2008
Issue A
May 2, 2008

OBAMA, HIS PASTOR AND US

My May paper is moved ahead because the press is going nuts about a pastor and a politician. Hey, I am both, so I have some thoughts. Plus, I have been a member of IMA, basically a Black Pastors organization, for twenty years. We have thoughts too.

This is not about the overall merits or demerits of Obama, though he currently is my first pick of the candidates. This is about paying attention to the definition of words you use for a particular audience. You and I are responsible for the definitions that we know others may assume. The pastor is ignoring that, big time. He is actually a bilingual.

When I was superintendent of pastors, I at times had to remind a pastor (who was under fire) about words. I remember one who righteously said he knew what he said and it was the fault of members who heard him say otherwise. Not. When he used words that were complex in emotion he was responsible for how those words were heard. And felt.

In my home church a pastor said, in response to a missionary who spoke of being washed in the blood of Jesus, that the blood of Jesus and the blood of an ox are no different. My home church never talked about the blood of Jesus, but they understood what she meant. The pastor was somewhat correct, technically. But the chemistry of blood was not the question and he knew it. He was dishonest.

My newsletters are written for a particular audience -- folks who are open to more information. I do not write for either wing. Right wing Republicans and left wing Democrats (words hard to define!) often are upset with me. I do not use words they own. They understand them. The person looking for info without spin would be confused.

I heard Pastor Wright's address to the National Press Club and I appreciated it. Good academic work, while reminding white folk that we have sinned many times in relation to other races. His use of scripture was honest to the text, which is unusual in these feats by rhetorical gymnasts. He did ignore the other side -- Whites who paid dearly for justice.

However, when he implied that what he said was from God and to be trusted and that what Obama says is not to be trusted, but rather is to get elected, he is way off base. I assume each is truthful, and that each uses words chosen for a particular audience. The pastor objected to news clips which were not understood by the general public, saying in essence they were a part of the whole sermon, for his congregation. Well, own it. He refused to express his thoughts in words the public could naturally define and therefore understand. By not owning his limited (bilingual) definitions, he is saying, in effect, the Black Church is not to be trusted by anyone not taught in his language/rhetoric.

Obama is saying that the Black Church and the Black culture is to be trusted and can be a gift to the American culture. I find that truthful. I have listened to scores of sermons by Black pastors. I always agree with the impact of the whole sermon, but I would never use some of the words and phrases in a white setting. The words are divisive, unless you hear with the ear of Black definitions.

The pain of this moment is that Obama obviously passionately believes that we can unite as differing peoples with common goals. I believe. The press says the pastor is being vindictive when he discounts the words Obama uses as political. I cannot know why he accuses. However, my experience is that candidates tell the truth as they see it. They of course do not tell the other side. Nor does the pastor. Or you. Or me. That is a gap. None of us, as we seek to be honest, gives all other opinions about our opinion.

The subject has particular pain for me because the legislature backed away from stating an apology for slavery and the effects of it in Nebraska. We can be sorry slavery happened, some said, but we cannot apologize for the actions of others. I object. It is all a part of one piece and we can confess to our part. As theologian Jim Wallis said, we whites have not confessed, let alone repented of our sins. We will not think it!

Those who defended our Nebraska actions made much of our freeing the slaves in Nebraska in 1861. However, the legislature did not mean it when we said they were citizens. Six years later our legislature declared that Black men could not vote. Previous to that a slave was bought and sold and shipped by freight within Nebraska with a tag around her neck. Full citizenship came very slowly. For the next 100 years Blacks were limited in where they could live and work. Fifty years ago, in Omaha it was illegal for a Black person to walk on a sidewalk in certain neighborhoods. Persons still living experienced that and persons still living voted that. The only permit to be there was to declare you were a servant in that neighborhood. Is a servant the new slave? In the minds of living persons who did not want to be there, it was a holdover of slavery.

A story book in grade school told me that the raisins in pancakes are black boys who greased the pan and got covered with batter. Not white boys. Is that fun? Did I smile?

Twenty five years ago, any person living in our present home could not get a bank home improvement loan if there were Black neighbors. Redlining was a bank effort to drive property values down and whites out. It worked. A clever application of owning principles. Today, I can take you to neighborhoods where Blacks moved in and were driven out. We who are over 50 have witnessed and felt the effects of slavery.

Our magazine, Nebraska History (Winter - 2007), has a remarkable 16-page academic article on ethnic history in Nebraska, by Deborah Fink, a Nebraska native. I understand it because I lived what she describes. Blacks and Indians are not invisible. Whites are invisible, and we made that happen. By the 50s we did away with serious attention to white ethnic divisions. We defined America our way. “We were not even to think about the possibility that we could experience the misfortunes of others. As whites, we were rational, capable, advanced, favored by destiny, magnanimous, and superior. Our task was to live up to our heritage of greatness and to ignore the gap in the details about where we had come from, who we were as a people, and where we fit into history.”

Obama and the Black pastors I know are trying hard to move us to genuine acceptance of the experiences of one another. A quiet, humble confession would help.

Hopeful,
Lowen