the token use of select African Americans in Pentecostal churches and conferences:
Whites continued to define our leadership by selecting a “gatekeeper” to
screen all other Blacks for whatever the next show calls for. Somehow the
list is getting shorter.’°
Only
those black Pentecostals who conform their
message
to what the white
“gatekeepers”
consider to be
politically
“safe” can have a ministry
in the PentecostaUCharismatic movement.
The most
thorough
assessment of the
past
racism of Pentecostalism came from Cecil M.
Robeck,
Jr. Robeck told the
story
of the racist history
of the
PFNA,
but he concentrated on the
history
of its
largest member
church,
the Assemblies of God. In contrast to the ecumenical vision of African American Pentecostals William
Seymour
and C. H. Mason,
the vast
majority
of white Pentecostals were racist and segregationist
from the
beginning.
Soon after the brief
period
of racial reconciliation at Azusa
Street,
white Pentecostals accommodated themselves to the racist
patterns
of North American
society.
The roots of the Assemblies of God are to be
found,
in part, in this
development.
As
early
as
1915,
the
Weekly Evangel
of the Assemblies of God published
an article from Executive
Presbyter,
W. F.
Carothers, defending
the
segregation
of the races in America and elsewhere as “ordained of God.” Carothers claimed that the Assemblies of God was
8New York Times, 10 April 1985, from the acceptance speech for the Gold Medal of Achievement; in Shriver, An Ethic for Enemies, 96.
9 Shriver, An Ethic for Enemies, especially chapter 7.
‘ 10 loves, “The Present: The Problem of Racism in the Contemporary Pentecostal movement,” 17.
5
208
in “cheerful
conformity”
to the “wholesome
regulations”
of
segregation in the South for the sake of “common
decency.” By allowing
a high-ranking
denominational official to
publish
such a racist evaluation of
segregation
in its national
weekly publication,
the Assemblies of God revealed
something very telling
about its
trajectory
for
dealing
with racism and
segregation
in the future.”
In
1939,
the Assemblies of God
prohibited
ordination to African Americans, only allowing
them a license to
preach
with instructions that
they operate strictly
within the boundaries of their District.’2 Black Pentecostals
seeking
ordination were referred to “one of the colored organizations,” especially
the Church of God in
Christ,
which the Assemblies of God
patemalistically
“allowed” to function as the “younger sibling”
to accommodate African
Americans,
even
though
the Church of God in Christ
predates
the Assemblies of God. 13 Mounting pressures
in the 1940s and 1950s to reach out to the African American community
were resisted
by the Assemblies of God in conformity
to the standard of “American law and
society.””
The Assemblies of God continued to
ignore
the evil of
racism, particularly
as manifested in segregation. As J. Roswell Flower stated in
1958,
“The Assemblies of God is a
vigorous missionary
and evangelistic
association which has not concerned itself with social and racial
problems.””
A
major
concern of the
Memphis
talks was to overcome
trivializing
the sin of racism as a mere social
“problem.”
The talks at
Memphis
also tried to overcome the
misguided separation
of evangelism
from the need to
embody
a life orientation and
prophetic witness that are critical of racism and
segregation. Imagine
St. Paul ignoring
the division between Jew and Gentile.
Contrary
to the historic stance of the Assemblies on racism, William Turner’s excellent
paper
at the
Memphis meetings
on the
implications
in the
Gospel
for racial reconciliation reminds us that there can be no
concept
of
evangelism nor of
pastoral
care without a vision of racial
justice
and reconciliation.” Turner’s
point
was raised
repeatedly
in the
meetings
at Memphis.
“Robeck,
‘The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,” 26-27.
Robeck,
“The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,” 29.
“Robeck,
“The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,” 29,
36.
“Robeck, “The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,”
27ff.
“Letter from J. Roswell Flower to Mrs. Burton Lewis, 23
April 1958, Race Relations File, Assemblies of God Archives;
quoted
in
Robeck, “The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,” 42. ‘6 William Turner, “The Ideal: The Biblical Pattern of Unity,” a paper presented at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” TN: October
(Memphis,
17-19, 1994).
6
209
Robeck noted further that the Assemblies of God
dragged
its feet concerning possible
involvement of African Americans in the denomination in an effort to remain neutral in the
rising segregation/integration
debate.
Consequently,
the Assemblies
engaged in a “tip-of-the-hat” to
Scripture governed by an overriding
concern not to offend “American law and
society.”
The Assemblies of God’s lack
of concern with the race issue
supported
an
illusionary neutrality, since
it actually supported
racism
by
its silence. Its
only
official
response
to segregation
in 1957
naively
assumed that American law had
already granted equality
to all.” Robeck
pointed
out that there were notable voices within the Assemblies that
obviously
resisted the dominant racist stance toward
segregation.
But Robeck concluded that the
“only
norm or canon to which the Assemblies had ever
appealed
on the
subject
of race relations was ‘American law and
society. “‘
This standard and not the
Scriptures,
was the “canon above the canon” for the Assemblies of God on the issue of racism.”
Repentance
and
Forgiveness
With such a
past
before the member churches of the PFNA at Memphis,
it is of no
surprise
that there was a dominant mood of repentance
at the
meetings.
The confessions of sin that occurred there may
cause one to wonder whether
repentance
can function on such a corporate,
institutional level. Donald Shriver
argues
that
repentance and
forgiveness
were intended
originally
in the Church to be a
public and
political
force for
healing
and reconciliation but became
privatized in the
early
centuries of the Christian era. When
repentance
and forgiveness finally
became a
public
and
political dynamic again
in the late Medieval
period, they
were abused in the Church’s effort to
gain political power. Thus,
the Church
largely
lost its
ability
to
tap
a powerful
force for
healing
and
reconciliation,
not
only
within the believing community,
but in the
society
at
large.’9
Public and
political repentance,
in the words of
Jfrgen Moltmann, render one
“defenseless, assailable,
vulnerable.” Moltmann
points
to the need for
repentance
that is ongoing:
He stands there muddied and weighed down. Everyone can point at him and despise him. But he becomes freed from alienation and determination of his actions by others, he comes to himself, and into the light of a truth which makes him free and
brings
him into a new steps
comradeship with the
victims-readiness for reconciliation. How can one look the victims in the eye? The victims always have a better memory than the wrongdoers
Versus
“The Past: “”Segregated
Integration,”
General Presbytery File,
quoted
in Robeck,
Historical Roots of Racial
Unity
and Division in American Pentecostalism,”
39-40.
‘8 Robeck,
“The Past: Historical Roots of Racial Unity and Division in American Pentecostalism,” 34.
‘9 Donald Shriver, An Ethic for Enemies, 46ff.
7
210
and those who run with the pack. For that reason, there is never an end to the admission of guilt.”
Repentance
cannot be a one-time event if it is to
open
a
person
to deeper insights
and effect
change throughout
an institution. Will the denominational leaders and others that
repented
behind closed doors at Memphis
initiate this act
throughout
the churches
they represent? Shriver notes that institutions such as the Church
usually require years of
wrestling
with the
past
before
specific sins,
such as
racism,
are admitted, especially
on a
grass-roots
level. The Protestant Church in Germany,
for
example,
did not reach this level of
repentance concerning
the Holocaust until
1950,
with a statement
produced by
a territorial
synod.
The famous Barmen
(1934), Stuttgart (1945),
and Darmstadt
(1947) Declarations,
for all of their
worth,
did not
explicitly mention antisemitism.” There are
exceptions, however,
as the
Holy Spirit
moves on individuals to hasten
corporate processes.
One is reminded of German Chancellor Willie Brandt’s sudden and
unexpected act in 1970 of
falling
to his knees before the Polish monument to the Warsaw
ghetto uprising
of 1943 in a spontaneous display of repentance on behalf of the German nation. 22
One can
easily
celebrate such moves of the
Holy Spirit
in the reconciliation talks at
Memphis. Though
Thomas Trask did not
respond directly
to Robeck’s evaluation of the
history
of the Assemblies of God with
regard
to racism and
segregation,
he did admit the
following limited,
but
sincere, expression
of
repentance
in
response
to Leonard Lovett:
Dr. Lovett has appealed to the white church to repent of its racism. To the extent that I can represent others before the throne of God and before you, I freely
do so… I have researched the history of the church I represent, the Assemblies of God. While we have much in our for which to praise the
Lord,
we
recognize
that the
enemy
sowed weeds past
among us. Our record of race relations indicates that we failed to keep the dream and example of an
integrated Christian community, composed of all races, as modeled at Azusa Street.”
Similarly,
Lamar Vest of the Church of God
(Cleveland, Tennessee) stated in more
explicit
terms: “Treatment of African American Pentecostals
by
white Pentecostals has fallen far below the level of a loving relationship required by Holy Scripture.”
He stated
further,
“We
2° Jiirgen Moltmann, “Forty Years After the Stuttgart Declaration,”
trans. Susan
in Case Study 2, The Forgiveness and Politics Study Project, ed. Brian Frost (London: New World Publications, 1987), 41-42; quoted in Shriver, An Ethic Reynolds,
for Enemies, 85.
I’ Shriver,
22
An Ethic for Enemies, 78ff.
Shriver, An Ethic for Enemies, 91.
n Thomas Trask, “The Problem of Racism in the .Pentecostal Movement,” a to a paper presented by Leonard Lovett, ” “The Present: The Problem of racism in reply the Contemporary
Pentecostal Movement, at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” (Memphis, TN: October 17-19, 1994), 1.
8
211
must
repent
for our sins of
prejudice,
discrimination and racism before God will restore us to our
original purpose. “24 Quoting
Jim Wallis, Vest reminded white Pentecostals of how racism denies the
Gospel
of Jesus Christ:
Racism negates the reason for which Christ died-the
reconciling work of the cross. It denies the
purpose of the church to bring together in Christ those who have been divided from one another.”
In an
important distancing
from the
political agenda
of the
Religious Right,
Vest remarked:
The
cry to turn back to “traditional American values” often voiced denominations
by
represented by the PFNA and the NAE is not our What we primary agenda. really need to do is to recover the biblical values with
of living
integrity and maintaining relationships with God’s s people. 26
Prospects far
the Future
Ongoing expressions
of repentance, as important as they
are,
can also become
counterproductive
if not followed
by
concrete action. Gestures of
repentance
can
actually
serve as a smoke screen for a failure to change
the status
quo
of racism. The status
quo
can be
maintained, with
perhaps
a few token
gestures
of racial
justice,
while consciences are
appeased by public repentance.
On the other
hand,
a
group
can engage
in
perpetual self-flagellation,
which is not
helpful
to
anyone
at all.
Consequently,
a question that was raised
repeatedly throughout
the meetings
concerned which
practical steps
are
necessary
to move Pentecostals toward a just racial reconciliation.
Vinson
Synan
offered a number
of helpful suggestions
that concerned joint
church
meetings
and
evangelistic
crusades
among
white and black Pentecostals.” In
response
to
Synan, Bishop
Charles Blake of the Church of God in Christ raised the
following
words of caution:
We cannot expect events and special meetings to bring us together. How many
times have we
gathered
in various situations to bridge the which have separated us! How many times have we set aside
gaps
“Brotherhood Sundays”
to lift up our oneness in Christ! These events and should rather be
meetings
magnificent celebrations communicating to the world the that we
existing togetherness
have attained on every level. every day, week.
24 Lamar Vest, “A Response.” a reply to a paper presented Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., “The Past: Historical Roots of Racial
Unity
and Division by in American Pentecostalism,” at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” (Memphis. TN: October 17-19, 1994), 4.
2′ Jim 26
Wallis, America’s
P
“A
Original Sin, 16; quoted in Vest, “A Response,” 2.
Vest.
Response.” 3. Vinson
Synan. “The Future: A the Strategy for Reconciliation,” a paper presented at
Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled, “Pentecostal Partners” TN: October
(Memphis.
17-19, 1994).
9
212
and month. It cannot be something that we take out of the box at time.ze
meeting
Though
Blake noted the usefulness of
Synan’s suggestions,
he also pointed
to the need for
something deeper.
This
something deeper
is a solidarity
of white Pentecostals with their black brothers and sisters “on every
level” at all times. Such
solidarity implies
a
turning by
white Pentecostals to hear the voices of
suffering
and
protest arising
from the black
community,
a willingness to join in fellowship and life with those who live
beyond
the confines of
lily-white
suburban church
settings, and a
support
in
every way
of the black church’s efforts to affirm an authentic
humanity
and a biblical witness to the
Gospel.
There must be significant
institutional
restructuring
and sacrifice if white Pentecostalism is to
proceed meaningfully
toward a reconciliation strategy
in the future. Without such concrete
steps
on administrative and
grass-roots levels,
the
Memphis meetings
will
represent
a hollow event.
The
major
issue that remained unaddressed
by the white
Pentecostals at
Memphis
concerned the concrete institutional
changes
that PFNA churches will need to make in order to combat racism on a
broad, grass-roots
level. The
long-term significance
of a denominational leader repenting
for his denomination will be measured
by
the institutional changes
that he helps to effect in the months and
years
that follow. For example,
how will
Memphis
effect
changes
in the
ways
the Assemblies of God
spends
its
money?
What
degree
of investment will be made in communicating
the sinfulness of racism to member churches and in establishing
links with African American churches? How must the Assemblies be restructured so as to eliminate its distance from the concerns of African American Christians? How will its schools be affected in their
curriculum, textbooks,
and
staffing?
The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 reveals that
spontaneous
moments of reconciliation
wrought by
the
Holy Spirit
between divided
groups must be institutionalized in order to become a
permanent part
of the ongoing
life of the Church.29 In modem
terms,
institutional restructuring
must be
seriously
addressed on an
ongoing
basis
by white Pentecostal denominations of the PCCNA if racial reconciliation is to become embodied
among
them in any
meaningful way. Only
in this
way can the PCCNA bear an integrated witness to the
Kingdom
of God that will call into
question
racism in
society
on all
levels, including
that of institutional racism.
28 Charles E. Blake, “A Response,” a reply to a paper presented by Vinson Synan, “The Future: A
Strategy
for Reconciliation,” at the Conference on Racial Reconciliation, entitled,
“Pentecostal Partners”
(Memphis,
TN: October
17-19, 1994),4.
“I I am indebted to Murray Dempster for this insight into the positive side of the routinization of charisma.
10
213
The words that form the foundation for a just reconciliation between white and black Pentecostals, no matter how
carefully offered,
will be sure to offend and alienate a
segment
of white Pentecostalism.
There will also be
great
resistance to the sacrifices
necessary
for an institutional
response
to
justice
and reconciliation of white with black Pentecostals. Those committed to denominational
growth
must consider
carefully
the sacrifices involved in
building
a
truly just reconciliation. The
temptation
to be satisfied with token
gestures
of reconciliation and a
politically-safe
silence
concerning
the
depth
of racism in white Pentecostalism will be
great, especially
for denominational leaders. Such leaders
may
have to choose between growth
and truth. The two are not
always compatible. Chairperson Ithiel Clemmons of the PCCNA is
cautiously optimistic
at best that white Pentecostals will make the sacrifices to work toward a genuinely just
reconciliation with their African American brothers and sisters. He summarized his caution most
insightfully:
Our Caucasian brethren have always wanted unity without the price of
justice. in a
The African American brethren have said, “Our interest is not in
sense alone. Our interest is in justice, in how we
behave.” Whites talk about spiritual unity-unity
unity spiritual
of heart, unity of soul.
But they seem unwilling to deal with the issues of
power, wealth, and
privilege
in a real way that promotes justice and access. Even as we come
that there is a
together
there is a kind of cautious optimism, because we are deeply aware
brethren are
price to pay for this unity. We are not sure whether the white
really willing to pay that price for unity.’°
In addition to institutional issues, the PCCNA has much unfinished business to
complete
if it is to survive as a meaningful
expression
of a diverse Pentecostal witness. In her address at
Memphis, Bishop Barbara Amos
forcefully
criticized the fact that she was the
only
female among
200
participants
at the
meetings.
What will the PCCNA do to support
female ministers and church leaders and to invite their participation
in future
meetings?
What will the PCCNA do to
repudiate sexism in the
churches,
in homes, and in the
society
at
large?
Also,
the near total absence of Asians and
Hispanics
at the
Memphis meetings
must be criticized. Even if one could
justify
a focus on the relationship
between white and black
Pentecostals, surely
the perspectives
from other minorities on the issues
surrounding
this relationship
would be most
helpful.
In
fact,
one would have
easily understood
meetings
of African American Pentecostals with other minority
Pentecostal
groups prior
to
dialogue
with white Pentecostals. A meeting among various
minority
Pentecostals has
already
occurred in 1994 as
part
of the
Society
for Pentecostal Studies. Such
meetings prior
to
Memphis
would have allowed black Pentecostals to form a broad-based
agenda
for racial
justice
and reconciliation in
solidarity 30 Interview with Ithiel Clemmons, “Racial and
Spiritual Unity in
the
Body of Christ,” Advance, 68.
11
214
with other Pentecostal minorities before
confronting
white Pentecostals with the realities of racism and the
requirements
of
a just
reconciliation. As it now
stands,
the PCCNA must
attempt
to invite
Hispanic
and Asian Pentecostals to a
dialogue
that these excluded
groups
had no voice in establishing from the
beginning.
The Statement
which was borrowed
largely
reckoned as
adequate
example,
there is not one article for Statement,
even
though
emphasized again
and
again
of
Faith
of,
its
past
racism in its
for
integrated
PCCNA?3′ For
the scandal of the visible and
There is some reason to
question
the
degree
to which the PFNA has denied,
or even understood the extent
transformation into the PCCNA. What is
being communicated, example,
in the uncritical
acceptance
of the PFNA’s Statement
of Faith,
from that of the NAE?
By
what stretch of the
imagination
can the Statement of Faith of the
original
PFNA be
for the
racially
racial
justice
and
integration
in the
the
participants
in the
meetings
at
Memphis
the essential connection between these goals
and the
Gospel. Though
the
Memphis meetings
resulted in a manifesto which
explicitly
condemns racism and commits the PCCNA to racial
justice
and
reconciliation,
the Statement of Faith should reflect the essential connection between this commitment and various elements of the Christian’s confession. That the PFNA left an article for racial reconciliation out of its Statement of Faith is understandable in light of its racist
origins.
That the PCCNA excluded it is baffling.
The nearest the Statement comes to a reconciliation article is the belief in the rather abstract
“spiritual unity”
of believers
(article 8).
This article can be read as
sidestepping
institutional divisions between white and black Pentecostals caused
by white racism so
explicitly
condemned at
Memphis.
A statement for spiritual unity may
have been
adequate
for the NAE and the
PFNA,
but does it
embody adequately
what the PCCNA stands for?
Perhaps
a statement for the
“unity
of
diversity” among
believers from all races would
capture
the
spirit
of the
Memphis
talks more
adequately.
the Statement includes a trinitarian confession
(article 2) which,
in
effect, disqualifies
Unitarian or Jesus Name Pentecostals from
membership.
This trinitarian statement has
significant political
in
light
of the
large
number of Unitarian Pentecostals
African American and Mexican Pentecostals.
trinitarian confession is
meaningful
for a Pentecostal affirmation of an ecumenical
apostolic faith,
one must consider the
important priority
of solidarity
with
minority
Pentecostals. After
all,
the PCCNA is not a church or a denomination but an association of Pentecostal and Charismatic churches that
consciously
Furthermore,
implications among
Though
a
seeks to be as inclusive as
” I am indebted to Gerald T. Sheppard for insight into the
involved in
political implications
the PFNA’s usage of the NAE’s statement of faith.
12
215
possible
for the sake of diverse
fellowship
and
dialogue. Consequently, the Statement of Faith of the PCCNA should have as its primary
goal
a solidarity among
a broad
diversity
of
Pentecostals,
even if certain limitations are
thereby placed
on the
language
of the
corporate confession of faith when viewed from a broader
solidarity
with the Oikoumene. If the PCCNA is serious about
dialogue among white, black and
Hispanic
Pentecostals on an
equal footing,
the white Pentecostals cannot be allowed to enforce a confessional statement that a significant number of black and
Hispanic
Pentecostals
reject. Perhaps a “trinitarian” statement can be included which would avoid the ontological language
that divides Trinitarian and Unitarian Pentecostals.
The Statement does sound
Evangelical,
as one would
expect,
since it was taken almost
exclusively
from the NAE. But how Pentecostal is it? Why
does the
very
first article concern the
infallibility
of
Scripture, without one word about the
power
of the
Scripture empowered by
the Holy Spirit
to transform lives and set at
liberty
the
captive
and the oppressed?
Whose
priorities
does this first statement
reflect,
that of the Pentecostals or that of the NAE? The
only distinctively
Pentecostal statement
(article 5) supports
the doctrine of
tongues
as “initial evidence,”
which will result in the exclusion of the vast
majority
of the Charismatics that the PCCNA is inviting into
membership.
In brief, the new
allegedly
inclusivist
identity
of the
PCCNA,
if genuinely responsive to the talks at
Memphis, implies
a Statement of Faith much different from the one
imported
from the PFNA. If this matter is not studied and reconsidered,
the PCCNA will
proceed
with a rather confused corporate identity
and future
agenda.
The
Manifesto
The most
important product
of the
Memphis meetings
was the Manifesto. Written
by
Cecil M.
Robeck, Jr.,
Leonard
Lovett,
Ithiel Clemmons,
and Harold
Hunter,
and embraced
by
the
PCCNA,
this statement is an
explicit repudiation
of racism in all of its forms. It starts with the statement:
‘
I pledge in concert with my brothers and sisters of many hues to oppose
racism prophetically in all its various manifestations within and without
the body of Christ.
This refusal to limit racial reconciliation to the walls of the church is significant.
After
all,
one of the
purposes
of racial reconciliation in the church is to bear witness to the world of the kind of humanity that God desires. Article 2
opposes
both
personal
and institutional
racism,
even protesting
racism “within the
very
structures of our environment.” As noted
above,
the
importance
of institutional and structural racism was mentioned but not
responded
to
sufficiently during
the talks. Article 3 boldly
refers to racism as sin
(emphasis theirs). Significantly,
racism is
13
216
not referred to as a
“problem.”
Article 7 vows to work for
“genuine and visible manifestations of Christian
unity,” transcending
the confession of the rather nebulous
“spiritual unity”
in the Statement of Faith discussed above. Article 11 points to the need for
gender equality by confessing
a “reconciliation of all Christians
regardless
of race or gender.”
The
language
of the
Manifesto, however,
does not
quite
reflect adequately
the rich biblical faith and
theological insights
that
inspired
it. For
example,
article 3 mentions that racism is a sin that has hindered “spiritual development”
and “mutual
sharing” among Pentecostal/Charismatic believers. More
adequate
than “mutual sharing”
would have been the term
“koinonia,”
which
implies
a common life that is bound
together by
the cross of Christ and the work of the one
Spirit
of God.
Moreover,
the
Spirit
is mentioned as the Liberator in article
5,
without some hint of the biblical context that gives
this
designation meaning,
such as the
message
of justice in the prophets
and the
prophetic ministry
of the charismatic Christ. The eschatological
reservation is mentioned in article 6 as a context for understanding
the weaknesses and limitations of the Church’s work toward reconciliation. But no mention is made of the
challenges
in the goal
of the
kingdom-to-come
to unite
peoples
of
“every nation, tribe, people,
and
language” (Rev. 7:9),
nor of the Pentecost event that foreshadows the
eschaton,
a rather
strange
omission for a Pentecostal manifesto.
Lastly, though
the need to
repudiate
racism outside the walls of the Church is noted in the
Manifesto,
no mention is made of the role of this
repudiation
in the witness of the
people
of God to the
Gospel
of Jesus
Christ,
which was a major theme of the talks.
Though
a manifesto is neither a confession of faith nor a theological treatise,
it should reflect
sufficiently
well the
language
of faith and the theological insights
that constitute the discourse of the communities involved. The force of conviction that should be
conveyed
is weakened if commitments are couched in a
language
that is not reflective of the faith of those who stand behind the manifesto.
Yet, though lacking adequately strong
and
thorough religious language,
the
Memphis Manifesto is still an
explicit, courageous,
and
insightful repudiation
of racism in all of its forms.
Unfortunately,
this document has not
yet gained
much
exposure
in the Pentecostal media.32
Memphis
as an Intermezzo
Perhaps
one could refer to the
Memphis meetings
and the establishment of the PCCNA as an “intermezzo” between two
major “acts” in the
history
of the Pentecostal movement. One
may
view it as a pause
between the decline of Pentecostalism from its
integrated beginnings
and the
possible
future of working toward a racially
just
and
32 the Memphis Manifesto is reprinted at the end of this article on pages 217-218.
14
217
reconciled Pentecostal witness. This
pause
is rich with
potential
for leading
to an
increasingly integrated
future for Pentecostalism. At Memphis
there were candid recollections of white Pentecostalism’s racist
past,
confessions of
guilt
and
repentance by
white
Pentecostals, and
gracious gestures
of
forgiveness by
black Pentecostals. This break from the
past
and
willingness
to wait and work for a new and more
just future is worth
celebrating.
One
may very
well have here the
recovery of
repentance
and
forgiveness
as
powerful catalysts
for
initiating
a conversation for
political justice
and reconciliation that the offenders do not
yet
have the moral
credibility
to
support.
But such
grace
must never be misused
by the offenders as a justification
for
maintaining
the racist status
quo.
That stance would be to
deny
the
grace
of God and to make a mockery of the entire
dialogue.
The celebration of the Pentecostal
partnership
at
Memphis
must be cautioned, therefore, by
the stark
reality
of a future not
yet
seen. Though
reconciliation is a constant
struggle
this side of the
eschaton, the
credibility
of faith and commitments are tested
by
the amount of sacrifice the
people
of God
put
into their words. The
Memphis meetings
will lack
credibility
as an authentic force for
change
if white Pentecostalism offers
only
token
gestures
toward
repudiating
racism and
uniting
with black brothers and sisters and other Pentecostal minorities in
forming newly integrated
communities of faith and if it ceases to remain
open
to
presently
unseen vistas of
repentance
and action. The
repentance
and commitments of white Pentecostals in the midst of such tokenism would then be viewed
justifiably
as an
attempt to receive
cheap grace,
or as a search for
glory
without a cross.
Only the future can tell the outcome
and,
as
always,
the offended ones will have the keenest
insight
into the true nature of the results.
.
Pentecostal Partners Racial Reconciliation Manifesto
Challenged by the reality of our racial
divisions, we have been drawn bv the Holy Spirit
to Tennessee, October 17-19, 1994 in order to become true “Pentecostal Partners” Memphis, and to develop together “A Reconciliation Strategy jor 2]st Century Afinistrv. ” We desire to covenant together in the ongoing task of racial reconciliation
by committing ourselves to the following agenda:
I. I pledge in concert with
racism prophetically in all its various manifestations within and without the Body of
my brothers and
sisters of many hues to oppose Christ and to be vigilant in the struggle with all my God-given might.
II. I am committed personally to treat those in the Fellowship who are not of race or
my
ethnicity, regardless
of color, with love and
respect as my
sisters and brothers in Christ. I am further committed to work against all forms of personal and institutional racism, including those which are revealed within the very structures of our environment.
15
218
III. With complete bold and courageous honesty, we mutually confess that racism is sin and as a blight in the Fellowship must be condemned for having hindered the maturation of
spiritual development
and mutual
Pentecostal-Charismatic believers for decades.
sharing among
IV. We openly confess our shortcomings and our participation in the sin of racism by
our
silence, denial
and blindness. We admit the harm it has to generations
bom and unborn. We
strongly
contend that the
past
does not brought
always completely determine the future. New horizons are emerging. God wants to do a new
thing through His people.
V. We admit that there is no single solution to racism in the Fellowship. We and are
pray
open to tough love and radical repentance with deep sensitivity to the Holy Spirit as Liberator.
VI.
Together we will work to affirm one another’s strengths and acknowledge our own weaknesses and
inadequacies, recognizing that all of us only “see in a mirror dimly” what God desires to do in this world. the
of Christ as inclusive of Christians Together,
we affirm the wholeness of
Body fully regardless of color. We, therefore. commit ourselves “to love one another with mutual
affection, outdoing one another in showing honor” (Romans 12:10).
VII. We commit ourselves not only to pray but also to work for genuine and visible manifestations of Christian unity.
VIII. We
hereby
commit ourselves not
only
to the task of
denouncement of racism in word and
making prophetic
creed, but to live by acting in deed. We will fully support
and encourage those among us who are attempting change.
IX. We pledge that we will return to our various constituencies and appeal to them for logistical support and intervention as in racism. We will seek partnerships and exchange pulpits with necessary
opposing
persons of a different hue, not in a paternalistic sense, but in the Spirit of our Blessed Lord who prayed that we be one might
(John 17:21).
X. We commit ourselves to leaving our comfort zones, aside our racial
allegiances, respecting the full humanity of all,
live lay with an
warring,
openness to authentic liberation which is a
product of Divine Creation, until the shackles fall and all
bondage ceases.
XI. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the Azusa Street Mission was a model of preaching and living the Gospel message in the world. We desire to drink deeply
from the well of Pentecost as it was embodied in that mission. We,
of that
therefore, pledge
our commitment to embrace the essential commitments mission in evangelism
and mission, in
justice
and holiness, in
spiritual
renewal and empowerment, and
in the reconciliation of all Christians
regardless
of race or gender as we move into the new millennium.
Manifesto Committee
Ithiel Clemmons · Leonard Lovett Cecil Bishop M. Robeck, Jr. · Harold D. Hunter
16
