“And Are We Yet Alive”—New Year 2011

A fond memory from my days as a minister in the African Methodist Episcopal Church was the Methodist tradition of singing, at the opening service of each year’s Annual Conference, Charles Wesley’s hymn, “And Are We Yet Alive”. As a way of marking the beginning of another year writing this blog, I think it also appropriate to recall Wesley’s words.

And are we yet alive,
And see each other’s face?
Glory and praise to Jesus give
For His redeeming grace!

Preserved by power Divine
To full salvation here,
Again in Jesus’ praise we join,
And in His sight appear.

What troubles have we seen,
What conflicts have we passed,
Fightings without, and fears within,
Since we assembled last.

But out of all the Lord
Hath brought us by His love;
And still He doth His help afford,
And hides our life above.

Then let us make our boast
Of His redeeming power
Which saves us to the uttermost
Till we can sin no more.

Let us take up the cross
Till we the crown obtain;
And gladly reckon all things loss
So we may Jesus gain.

—Charles Wesley (1707-1788)

The only safe guide

“An individual man or woman must never follow conviction in regard to moral, religious, civil, or political questions until they are first tested by the unerring word of God. If a conviction infringes upon the written word of God, or in any manner conflicts with that word, the conviction is not to be followed. It is our duty to abandon it. Moreover, I will add that light on a doubtful conviction is not to be sought for in the conscience, but in the Bible. The conscience, like the conviction, may be blind, erroneous, misled, or perverted; therefore it is not always a safe guide. The only safe guide for a man or woman, young or old, rich or poor, learned or unlearned, priest or people is the Bible, the whole Bible, nothing but the Bible.”

—Bishop Daniel Alexander Payne (1811-1893), from his memoirs, Recollections of Seventy Years (pp. 233-234), written in 1888.

Dr. Jeremiah Wright and preaching in the Black Church

I just listened to Wright’s “God damn America” sermon. The actual title is “Confusing God and Government”. The text used is Luke 19:37-44.

You can listen to it yourself right here:


powered by ODEO

I have several initial reactions to this message:

First of all, I’ve heard several messages by Wright on television and radio, here in “Chicagoland”. This is a very typical Wright sermon, both in terms of the way he handles the text and the style.

I’m also reminded of some of the “best” preaching that I heard in the African Methodist Episcopal Church—the denomination in which both my wife and I were raised, in which I was ordained and of which we were members, until 10 years ago when we left. It’s not a common message—the average Black pastor doesn’t preach this way—but it is very similar to the preaching of some of the more eloquent and educated pastors and bishops in the A.M.E. Church that I heard. It’s worth noting that the more educated ministers received their education from liberal seminaries, just like Wright (see here). My experience has been that this kind of message has been very well received by Black church audiences.

I thought Wright made some good and helpful points, and that—for his majority Black, Chicago audience—this sermon was probably very encouraging. In context, I didn’t find his “God damn America” comment particularly shocking, other than the choice of words was unnecessarily strong (It’s interesting that even Wright seemed to recognize that his choice of words was excessive). My observation has been that most Black preachers (and I’ll include myself in this) are more direct—more blunt—in what they say than the average white preacher. I’m speaking in very general terms, based on what I’ve observed. Generally, we Black preachers leave you no doubt as to where we stand on an issue. But, clearly Wright’s message wasn’t an anti-America message at all, contrary to how it’s been portrayed in the media.

The message of the sermon had nothing to do with the message of the text. His main points (Governments lie—God does not lie; Governments change—God does not change; Governments fail—God never fails) are true—very true—but that’s not the point of the text. Wright built a message based on the political setting of Jerusalem in Jesus’ day. Once he set that up, he was finished with the text. Sadly, this is, again, typical of innumerable sermons I heard when I was in the Black Church.

Probably most important of all, the gospel is never, ever presented in Wright’s message. At the conclusion, the “doors of the church are opened” (that is to say, he extends an invitation to become a member of the church), but it is never made clear what people are supposed to come forward for. There is no gospel invitation. Christ’s death and resurrection are mentioned, but there is no mention of the reason Christ had to die, no mention of sin, judgment or God’s wrath. There is simply no gospel.

My experience has been that there is little mention of the gospel in most traditional Black churches. This fact is what breaks my heart. When white believers choose to criticize Barack Obama for being a member of Trinity United Church of Christ, I don’t think it is helpful at all, and it smacks of racism. In effect, you might as well criticize any Black politician who is a member of a typical Black church. Why don’t the critics go after Sen. Clinton’s United Methodist church (or Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush’s Episcopal Church in America?)? There is open heresy in white mainline churches; why does the Black Church get singled out for criticism? In my opinion, the need is not criticism but good-faith efforts to stimulate, encourage and support the preaching of the gospel in the Black Church.

My experience in “cross-cultural missions”

One of the recent trends in evangelicalism is the short-term mission trip. Instead of giving decades of one’s life to ministry for the cause of Christ in some faraway country—as legendary missionaries of the past like William Carey, Hudson Taylor, David Livingstone or Amy Carmichael did—today’s would-be missionary can give a couple or so weeks of service sacrificing little, risking little, investing little.

Without getting into the pros and cons of short-term mission trips, I have to confess I’ve never had even the slightest urge to go on one (I know that will sound like near-heresy to some). I figure, why should I go to another country for missions work when I’m already doing “cross-cultural missions”. You see, for the past 6 years my family and I have been involved in a predominantly white, non-denominational, evangelical church.

I hope no one will find my association of the term “cross-cultural missions” with involvement in a predominantly white church offensive. I’m simply acknowledging a cultural and sociological reality: There is a vast world of difference between the white evangelical church and church in the Black community. In fact, the move to a predominantly white church has meant learning a whole new way of “doing church”.

I’ve always been in church. My great grandparents were faithful church attendees and brought me to church every Sunday from the time I was 2 months old. Not only was I in church every Sunday of my life (unless I was sick—a rare occurrence), but I’ve been active in the church since childhood, ever since my great-great aunt “made me” come and play the organ for the brand new A.M.E. Church she became a part of way back in 1972. I was 9 years old at the time. So, for over 34 years I’ve been involved “up-front” in the church. I was active in the church even before I knew the Lord (I’ve been a Christian for a little over 26 years)! However, all my church experience, until 1998, was within the “Black Church”—within a Black local church in the Black community, within an historically Black denomination.

When we left the A.M.E. Church in 1998, we immediately united with a Black evangelical church (a Black local church which was part of a majority-white evangelical denomination). There were some significant differences between this Black church in a white denomination and a Black church within a Black denomination (a subject worth a blog post of its own), but I was still dealing with Black folk.

But, when my wife and I made the decision to attend a white church, we made a decision which (probably more so for me than for my wife) was earth-shaking. I don’t think I’m being overly dramatic in speaking of our decision in those terms. Leaving behind the comfort and security of Black people on Sunday morning meant leaving behind everything we had known and become used to. It meant leaving behind familiar sights and sounds. It meant singing new music or singing familiar music (hymns) in new ways. It meant a different way of worshiping, a new way of praying in public, and listening to a different way of preaching. It even meant learning a new language: “evangelical-speak”.

So, whenever the subject of short-term mission trips comes up, I think to myself, “I don’t need to go on a mission trip to experience and minister to another culture; I’m doing that right now!”

(To be continued…)

Some of my experiences with Pentecostalism (Part 3)

The fact of Pentecostalism’s influence on more mainstream churches wasn’t new, but I was in high school by the time I became aware of it. For instance, to my surprise, I found out that the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) congregation that my family was a member of had experienced Pentecostal “outpouring” as early as 1923. A Pentecostal minister was invited by the pastor to conduct a “revival”. Several members of the church, including the pastor and his wife, received the Pentecostal “baptism of the Holy Spirit”. This happening brought about a church split, as many of those who received “the Holy Ghost” left the AME church to form what became the first Church of God in Christ (COGIC) in our area. The pastor, his wife, and the rest of those who “received the Holy Ghost”, however, remained with the denomination. This well-regarded pastor—who, by all accounts that I ever heard, was a godly pastor and Bible teacher—led my “home” church for about 21 years, from its founding in 1905, until a few years after he received the Pentecostal “blessing”, at which time he was transferred by the bishop.

My great-grandmother, her sister, and their parents united with what became our “home” church in 1923, shortly after the Pentecostal split occurred, having migrated from Alabama a couple of years earlier. My great-grandmother told me that she remembered the pastor’s wife speaking in tongues. She said the pastor’s wife, on occasion, would leave the sanctuary during worship, go into a back room of the church, and speak in tongues out of sight of the congregation (you could still hear her). Apparently that wasn’t an unusual Sunday morning occurrence. Of course, by the time I came along, all evidences of Pentecostalism had long ago disappeared, and only a very few even remembered that such a thing had ever happened.

Well, my “home” church’s founding pastor, in about 1926, was sent by the bishop to lead a small group of AME Christians, in another city about 30 miles south, who had also received the Pentecostal “baptism of the Holy Spirit” and left their traditional AME church. So, this “Pentecostal” AME pastor was paired with these “Pentecostal” AME Christians, and he organized them into a new AME church. He would remain as pastor of this small flock for over 20 years (The pastor is pictured here, front row, far right, standing next to his wife, on the occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary).

Moving ahead some 50 years, to my high school years: There is a Black Baptist church in town which comes under the influence of Pentecostal teaching. The pastor at this church had “received the Holy Ghost” and basically, within the period of a few short years, had succeeded in turning this previously traditional Black Baptist congregation into a “Bapticostal” church. This church was very popular with Black teenagers in the area. Several of my high school classmates attended this church and came under the influence of this Pentecostal teaching. However, I was impressed by what I saw: Kids that used to cuss and fight stopped cussing and fighting, girls started dressing more modestly, some kids that used to be bullies became nice and kind. In my mind, there had to be something to this “Holy Ghost” teaching, because I saw it changing lives.

A bit later, also during my high school years, a relatively new AME congregation (this congregation had a few years earlier separated from my “home” church), for which I was the organist, began to fellowship with that “Pentecostal” AME (“Methodicostal”) church I was talking about earlier. Some 25 years after their founder’s death, the Pentecostal influence at this church was still strong. What brought about this fellowship was an invitation to a long-time preacher at that church to come and conduct a week of nightly “revival” meetings at the AME church where I was the organist. During these meetings I got to hear and observe firsthand some of the theology and practices of Pentecostalism. The “highlight” of the week was the final night (I believe it was a Friday night), when the preacher would pray for people that they might be “filled with the Holy Ghost”.

That night, the preacher preached about being filled with the Holy Spirit. I don’t remember the text or anything specific that he said; I just remember the sermon was about being filled with the Holy Spirit. As the organist, I had a “front-row seat”, so I saw everything that went on. No one spoke in tongues—in fact, the preacher did indicate that tongues were not a necessary evidence of the filling of the Holy Spirit—but it was both fascinating and eerie to see what did happen. One individual just trembled from head to toe. It was obvious she was not trying to do this; it was just happening. Another individual collapsed on the floor (from a kneeling position at the altar rail). Someone else screamed at the top of their lungs (I tell you, that scream would have awakened the dead!). Others did not respond in any overt, visible way. Some just quietly wiped away tears. Remember, I’m only reporting some of what I saw; I still can’t explain it (and if you think you can explain it, perhaps you’re not as smart as you think you are). Needless to say, the memory of those meetings stayed with me a long time. In fact, I think what I saw and heard stimulated within me an interest in the present-day ministry of the Holy Spirit, for interestingly enough, I saw some people change: seemingly greater joy in the Lord and a greater seriousness about the things of God.

It’s important to know that about this time, somewhere between my junior and senior years of high school, by God’s grace and power, I was born again and became a Christian. I think in some way God used the changes that I saw in some of my high school classmates to get my attention. No, I wasn’t involved in any gross sins; after all, I was a “goody-two-shoes” church boy—I knew how to act the part. However, deep-down I wasn’t sure that anything savingly real had ever occurred in my soul. Praise God, after I was born again, I no longer had to wonder had I ever experienced the salvation that others testified about. I knew my sins were forgiven for Christ’s sake. I knew I was in His hands.

Yet, I also knew I wasn’t perfect—far from it. To hear others testify to the blessing that had come to their life through the infilling of the Holy Spirit stimulated in me an increasing interest to know the power of the Holy Spirit in my own life. The stage of my life which saw some of the greatest changes occurred between my salvation in 1980 and my graduation from graduate school in 1986, and it's my contention that a growing personal interest in the continuing ministry of the Holy Spirit played a decisive role in the changes that would take place.

(To be continued…)