Everyone sensed it coming even before it happened. The musicians, who had been sitting on the side since their set ended, quickly found their way back to their instruments. People in the audience scooted up toward the edge of their seats. The shouts of “amen” and “alright” were more frequent and more vociferous.
“Black Christians are the embodiment of singing the Lord’s song in a strange land,” intoned the preacher. Rev. Dr. John Faison Sr. began a half-speaking, half-singing cadence that signaled the climax of a sermon in the Black preaching tradition.
Sentence after sentence rolled from the pulpit in ever-heightening waves of enthusiasm for his subject: the resurrection.
“He got up!”
The few people who remained sitting popped to their feet shouting “Yes!” and raised their hands in the air as a physical punctuation of the preacher’s proclamations.
Rev. Faison ended with a prayer. Not the heads-bowed, eyes-closed type but a song. Everyone was singing, swaying and clapping in unison to a classic song of the culture. The whole church was on their feet with the preacher in collective praise.
“This joy that I have…the world didn’t give it, and the world can’t take it away!”
This moment, this place, this occasion, this gathering of speakers and guests at the Joy and Justice conference was a celebration of the Black Church and Black Christianity.
Black…But with a Seatbelt On
At many Christian conferences I’ve attended, the Black Church tradition, as varied and rich as it is, has been left out of the proceedings. The white-centeredness of those events leaked through in all kinds of ways. By slates of all-white speakers, music written by and for predominantly white Christian audiences, or the choice of topics and themes.
So often I would be in those spaces on the edge of my seat, not in anticipation of a moment of communal celebration, but anxiously gauging whether this presenter would say something misguided or racist. For Black Christians, conferences that purport to be Christian in principle but exclusively prop up white religious norms in practice, are not places of freedom.
Too often as Black Christians, we have to downplay our culture and history in a mixed-race or predominantly white setting. We have to give explanations or qualifications that what we are doing or saying may be unfamiliar or perhaps even offensive to non-Black people. We have to give up our vernacular, our expressiveness, and our comfort for the sake of people who never knew and may have never respected our traditions.
In so many white Christian contexts, we only get to be Black with a seatbelt on.
A Celebration of the Black Church and Black Christianity
We didn’t want that for the Joy and Justice conference. We wanted Black Christians to come and feel free and safe. We wanted them to trust the organizers and the speakers. We wanted them to feel seen and heard and dignified. That happened through a celebration of the Black Church and Black Christianity.
The combination of speakers, topics, music, space, and place meant that we could be Black without a seatbelt on at the Joy and Justice conference. We welcomed people of all races and ethnicities, but we leaned into the reality that white culture and religious preferences are not authoritative or normative.
So much of this is better experienced than explained. That’s why I was so pleased to see so many Black people there. I wanted as many of us as possible to experience the joy of freedom. It was my hope that at the Joy and Justice conference, Black Christians felt the liberty to be their full embodied selves, and after such an experience never to settle for anything less.
Many of the Black Christians who follow The Witness find themselves in predominantly white settings whether in church, school, or the workplace. They often feel whitewashed in those contexts. They have to modulate their blackness for the comfort of the white people around them.
But we don’t have to do that. Black Christians don’t have to leave part of ourselves at the door in an attempt to placate the least culturally-aware white person around us. I hope the Black Christians who attended the Joy and Justice conference left with a bit of holy dissatisfaction: a righteous restlessness that makes them uncomfortable and unwilling to unnecessarily play down their unique Christian heritage in the name of a whitewashed form of diversity.
From the feedback we received, I think we largely achieved that goal. So many people had the same comment about the conference: “This was healing” or “I needed this.”
Liberation Requires Sustained Intentionality
But, and I cannot emphasize this enough, the freedom to embrace one’s blackness does not happen without sustained intentionality.
We intentionally designed every component of the conference to help Black Christians feel at home. Every speaker who took to the main stage was Black. Representation, or a lack of it, sends a powerful signal about whose presence is valued. For Black people who may never or seldom see a teacher in school, the president of an organization, or the leader of a group who looks like them, we had to make it clear that Black people’s gifts and skills would be on display.
The location was critical, too. We could have chosen a sleek space with various lighting sets, the latest A/V equipment, and sophisticated breakout rooms. But we chose a historic Black church: Ebenezer Missionary Baptist Church. It has been a cornerstone of the Black community in the Bronzeville neighborhood of Chicago for over a century. People from Mahalia Jackson to Martin Luther King Jr. have graced the stage in the church sanctuary. We wanted to celebrate not just the Black Church as a culture and tradition, but as a physical space as well.
Black Church music is an institution in itself. Ebenezer M.B. Church had Thomas A. Dorsey as its music coordinator. It was at that very church where he assembled a 100-person gospel choir and they first performed this fledging musical genre. This historic event gives the church its name, “The Birthplace of Gospel Music.” That tradition continued with Michelle Higgins and her band of singers and musicians. They understood the dynamism of Black gospel music: when to repeat a refrain, when to pause for an exhortation, when to encourage the worshipers to sing, clap and throw their full selves into the experience.
All of these decisions took hours of conversation, prayer, research, and discernment. The pervasiveness of white norms and culture makes it easy to default to practices and mindsets that have been designed to empower and emphasize whiteness. Only through a deliberate and ongoing process of prayerful thought can we, even as Black Christians, counteract the presumption that “white is right.”
Intentionally black-centered occasions are not a separation from people of other races or ethnicities. It is cultural appreciation rather than appropriation. It is poised in the midst of plurality. It is diversity with unity.
The Joy and Justice conference was a multi-day answer to pray. It gave us a picture of God’s faithfulness to the Church through people of African descent. It was no less than a demonstration of God’s glory through a celebration of the Black Church and Black Christianity.
0 comment
“Intentionally black-centered occasions are not a separation from people of other races or ethnicities.”
“Every speaker who took to the main stage was Black. Representation, or a lack of it, sends a powerful signal about whose presence is valued. ”
Mr. Circumcision, do you honestly not hear yourself?
“Black Christians don’t have to leave part of ourselves at the door in an attempt to placate the least culturally-aware white person around us.”
Honestly, I find it wonderful to have such a conference. However, you damage, undermine, and demean your own culture when you write an article that spends half the time degrading white people and their culture. Is blackness only of value so long as whiteness is less than? Why is it contingent?
One’s mono-ethnic worship is not more holy than another’s. One’s multi-ethnic worship isn’t either.
Can you write an article on how great blackness is, without devaluing white culture or ethnicity?
I don’t think you can, Mr. Circumcision.
All the more so, after another article (WaPo) in which you declare yourself an authoritative representative of the black community that you get to declare when black forgiveness is given, as if that’s a thing and that you carry more authority than Christ.
So Mr. Circumcision, will you continue to spiritually extort your white brethren, chaining them to the past to spiritually oppress them, or will you repent and remember that there is no Jew nor Gentile in the Kingdom of God?
Spiritual extortion across cultural/ethnic lines has to end if you want true and real unity in the church. Such unity recognizes that we’re all racist, bigoted, oppressors who need Jesus. Not just white people. Such unity recognizes that value is not a competition across cultures or worship, but that it is granted in the first place by God as we’re all in his image. Therefore, worship is to him, and the freedom of variable styles is acceptable to him.
To say that you can’t be represented by a different worship style or a different preacher or leadership because of their color, is entirely anti-biblical, and if said by a white man would be entirely condemned as racism. So may the Lord open your eyes, Mr. Circumcision, to the foundation principles of the gospel that you miss so that you may repent of the vary things you accuse your white brethren of, lest you lose your way and take others astray with you.
That must have been amazing, and what hallowed ground on which to hold the conference. Bless what you’re doing for the black community, Jemar, and for enlightening those of us who are “white allies.”
Thomas W, your comment breaks my heart to read… it truly does not deserve a response, but as a white man who has followed nearly everything The Witness has put out the last 2 years I’ll give it a shot. It breaks my heart because it seems to me you are perpetuating the very problem you claim Jemar is perpetuating. The whole point Jemar is making is that there are very very few spaces in the world, especially in our country, where people of color can feel 100% comfortable to worship the way they feel like, move the way they feel like, look the way the feel like, speak the way they feel like, and it goes on. This is in no way reverse racism or anti biblical as you have stated, nor did they bar people of other races from going to the conference. If you don’t understand this point of view and the feeling that there are no spaces to truly be yourself and who God made you to be in his image then congratulations, you feel what we call white privilege. The pass the mic podcast has some great episodes on this topic that you might find helpful 🙂
In my haste to reply I forgot to say thank you to the entire The Witness team and anyone involved in the conference for the work you do, the way you teach, the patience you demonstrate, and for putting up with a whole bunch of stuff (and comments) you should never have to deal with all while displaying the love of the savior. I honor you all.
Hey Josh,
Thanks for your response. Perhaps I’m not clear enough originally, but I have no trouble or issue with a monoethnic led conference, church, or worship. None.
I have a major issue with the degradation of another ethnicity to justify it.
And, I’m sure many who attended the conference do not share Jemar’s heretical foundation, but please note that my response is specifically to him and not the Witness or any group as a whole.
“The whole point Jemar is making is that there are very very few spaces in the world, especially in our country, where people of color can feel 100% comfortable to worship the way they feel like, move the way they feel like, look the way the feel like, speak the way they feel like, and it goes on.”
Aren’t there thousands of black, asian, latino churches and thousands of different denominations and independents that abound in this country? It’s called American privilege thanks to the “freedom of religion”. No one is breaking down their doors asking them to change their worship. Can’t you freely start one just like they freely had a conference to do just this too? I would argue there is so much space that if you wish to pursue what heaven will look like one day in its multi ethnicity, one must be intentional.
Now in multiethnic churches of course there isn’t a “safe space”, there certainly has to be agreement on what worship style/s that will be used, but no one is forcing you to go to one you don’t prefer. I go to a multiethnic church. I don’t like every song, every week, but I recognize worship isn’t about me. It’s a wide mixture entirely reflective of the background of its members. It’s not easy, because quite often, there are people like Jemar (on both sides) who think only one side is placating or strapping a seatbelt on.
Also, if I went to an asian church this week, I would not expect them to change just for me, even if I joined the church later. Nor if I went to a conference with an emphasis on black leadership to expect them to talk about every subject that is important to me. That’s absurd. It is not a devaluation of others to have your own interests or own worship styles.
At this point there are also many whites suffering from “white guilt” who bend over backwards to change and incorporate multiethnic worship and at times to a fault. And this happens, not always, but certainly contributed to by the spiritual extortion from those with Jemar’s worldview. Who present that all other ethnic churches are holy except the white church. Jemar has not written an article in the last 3 years that refrains from bashing, degrading, and devaluing the white church. He can’t even write a monoethnic article about a monoethnic conference. He takes the constant swipe at whites, while acting just like one.
“This is in no way reverse racism or anti biblical as you have stated, nor did they bar people of other races from going to the conference.”
I agree with you. In light of that please reread the points I’m making esp where I requoted him on his own comments on lack of representation. It’s HIS comment where the lack of representation devalues, and he has placed that representation for himself largely on COLOR.
My belief is that any Christian pastor or leader can represent any ethnicity, because it is Christ that unifies us and represents us. But maybe I’m of the few. I hope not.
I go to a multiethnic church with a pastor, elders, and worship leadership that are not white. I feel fully represented. Because they preach Christ crucified. I would have felt perfectly fine going to this conference, because my color is not a demand they give up theirs.
If monoethnicity is acceptable, it means its also acceptable for any other ethnicity not just the black church, and must be acceptable for white churches too without the claims of racism, etc. You can’t claim it for one and deny it to the other. And its not necessary at all to go about devaluing others in any case, when our value is rooted in Christ to begin with.
Just two thoughts. My first thought is that it feels like you came to this article with a gang of preconceived notions about who you think Jemar is and what he stands for because when I read this article I don’t see anything I would call “degradation of another ethnicity”.
My other thought is, while I am not part of The Witness in anyway and can’t speak for them, it seems like what you have the most problem with might be just a misunderstanding. You seem to take issue with thinking the article and Jemar himself bash and degrade the white church. Again, I can’t speak for them but my take is that they are not bashing the white church, which is a congregation with predominantly light pigmented believers, as they are the “White Church”, which historically is a group of evil, power hungry, euro centric white men that have perpetuated systemic racism throughout americas history in society, politics, and in the church under the guise of being Christians. Just my thoughts.
Josh,
Allow me one more thought or example of the subtle twists here.
If a person were to say they are going to the store to get groceries, that would be normal right?
But if a person were to say they are going to the store to avoid their in laws visiting, that would have different implications, right? It’s not about the food anymore, the typical and normal reason you go to the store.
So see here:
“All of these decisions took hours of conversation, prayer, research, and discernment. The pervasiveness of white norms and culture makes it easy to default to practices and mindsets that have been designed to empower and emphasize whiteness.”
He entirely defines part of their conference around the avoidance of white norms. (Whatever those are).
Rather than just having a conference to celebrate the black church and blackness. Which should be good enough in and of itself to be its own reason. I would think Jemar knows plenty of black pastors and leaders to invite as well as what worship styles are the norm for blackness. Right?
The effort to avoid, changes the focus. Or at least undermines it because it becomes contingent on another variable/definition. In this case, Jemar decides what “whiteness” is so that it can be avoided. Ultimately, making blackness contingent upon whiteness still (which is the very thing he wishes it to be liberated from, right?) This leads to one of many difficulties by which black value is now in reference to white value, and not grounded in Christ for our value where it is already sufficient. Therefore he continues to pull out the measuring stick, bashing whites, in an attempt to elevate blacks. He defines value only at the expense of others.
To put this on the other shoe. If a white church, held a white conference, with purposeful hours of “research and discernment” to avoid blackness, we’d be throwing stones at them for their RACISM. Right?
Or does a disclaimer that “the doors are still open to anyone”, actually change any sensible person’s mind at that point?
Jemar’s shift is subtle, but that’s what makes it all the more dangerous, as it ends up just being more of the same ole racism. You can’t define blackness at the expense of others without damaging blackness itself. Please don’t be fooled as the propensity for damage here can entirely undo the decades of work that others on all sides have committed to to bridge the gaps in fellowship, including RAAN and the Witness. I too have visited the site for years and value its mission and many others here, but I knew of Jemar before this, and he did not speak this way. Now it’s the only way he speaks, at the expense of his white brethren.
So I don’t spill more ink for no reason I’ll just say this: I, respectfully, completely disagree with you brother.
“Again, I can’t speak for them but my take is that they are not bashing the white church, which is a congregation with predominantly light pigmented believers, as they are the “White Church”, which historically is a group of evil, power hungry, euro centric white men that have perpetuated systemic racism throughout americas history in society, politics, and in the church under the guise of being Christians.”
I don’t misunderstand that definition. That’s the definition I take from him too. That’s entirely the problem.
There’s at least 2 primary issues with this:
1. The “White Church” is therefore reduced to a definition solely related to evil, while the “Black Church” is at least presented without blemish in comparison.
2. White christians rarely accept or view the “White Church” to that definition, not because there isn’t sin, evil, power, slavery, etc as apart of its history that they reject, but because it is not just about the sin that makes up any church. The “White Church” also has its repentance, bearing good fruit, rejecting evil, rooting it out, ending slavery, etc with its Christians being SAVED BY JESUS TOO.
To use a broad term like “white church” based on ethnicity, but to limit it solely to its evil is wrong. In the least it is a constant miscommunication, talking past others, creating quarrelsomeness because the terms are not defined the same way (even if you accept it, you do not speak for the millions upon others who do not define it that way, even if they ever did). At worst, it is purposely being used to diminish and devalue white christians.
That’s entirely how slavery and racism were/are justified. It was a broad brush (black), where black was defined as “less than, evil, inferior” by another broad brush (white).
Every ethnic church body and culture has historically evil, power hungry men, not just white. Every Christian is fallen, having committed sins as grave and severe as racism and slavery. Thus, every church body, every christian is not without sin that they should feel comfortable tossing stones.
Hello Thomas W.,
It’s me again. A sentence in your post could possibly be a simple instance of error due to haste. But would you mind explaining this statement you wrote ?
.
“He takes the constant swipe at whites, while ACTING JUST LIKE ONE.”
Thanks,
Toviyah
Hey Toviyah,
It’s nice to see you again. My apologies as that probably wasn’t well stated. My point is that if its wrong for whites to have a white conference, avoiding blackness; why does Jemar reciprocate in the same way, by avoiding whiteness?
This is his characterization of white conferences, churches, etc, that they do not provide black representation by which he condemns them for, but then goes about acting in the same manner as they have, creating a mono represented conference in which he purposely avoided white representation.
How is he any different in his actions than what he accuses whites and white events of?
(To be clear again, I have no problem with monoethnic worship. I take issue with the double standards.)
Hello Thomas W.,
Here’s a ‘what-about’ reply. What about the Negro Baseball League and many other secular organizations the were started by blacks and for blacks ? Were they also practicing a double standard? Or were there mitigating circumstances that led to the formation of those secular black organizations ?
Negro Baseball League article:
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/negro-baseball-leagues-1920-1950/
Toviyah
Of course not. Whites had banned them from baseball along with many other things during segregation by which they made color and ethnicity contingent for value.
“Soul of the Game” is a great movie about the Negro Leagues and that era. It gives you a lot of history and appreciation for Robinson, Paige, Cool Papa Bell, Gibson and others.
But we don’t have Negro Leagues anymore, entirely because baseball is open to anyone now, thanks to the Lord blessing Jackie Robinson with the talent and resolve to withstand and break down white racism, and encourage desegregation of society that would follow. “42” is a great movie by the way that goes through that era. So you had monoethnic colleges, leagues, associations, etc entirely because of white people making color a contingency to the EXCLUSION of others. That’s where it leads, because now value is a function of something that is unable to actually give it.
So today, if you were to start a baseball league that purposely excluded all other ethnicity, but your own, what would that be called? Racism? You’d be doing the same thing whites did in segregating the game of baseball.
Remember, from Jemar:
“Representation, or a lack of it, sends a powerful signal about whose presence is valued.”
I agree, as baseball has no color/ethnicity by which the rules are actually dependent on. Likewise the Church doesn’t either. Our representation is Christ, period; therefore, our value is sufficiently perfect in his creation and redemption of us.
When we stand on that sole representation, diversity, ethnicity, etc is valued. But the minute those things are needed for value, is the minute you start drifting away from Christ and toward the same legalism whites implemented to control and diminish blacks. I
We let that manifest from our pride and insecurities in a whole manner of areas, not just ethnicity. It’s why a mother of 3 will criticize an unmarried woman in her 30s with no kids. Or why the bully feels the need to beat up a nerd. We make our security, our value contingent upon things in addition to or in lieu of Christ, and thus we force ourselves to fill up that gap we’ve created.
There is nothing wrong with a pick up game of baseball with your friends, even if they’re all black, anymore than having a conference that’s all black. But the minute you do it to avoid others, is the minute its no longer just about the love of the game and your friends. It’s no longer about the actual church and worshiping the King of Kings.
Any addition to Christ to suffice value or representation, results in legalism. Legalism’s result is always control, devaluation, and diminishment of others.
I just know the Lord enjoyed the resentment expressed there!
Plus, Dr. King would have been glad to see his “Dream” take on new meaning with the Conference’s expressions of fraternity and reconciliation with whites! He might have said, “Now my little girl is holding the hand exclusively of black boys again” and celebrated the color of their skin and not the content of their character promoted there.
My black students in Uganda would be mystified at the content and goals of this conference!