Frustrated in the “friend zone”? We should be so lucky.

“I no longer call you servants… Instead, I have called you friends” (John 14:15).

I recently saw Spider-Man at the movies.
For the fourth time.

I arrived early, bought my overpriced popcorn, found my seat, and settled in to lose myself in a world of make-believe. For the next couple of hours, I wanted superheroes, explosions, impossible stunts, and somebody else’s problems to think about instead of my own.
Of course, I wasn’t alone.

The theater was filled with dozens of people who had come to do essentially the same thing. We laughed at the same jokes. We reacted to the same surprises. We felt something at the same moments.
Then the post-credit scene ended.
The lights came up.
We gathered our things and went our separate ways.
We had occupied the same room and experienced the same story, but we left no closer to one another than when we arrived.
Strangers before the movie.
Strangers after.

Later that week, I attended church, and I couldn’t stop thinking about the movie theater.
We came from different backgrounds and gathered in the same building. We sat beside one another. We sang the same songs. We prayed the same prayers. We listened to the same sermon. Some of us hugged. Some shook hands. Some smiled politely at people whose names we still didn’t know.
Then the service ended.
We gathered our belongings, walked to our cars, and returned to our separate lives.
And I found myself wondering:
What if we have become very good at gathering without becoming very good at belonging?

This isn’t unique to one congregation. Many churches run the risk of becoming collections of disconnected people who gather around a shared experience but rarely share their lives.
But I believe Jesus envisioned something deeper.
Jesus didn’t simply gather people around a message. He gathered people around each other.
Before the cross, Jesus prayed for His disciples and for those who would eventually believe through their witness:
“That all of them may be one” (John 17:21).
That prayer reaches into our churches today.

Christianity was never intended to mean merely agreeing on doctrine, attending the same service, or occupying the same sanctuary once a week. Biblical community asks more of us than proximity.
The church in Acts gives us a picture of something richer. Believers worshiped together, but they also ate together. They opened their homes. They shared resources. They carried burdens. Their faith was not confined to a weekly gathering because their relationships were not confined to one either.
They shared life.

Look at the disciples.
They traveled together. Ate together. Learned together. Argued with each other. Failed in front of each other. Asked questions around each other. Walked dusty roads and sat around tables together.
Jesus did not build His community through sermons alone.
He built it through shared life.
And that kind of relationship does not happen by accident.

A church can create programs, events, fellowship meals, small groups, retreats, and worship services. Those things can create opportunities for community.
But eventually, somebody has to make a phone call.
Somebody has to send the text.
Somebody has to say, “Want to grab something to eat?”

Friendship grows through time, conversation, curiosity, vulnerability, and presence.
Sometimes it looks almost painfully ordinary.
Sharing a meal on a Tuesday.
Talking on the phone during the week.
Discovering a hobby you both enjoy.
Sitting with someone through a difficult season without trying to fix everything.
Remembering something they told you weeks ago and asking about it again.

Layer by layer, strangers become acquaintances. Acquaintances become companions. And sometimes, companions become friends.

I think about my younger brother, Kasim.
We can talk about serious things, laugh about ridiculous things, share what is happening in our lives, or sit together in comfortable silence.
He isn’t only my brother. He is one of my best friends.

That friendship did not develop simply because we share DNA or spent years under the same roof. It grew because, over time, we learned each other. We experienced life together. We kept choosing relationship.
The church often refers to itself as a family, and rightly so. Scripture calls believers brothers and sisters in Christ.
But being related does not automatically mean being close.

You can sit beside someone every Sabbath for years and still know almost nothing about what makes them laugh, what keeps them awake at night, what they are grieving, or what they are dreaming about.
Proximity is not intimacy. Attendance is not community.

If we are going to become the community Jesus prayed for, we have to open our lives to one another.
That means asking better questions than “How are you?” while continuing to walk toward our seats.It means remembering the answer.
It means following up.
It means showing up at hospital rooms, graduations, birthday dinners, moving days, coffee shops, and kitchen tables.

Friendship costs something. It costs time, attention, vulnerability, and sometimes the awkwardness of making the first invitation.

But what we gain is worth it.
When church becomes more than a place we attend, it becomes a people with whom we belong.
So perhaps the deeper question is not simply, “Do you go to church?”

Maybe it is this:
Are you building a life with anyone there?
When the sermon ends, the music stops, the lights come up, and the parking lot empties, what remains?
At the movie theater, we expect to leave as strangers.
At church, we should hope for something more.
Because Jesus’ prayer for His disciples then remains His desire for His disciples now:
“That they may be one.”
Maybe one of the simplest ways we begin answering that prayer is by looking at the person sitting beside us and deciding:
Let’s just be friends.

Public outrage surrounding the death of George Floyd and Operation Metro Surge puts Minneapolis, Minnesota at the epicenter of the conflict between civil liberties and law enforcement abuses of power. This outrage critiques influential Evangelicals for being culturally-centered rather than Christ centered. 

“In short, American religion has become an ‘all or none’ proposition— conservative evangelical religion or none at all,” said Ryan P. Burge, professor of Practice at the Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University and author of “The Vanishing Church.” “This leaves tens of millions of theological and political moderates with no place to find community and spiritual edification, or to work collectively to solve societal problems.” 

Consequently, Christianity now reflects partisanship rather than being the unadulterated gospel of Jesus Christ. Discipleship is translated to mean having a “conservative” perspective rather than followers of Christ’s principles. Through critical and unbiased thinking, it may cast doubt as to whether the Bible is the inspired word of God or a launching pad to form “conservative evangelical religion.” 

It begs us to answer two questions: What does “evangelical” mean? How do we identify “conservative evangelicals?” 

“To be evangelical is to respond to God’s call into deeper faith and greater humility,” states Mark Laberton, editor of “Still Evangelical: Insiders Reconsider Political, Social, and Theological Meaning.” “It also leads us to repudiate and resist all forces of racism and misogyny, and all other attitudes and actions, overt and implied, that subvert the dignity of people, who are made in the image of God.”

For those who believe in the Ten Commandments, we could sum this up by our love of God, the first four commandments, and our love for our brothers and sisters in Christ, the last six commandments. 

At the 1992 Republican National Convention, Patrick Buchanan, former presidential candidate and noted conservative commentator, outlined what he thought should be the key elements of a Christian conservative’s values. 

In this address, he defined cultural wars as pro-life regarding abortion, using state funds to support private religious schools to ensure Judeo-Christian values in kids, advocating for justices who will follow the constitution and not their policy preference, and limiting marriage as between a male and female. 

In framing it as a cultural war over the above listed moral values, Buchanan provided a litmus test to describe “conservative evangelicals.” 

“The historical significance of this new axis (“conservative evangelical religion”) has been evident in the ways in which it cuts across age-old divisions among Protestants, Catholics, and Jews,” James Davison Hunter, author of “Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America.” 

“The orthodox traditions in these faiths now have much more in common with each other than they do with progressives in their own faith traditions, and vice versa.” 

Although they agree on the tenets of their faith, we can cite this example. Conservative Southern Baptists have more in common with conservative Seventh-day Adventists than non-conservative Southern Baptists. Consequently, conservative Seventh-day Adventists have more in common with conservative Southern Baptists than non-conservative Seventh-day Adventists. 

For openness and transparency, it would be a mistake to link “conservative evangelical religion” with Christian Nationalism. “Christian Nationalism is not synonymous with Evangelical Christianity,” said Scott A. Leadingham, Staff writer for the Freedom Forum, an organization whose mission is to “foster First Amendment Freedoms for All.” Christian Nationalism represents an ideology and not a theology. It is not a denomination, or a sect with rules and doctrines. Nevertheless, Figure 1:1 identifies adherents to Christian Nationalism by various denominational groups. 

In considering Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s book, “Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?,” we need to present this question to us: where do we, as evangelicals, go from here: Christ-centered or cultural-centered? 

EDWARD WOODS III is the Public Affairs and Religious Liberty director for Lake Region Conference and the Conscience & Justice Council chairperson. 

This article is part of our 2026 March/April Issue
Subscribe –>

A Brief History of “Woke” and Why We Should Reclaim It

Lead Belly, a legendary African American folk singer from the early 1900s, used a phrase at the end of his 1938 song “Scottsboro Boys.” The song recounts the story of nine black teenagers accused of a heinous crime against two white women. This led to historical legal cases that dealt with racism and the right to a fair trial. He said, “I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there—best stay woke, keep their eyes open.” This is one of the earliest appearances of the word “woke” used in this way. However, it’s meaning has changed over time and how it currently relates to the Black community. So, what does “being woke” mean and why does how we use this term matter? We have talked a bit about the word’s origin, but now let’s look into its modern resurgence.

“Woke” as Social Consciousness

In the wake of the killing of Trayvon Martin in 2012, and the movement and protests that followed, the term woke experienced a modern resurgence. The Black Lives Matter movement widely used the term in order to succinctly communicate the need to be aware of the dangers Black people face on a regular basis. The term was used once again widely by BLM just two years later after the shooting of Michael Brown. Its use there to was to make people aware of conscious of injustices caused by police brutality and the abuse of power inflicted on Black communities.

I was in California with friends for a gathering in 2017. Saturday night was approaching and we all knew what was on the itinerary. A new horror film by comedic actor turned writer/director Jordan Peele had arrived in theaters, and the buzz for it seemed to be through the roof. In the opening scene of his critically acclaimed film, “Get Out”, a song by Childish Gambino plays, a cultural touchstone in its own right. The lyrics in Redbone that caught my ear were “now stay woke…” and the lyrics that followed painted scenes of needing to be aware of the dangerous forces that mean to descend upon the listener. The story in the film took this idea quite literally. I won’t get into plot details, but the main character survives the danger he encounters by being aware of or “woke” to the threats he faces as a Black man. This term has clearly endured throughout modern culture because of the effectiveness in which it communicated a simple truth: Black people must be vigilant concerning the racial threats.

“Woke” is Weaponized

However, by 2018 the meaning of term “woke” changed and criticism began to arise. According to The Guardian the term is now being weaponized by right-wing influencers like Laurence Fox and Toby Young. More specifically, the term is actually being used to attack those who choose to stand up for what are considered liberal, left-wing causes. Steve Rose, author of the article writes, “we are more likely to see it being used as a stick with which to beat people who aspire to such values, often wielded by those who don’t recognize how un-woke they are, or are proud of the fact.”

In addition, this new definition of “woke” is used to identify people as “being pretentious” and engaging in “cultural elitism” because they are socially aware. It is surmised that these woke elites then shame and oppress those that do not see the world and its injustices as they do and therefore they may even “cancel” their detractors in the process. Thus, making those that are not woke victims.

“Woke” Wars

In the summer of 2020, after the murder of George Floyd, the term become widely used again. Suddenly, the two definitions found themselves in a cultural conflict. The criticism increased in its complexity and intentionality. Some critics, such as James Carville a long-term political strategist, said the term “woke” and those associated with it exist in a world of vernacular that is just too foreign and unrelatable. In Carville’s estimation, those who use the term in reference to social consciousness for the purpose of activism are simply using buzzwords as a means of signifying how woke someone is or isn’t.

Pushing back against the idea of being “woke” has also become a new strategy to combat progressive ideas. The supposed vagueness of what “woke” actually means, in particular, subsequently serves as a distraction from the various policies and initiatives that are needed to make substantive change. For example, arguments around defunding the police are quickly brushed aside making the conversation moot when individuals declare that the idea and potential policy is too “woke” and goes too far. What ends up happening is individuals essentially identify what they don’t agree with to be too “woke.”

Reclaiming “Woke”

Clearly, this discussion could become tirelessly circular, but that’s the point. Getting stuck on the details takes time away from the actual work. We need to reclaim woke because it has such an extensive history in black culture. So much of the Black experience is not just about protecting what our community has created but also about reclaiming the language and culture that we have produced. Being “woke” or staying “woke” is to remain vigilant in the pursuit of justice and be ever aware and resistant to the forces bent on silencing Black joy and liberation. Much like being anti-racist, I believe staying “woke” is an active pursuit, a lifestyle, it is not simply a badge we proudly wear to show how progressive we are. It is a phrase that Black people hear and are instantly reminded to remain attentive concerning the particular challenges that our communities face. In so many words, it holds real power, and history.

The advice that Lead Belly gave at the end of his song back in 1938 lives on decades later and we have to continue its purpose. May we be good stewards of these terms, these pieces of history that are a part of our collective experience.

With Christmas Day fast approaching, families near and far are pulling out their favorite movies. Whether it be the very first Christmas film you recall watching, the Christmas film that makes you laugh yourself into a stomachache, or the Christmas movie that always gets you a little teary eyed, holiday cinema is a large part of how we celebrate the Christmas season. Although many prefer to stick to the classics they grew up on, every once in a while a new film comes along that changes the game.

Jingle Jangle: A Christmas Journey

Playwright David E. Talbert has done just that with his newest musical film, Jingle Jangle: A Christmas Journey. This Netflix Original has become very popular among Christmas lovers, young and old. It begins with a Grandmother, played by Phylicia Rashad, reading a Christmas story to her grandchildren. The story she reads is about Jeronicus Jangle, a talented inventor. Set in the Victorian Era, the film follows the journey of a man who loses everything, including his belief in himself and the power of the creative mind. But with the help of his granddaughter Journey and his young apprentice Edison, Jeronicus begins to believe again. As a result, the film is heartwarming and mesmerizing to watch. But for many Black viewers it is much deeper than just another Christmas movie. 

Black Representation in Film

In Hollywood, the fight for more Black representation continues. Of course films that represent Black people exist, but all too often they depict us as drug dealers, absent parents, and slaves. Films that show Black people in a positive light are few and far between. Thus, the significance of David Talbert’s new film is that it is not a Black Christmas story, but a Christmas story that happens to star Black people. The difference is small but important. It is vital for Blacks to see stories about themselves that depict the totality of their lives, particularly showcasing conflict derived from places other than the color of their skin.

When the protagonist of the story, Jeronicus, played by Forest Whitaker, sings of his trials it is not because he is a Black man, but because he is a man that has experienced loss. Although the story does not focus on race, the power of the movie rests in the characters unapologetic portrayal of who they are. For example, the Black women wear their hair in natural styles not tucking or hiding it away to fit the typical Eurocentric standard of Victorian beauty.

In addition, throughout the film there is an array of complexions represented. Ranging from the beautiful golden skin of Journey to the beautiful ebony skin of her late grandmother, every Black woman in the movie proudly flaunts their features in every tight curl and broad nose. Even when wearing the typical Victorian clothing appropriate for that era, if you watch closely, underneath you will spot Kente cloth. From casting down to the details of costuming you see that Black culture is holistically celebrated and not hidden.

A Celebration of Blackness

In celebrating the cultural beauty of every character, Jingle Jangle suspended the overwhelming reality of persons of color viewing their skin as a curse or burden to bear. From the very first musical number, you hear the grandiosity of Broadway but also the incorporation of runs that can only be heard in the Black Church. A little bit of black culture was tucked into every scene. Even some of the phrases and sayings used African American Vernacular English. The songs were so majestic, it was almost chilling. The actors let their voices sound as big and loud as they possibly could, with no remorse whatsoever.

There was one scene in particular where all the children began to break out into a traditional African dance during a musical number. It was almost an emotional experience to see children, Black and White alike, participating in African dances as if it was a common occurrence in their town. Dancing is a big part of global Black African culture. It is beautiful and culture shifting to present it so casually.

The Story of Black Inventors 

One of the incredible things about this Christmas film is its depiction of Black inventors. There was no unexplainable force that magically made things appear. The magic was inside of Jeronicus’ brain. He was the magic. His brain, his ability to understand science and decipher the most complicated of math calculations was magical in and of itself. The invention that captures our attention at the beginning of the film is a Don Juan doll, played by Ricky Martin. This doll is is brought to life because of Jeronicus’ hard work and belief in the unbelievable.

As Jeronicus celebrates his accomplishments, his apprentice Gustafson, played by Keegan Michael Key, is desperately trying to get his attention to ask for help with his own invention. Unfortunately, Jeronicus is occupied, but assures his apprentice he will be with him soon. Watching over Jeronicus’ recent invention, Gustafson is persuaded by Don Juan’s hunger for power, fame, and wealth so he steals Jeronicus’ book of inventions and runs off.

The relationship between Jeronicus and Gustafson is one of an apprentice looking to learn from his professor. Gustafson desperately craves the approval and validation of Jeronicus, his mentor and boss. It is not uncommon youth and young adults to crave guidance, acceptance, and mentorship from their elders. One of my favorite lines from the film takes place toward the ending, where Jeronicus’ gifts Gustafson the last thing he needed to complete his invention.

Jeronicus had planned on giving it to him on the day Gustafson ran away. Jerounicus, the elder, looks at Gustafson, who still has the eyes of the lost little boy he once was, and says “I would have shown you everything, if only you had waited.” Gustafson had made a lifetime of choices based on the fact that he did not receive what he wanted, exactly when he wanted it. Years later, Jeronicus is able to speak to the little boy in him and tell him that things could have been so different, if only he had exercised patience. 

Spotlighting the Power of Black Girls in STEM

But this film is not just the story of Black male inventors. It is the personification of Black girl magic. However, the magic in this film is not depicted in the traditional sense. Jeronicus’ granddaughter, Journey, depicts Black girl magic because she shows another side of Black girls. So many young Black girls are interested in numbers and science, but for the longest time Hollywood has not depicted on screen Black girls with such interest.

In fact, the first full length feature film highlighting the power and influence of Black women in fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math was Theodore Melfi’s 2016 drama Hidden Figures. Traditionally, Black women, young and old, are often placed in a box. Therefore, it is uncommon to see a little girl who is interested in math and inventing things. And even less common for those hobbies to be not only accepted, but encouraged.

I can only imagine what it must be like to be a young black girl right now. Seeing someone on screen that looks like you, acts like you, and speaks like you. It’s an experience that others have had the opportunity to have for years, but comes few and far between for Black girls. There is a song that Journey sings, where she says, “the square root of impossible is me.” That is where the Black girl magic in this story lies.

Journey’s song lets other little girls know that it is not conceited or arrogant to believe in yourself and your gifts. In fact, it is empowering to have confidence in yourself. To see a young girl who is seen as different be proud of who she is has so much more power than many will realize. This movie shows that everyone belongs somewhere, and every gift and ability has a purpose. Most importantly, Jingle Jangle teaches kids that being different is not negative. In fact, it’s what can create the next best thing.

The Power of Belief

Jingle Jangle provides so many different, yet important life lessons. But the main one is the power of belief. This lesson is brought to life through the interactive robot that Journey finds in her Grandfather’s attic, the Buddy 3000. Unlike other toys, this one runs on belief. After losing so much, Jeronicus gave up on believing in his gifts and talents. But there is power in a Black man creating something. There is power in a Black man believing in himself. There is power is a Black man being surrounded by a family that believes in him accomplishing his goal. Jeronicus Jangle had lost his power because he had lost his belief. Here are two important lessons Jeronicus learned in spending time with his granddaughter Journey.

First, he learns that his invention, the Buddy 3000, always worked. It just needed someone to believe in him. Second, he discovered what the most precious thing he had created was his family, specifically his daughter Jessica. In the midst of his grief and loss, Jeronicus pushed his greatest creation away. As many Black men experience, his main focus was on being the provider and protector of his family. When his inventions were stolen, he felt as though he failed. Although the story is fictional, I am sure many Black fathers can attest to the feelings of hopelessness and defeat that Jeronicu’s felt. But with the help of his family, Jeronicus slowly learns that family is what really matters. And furthermore, family has the power restore your belief in yourself.

The Moral of the Story

Jingle Jangle has catchy songs and an enchanting story. But the significance of this film is in what it represents to Black communities. Through Jingle Jangle Black people feel seen and heard. They can see themselves on screen in narratives outside of the struggle for racial justice; they can see themselves on screen in roles that represent the totality of their existence and not just the monolithic expression most common to TV and film.

The fact is, black people are not all alike. They are all different. They all have different stories, and all of those stories deserve to be told. For some, this is just another family-friendly film, to others a beautiful Christmas movie. But to many Black Americans it is another step in the right direction. This film provides more than just entertainment. It provides the reassurance that there is power in belief, and there is power in us.

*Dr. Martin Luther King’s speech “Give Us the Ballot – We Will Transform the South” delivered in front of the Lincoln Memorial during the Prayer Pilgrimage for Freedom on 17 May 1957, the third anniversary of the Supreme Court’s famous school desegregation decision.

Three years ago the Supreme Court of this nation rendered in simple, eloquent and unequivocal language a decision which will long be stenciled on the mental sheets of succeeding generations. For all men of good will, this May 17 decision came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of enforced segregation. It came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of distinguished people throughout the world who had dared only to dream of freedom. It came as a legal and sociological death blow to the old Plessy doctrine of “separate-but-equal.” It came as a reaffirmation of the good old American doctrine of freedom and equality for all people.

Unfortunately, this noble and sublime decision has not gone without opposition. This opposition has often risen to ominous proportions. Many states have risen. Up in open defiance. The legislative halls of the South ring loud with such words as “interposition” and “nullification.” Methods of defiance range from crippling economic reprisals to the tragic reign of violence and terror. All of these forces have conjoined to make for massive resistance.

But, even more, all types of conniving methods are still being used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters. The denial of this sacred right is a tragic betrayal of the highest mandates of our democratic traditions and it is democracy turned upside down.

So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote I do not possess myself. I cannot make up my mind – it is made up for me. I cannot live as a democratic citizen, observing the laws I have helped to enact – I can only submit to the edict of others.

So our most urgent request to the president of the United States and every member of Congress is to give us the right to vote.

Give us the ballot and we will no longer have to worry the federal government about our basic rights.

Give us the ballot and we will no longer plead to the federal government for passage of an antilynching law; we will by the power of our vote write the law on the statute books of the southern states and bring an end to the dastardly acts of the hooded perpetrators of violence.

Give us the ballot and we will transform the salient misdeeds of blood-thirsty mobs into the calculated good deeds of orderly citizens.

Give us the ballot and we will fill our legislative halls with men of good will, and send to the sacred halls of Congress men who will not sign a Southern Manifesto, because of their devotion to the manifesto of justice.

Give us the ballot and we will place judges on the benches of the South who will “do justly and love mercy,” and we will place at the head of the southern states governors who have felt not only the tang of the human, but the glow of the divine.

Give us the ballot and we will quietly and nonviolently, without rancor or bitterness, implement the Supreme Court’s decision of May 17, 1954.

In this junction of our nation’s history there is an urgent need for dedicated and courageous leadership. If we are to solve the problems ahead and make racial justice a reality, this leadership must be fourfold.

First, there is a need for a strong, aggressive leadership from the federal government. So far, only the judicial branch of the government has evinced this quality of leadership. If the executive and legislative branches of the government were as concerned about the protection of our citizenship rights as the federal courts have been, then the transition from a segregated to an integrated society would be infinitely smoother. But we so often look to Washington in vain for this concern.

In the midst of the tragic breakdown of law and order, the executive branch of the government is all too silent and apathetic. In the midst of the desperate need for civil rights legislation, the legislative branch of the government is all too stagnant and hypocritical.

This dearth of positive leadership from the federal government is not confined to one particular political party. Both parties have betrayed the cause of justice. The Democrats have betrayed it by capitulating to the prejudices and undemocratic practices of the southern Dixiecrats. The Republicans have betrayed it by capitulating to the blatant hypocrisy of right-wing, reactionary northerners. These men so often have a high blood pressure of words and an anemia of deeds.

In the midst of these prevailing conditions, we come to Washington today pleading with the president and the members of Congress to provide a strong, moral and courageous leadership for a situation that cannot permanently be evaded. We come humbly to say to the men in the forefront of our government that the civil rights issue is not an ephemeral, evanescent domestic issue that can be kicked about by reactionary guardians of the status quo; it is rather an eternal moral issue which may well determine the destiny of our nation in the ideological struggle with communism. The hour is late. The clock of destiny is ticking out. We must act now, before it is too late.

A second area in which there is need for strong leadership is from the white northern liberals. There is a dire need today for a liberalism which is truly liberal. What we are witnessing today in so many northern communities is a sort of quasi liberalism which is based on the principle of looking sympathetically at all sides. It is a liberalism so bent on seeing all sides that it fails to become committed to either side. It is a liberalism that is so objectively analytical that it is not subjectively committed. It is a liberalism which is neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm.

We call for a liberalism from the North which will be thoroughly committed to the ideal of racial justice and will not be deterred by the propaganda and subtle words of those who say, “Slow up for a while; you are pushing too fast.”

A third area that we must look to far strong leadership is from the moderates of the white South. It is unfortunate, indeed, that at this time the leadership of the white South stems from the closed-minded reactionaries. These persons gain prominence and power by the dissemination of false ideas, and by deliberately appealing to the deepest hate responses within the human mind. It is my firm belief that this closed-minded, reactionary, recalcitrant group constitutes a numerical minority. There are in the white South more open-minded moderates than appear on the surface. These persons are silent today because of fear of social, political and economic reprisals. God grant that the white moderates of the South will rise up courageously, without fear, and take up the leadership in this tense period of transition.

I cannot close without stressing the urgent need for strong, courageous and intelligent leadership from the Negro community. We need leadership that is calm and yet positive. this is no day for the rabble-rouser, whether he be Negro or white. We must realize that we are grappling with such a complex problem there is no place for misguided emotionalism. We must work passionately and unrelentingly for the goal of freedom, but we must be sure that our hands are clean in the struggle. We must never struggle with falsehood, hate or malice. Let us never become bitter.

There is another warning signal. We talk a great deal about our rights, and rightly so. We proudly proclaim that three-fourths of the peoples of the world are colored. We have the privilege of noticing in our generation the great drama of freedom and independence as it unfolds in Asia and Africa. All of these things are in line with the unfolding work of providence.

But we must be sure that we accept them in the right spirit. We must not seek to use our emerging freedom and our growing power to do the same thing to the white minority that has been done to us for so many centuries. We must not become victimized with a psychology of victors. In our nation, under the guidance of the superb legal staff of the NAACP, we have been able, through the courts, to remove the legal basis of segregation. Every person of good will is profoundly indebted to the NAACP for its noble work. We must not, however, remain satisfied with a court “victory” over our white brothers.

We must respond to every decision with an understanding of those who have opposed us and with an appreciation of the difficult adjustments that the court orders pose for them.

We must act in such a way as to make possible a coming-together of white people and colored people on the basis of a real harmony of interest and understanding. We must seek an integration based on mutual respect.

I conclude by saying that each of us must keep faith in the future. Let us realize that as we struggle along, but God struggles with us. He is leading us out of a bewildering Egypt, through a bleak and desolate wilderness, toward a bright and glittering promised land. Let us go forth into the glorious future with the words of James Weldon Johnson resounding in our souls:

God of our weary years,                                                                                                                       God of our silent tears,                                                                                                                         Thou who has brought us thus far on the way;                                                                               Thou who has by thy might,                                                                                                                           Led us into the light,                                                                                                                                     Keep us forever in the path, we pray.                                                                                                            Lest our feet stray from the places, our God,                                                                                   Where we met thee.                                                                                                                                             Lest our hearts drunk with the wine of the world.                                                                                                            We forget thee;                                                                                                                                       Shadowed beneath thy hand, may we forever stand                                                                     True to our God, true to our native land.

How the “problem of the color line” spawned today’s black nationalist religious practices.

“The problem of the twentieth century is the color line.” This is the poignant refrain in W. E. B. DuBois’ classic sociological analysis of the United States of America, simply titled, The Souls of Black Folk. Writing at the beginning of the twentieth century, I’m not sure if Dr. DuBois would have imagined that his prophetic challenge was also a chilling prediction for the twenty-first century.

The “color line” problem garnered headline attention earlier this year after a complex racialized incident at the nation’s capital. The incident was initially reported as a confrontation between a Native American elder, Nathan Phillips, and MAGA-cap wearing high school students from the Covington Catholic High school in Kentucky. As the details emerged, it was revealed that the elder had positioned himself as a barrier of peace between the young Trump supporters and a small group of men who identified as Hebrew Israelites.

In the aftermath, journalists rushed to define the Hebrew Israelites to the public. Unfortunately, most have presented a simplistic explanation that tends to view the various groups through a uniform lens. However, while the term “Hebrew Israelites” can be utilized to describe black people who claim genealogical affinity to the biblical Israelites, it should not be used as a catchall category for a specific religious orientation. From an organizational perspective, black people who identify with Israel can be divided into two general categories.

“Traditional” Congregations

The first category includes those groups that are organized along commonly identifiable religious structures. The oldest appears to be Frank Cherry’s Church of the Living God, the Pillar Ground of Truth for All Nations. Purportedly established in 1886, this Chattanooga, Tennessee based collective eventually moved to Philadelphia and apparently dissipated after Cherry’s death in 1963.[i]

Then there is The Church of God and Saints of Christ. Founded in 1896 in Lawrence, Kansas by William Saunders Crowdy, this self-identified “Judaic Christian” denomination currently has churches in North America, Africa and the Caribbean.[ii]

The third “traditional” congregation was founded in Harlem, New York, by Wentworth Arthur Matthew in 1919. Known as The Commandment Keepers Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation, members claim direct lineage to the ancient Israelites and follow a pattern of worship similar to Jewish synagogues. Their sanctuaries are mostly in New York and New Jersey.[iii]

Missionary Movements

The second category of Hebrew Israelites includes movements that are more mission-minded. Their task is to call black people back to their original faith. The first emerged in 1966 at the Abeta Hebrew Israel Cultural Center in Chicago. The leader, who assumed the name, Ben Ami Ben Israel, claimed to have received a vision from the angel Gabriel commanding him to lead the black Children of Israel to the land of promise. By 1970, he and forty-eight families had settled in Israel after a brief stay in Liberia. The Israeli government granted them residency in 1990 and they currently reside in the city of Dimona.[i]

The second movement also encouraged repatriation to Israel, but established its headquarters in Miami, Florida. Founded in 1979 by Yahweh ben Yahweh, The Nation of Yahweh was a philosophical counterpart to The Nation of Islam. The city of Miami publicly commended them for their community service and business initiatives. Following Ben Yahweh’s death, the organizational headquarters was moved to Texas.[ii]

The final “movement” is comprised of several loosely related groups that are collectively referred to as “One West.”[iii] This movement was founded in the late 1960s by Ebner ben Yomin who had been a member of Matthew’s aforementioned Commandment Keepers congregation. Adopting the name Israeli School of Universal Practical Knowledge, the leaders taught that Christ would return in the year 2000. One prominent group operates under the revised name Israelite School of Universal Practical Knowledge, and another embraces the militant label, Sicarii. Collectively, these teach that all non-European people who reside in the Americas are the true descendants of Israel and see it as their duty to recruit them to the faith.

The Real People of God

While each of these groups has distinct doctrines, people are attracted to them for some of the same reasons. Although an estimated 79% of African Americans identify as Christian, there are some who feel that conventional Christianity has been used as a tool of white supremacy. Most who reject Christianity for racial reasons align themselves with one of the two major black Islamic movements. However, a smaller number have found a home in one of the groups that fall under the Hebrew Israelite banner.

Looking for Liberation

Interestingly, like the Nation of Islam, Hebrew Israelites have not totally severed themselves from the teachings of the Bible but have appropriated its teachings for the sociological empowerment of black people. Jesus plays a central role in their theology and many of their doctrines are based on creative interpretations of New Testament passages. Young people, especially, probably view the movement as a branch of Christianity that has been liberated from imperial oppression.

As long as the dominant narrative in Christianity parrots the Eurocentric distortions that shift the biblical world from the African continent to Europe, black nationalist movements like the Hebrew Israelites will continue to attract African-Americans who are on a quest for a spiritual identity that resonates with their history and culture. If it is to remain relevant, the black church has a responsibility to lead the effort to recover the African roots of scripture.

[i] For an informative documentary on this movement, see Nicholas Philipides and Ben Schuder, directors, Village of Peace (Affinity Vision Entertainment, 2014). Available on Amazon Prime.

[ii] For a critical assessment of Yahweh ben Yahweh and his movement, see Sydney P. Freedberg, Brother Love: Murder, Money and a Messiah (New York, NY: Pantheon, 1994).

[iii] Their name is derived from One West 125^th Street in Harlem, New York.

[i] For a brief orientation to Cherry’s group, see Anthony B. Pinn, “Church of the Living God, Pillar of Truth for All Nations,” pp. 166-169 in Anthony B. Pinn, ed., African American Religious Cultures (Santa Barnbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2009).

[ii] For a comprehensive study see Elly M. Wynia, The Church of God and Saints of Christ: The Rise of Black Jews (New York, NY: Garland Publishing, 1994).

[iii] See Janice W. Fernheimer, “The Commandment Keepers of Harlem,” pp. 169-174 in Anthony B. Pinn, ed., African American Religious Cultures (Santa Barnbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2009).

Stewarding the Heart: When Evil Has Become Good

Message Magazine’s Online Devotional for Monday, April 8, 2019

Audio Link: http://bit.ly/ThoughtsinWorship