Martin Luther King

Coffee, Spiritual Conversations and Dr. Martin Luther King

Dave Sterrett — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 13:42:38 -0800

Last week, I started up a spiritual conversation with man who was sitting across from me at the local Starbucks. He was editing a Christian book for his father, who was the chaplain of a major university in the city of Dallas. I asked this young man if he was a Christian and he said no. After we talked awhile, this young man admitted that he was a practicing homosexual and he didn’t think it was right for Christians to say that homosexuality was wrong. I hadn’t told him that homosexuality was wrong at this point, but I asked him, “Well do you think that there is anything absolutely wrong with anything?”

He replied, “No, it’s just a matter of perspective and personal experiences. Different people feel different ways about certain actions.”

I responded, “Well, what about child rape? Would you admit that’s absolutely wrong or is that just relatively wrong?”

He hesitated. After his hesitation and uncertainty, I asked a couple more questions to help him discover his inconsistencies. Then, I appealed that the determining factor of morality cannot be humans or individuals. The rapist might feel his action is morally acceptable to him. However it’s still wrong.

The giver of this law is not you and it is not me. We recognize that throughout history certain societies have behaved badly, so we observe that the giver of the moral law cannot be a particular society, either. The giver of this law must be something or someone transcendent, something or someone beyond us. Today, as celebrate the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., I’m reminded of his convictions in moral absolutes. He said:

But I’m here to say to you this morning that some things are right and some things are wrong. Eternally so, absolutely so. It’s wrong to hate. It always has been wrong and it always will be wrong. It’s wrong in America, it’s wrong in Germany, it’s wrong in Russia, it’s wrong in China. It was wrong in 2000 B.C., and it’s wrong in 1954 A.D. It always has been wrong, (That’s right!) and it always will be wrong. (That’s right!) It’s wrong to throw our lives away in riotous living. No matter if everybody in Detroit is doing it, it’s wrong. It always will be wrong, and it always has been wrong. It’s wrong in every age and it’s wrong in every nation. Some things are right and some things are wrong, no matter if everybody is doing the contrary. Some things in this universe are absolute. The God of the universe has made it so. And so long as we adopt this relative attitude toward right and wrong, we’re revolting against the very laws of God himself.[i]

Martin Luther King Jr. strongly believed that an absolute moral law exists; and, therefore, that a moral lawgiver must exist. He called this moral lawgiver God. In our three new books, the Coffeehouse Chronicles, Josh McDowell and I try to give examples of how to take ordinary conversations, using the Socratic method, and point the conversation towards truth. We hope these books will encourage you to turn your spiritual conversation towards the Moral Law Giver and Christ, the morally good King, who died for our sins.

[i]Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. recorded on multiple sources including www.standford.edu/group/King/publications

Continuing The Legacy of Dr. King in Post 9/11 America

Daniel Hodge — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 21:27:54 -0800

These days it is difficult to fully embrace the idea that we live in a “post-racial society” when we in the Black community still see our young people shot down at the hands of police officers (click here. This young man was from one of my home towns on the Central Coast of Ca. where I did Young Life for many years). It is difficult to imagine a society where “race” and the “color” of our skin are not looked upon as the measure of a person/ people group. It is challenging to see through a lot of the subtle, overt, and venomous racism that swirls in our media, political rhetoric, and societal structures almost every day.

What sticks out to me the most during this Holiday season are two things: 1) Dr. King has become an institutionalized figure who has lost a lot of his true grit in societal terms and 2) A lot see the events of Dr. King as “back in those days” and fail to realize the “fight” for equality is still on. Hence, the struggle for equality becomes longer and harder in these times.

Therefore, the legacy part, for me at least and for many other ethnic minorities, is that we continue to educate, train up the next generation, and push forward towards equality for all and racial justice. But what does that mean? I was having a conversation the other day with some students who wanted me to call senators, help them organize a rally, and sign more petitions. All very good stuff indeed. However, a shift has occurred in our society over the last decade which has made it even more problematic to effect change through these channels. Am I saying we should abandon the march? Throw away the petitions? Hang up the phones? Of course not! However, in this day in age those avenues afforded to us as advocates for justice and equality in this free country are wearing thin in their effectiveness for change. For example, when the country found out we were going to war, millions marched, signed petitions, and called their senators and representative to put pressure on the White House to not do this; of course we all know those efforts were futile. Fast forward a few years and we have the events of Hurricane Katrina hit the New Orleans area hard. Once again, thousands marched and wrote letters…still, no real effective change; some areas still look as though the hurricane hit last week. Fast forward to the Dream Act where I personally called and petitioned, thousands of others called their representatives and many agencies (both left and right of political lines) stood together to write letters for this act to pass; no change. It would seem that the marches and protest—while still a great way of expressing thought—do not have the same impact they once did during Dr. King’s time.

What might all this mean?

As I spoke with my students, we struggled through this very question and weighed its significance in the future of equality and justice. Moreover, what are the “next steps?” How might Dr. King’s legacy continue when one of the most effective tools he himself used is becoming obsolete?

I also struggle with where we are at in terms of racial progress. As a Black male I tend to see a lot of these issues rear their foul countenance towards me: getting looked over to be served in line, being spoken to rudely at the library while other White patrons are spoken to in a nicer tone, being asked “Do you work here?” constantly at places like Home Depot when I’m clearly not wearing the classic orange—all underlying tones of something deeper at work within our lens of the social construct of race. So, I struggle in finding that balance in continuing the legacy of Dr. King.

I love the parades and I love the nuances and homage paid to Dr. King on this day. However many, including many African Americans and ethnic minorities, fail to see the depth and scope of what that changed cost. It cost time, energy, tears, sweat, time away from family, human hours, organizational minds, nails, paint, glue, shoes, voices being lost, coordination, and most importantly it cost many lives. Dr. Stephane Dunn writes that there are businesses that are taking “snow days” on this Holiday and not truly observing the actual meaning of the day (you can read more here). At one of the schools I teach at, one year several social and racially unconscious students ran down the dorm hallways screaming “yeah, whoo hoo, Dr. King’s freaking Holiday…” in mockery of the day. Many other social and racially unconscious students laughed as they wore black hats and ties. That type of ignorance is extremely hard to deal with, but even harder, if not impossible, to educate and change.

What’s the point? The point is that we need to re-group: African Americans, Latinos, Euro Americans, Asians, and oppressed peoples everywhere… we need to realize the significance, depth, responsibility, awareness, and complexity of change and what it will cost; because what we can’t afford is a future not paid and in debt socially and institutionally.

Note: the picture used in this blog is that of Dave Dennis, delivering the eulogy at the funeral of James Chaney (killed by cops/Klansmen) in 1964. See the intensity, the anger, the call to justice, and the passion within this photo.

Dr. Martin Luther King speaks again...KEEP MOVING.

Invisible Children — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:26:32 -0700

BEYOND THE INAUGURATION: Embracing Dissent

Craig Detweiler — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:38:20 -0800

Last Spring, barnstorming across America with my atheist college roommate and our dialogical documentary Purple State of Mind, we felt a bit like presidential candidates. We engaged in heated debates on college campuses. We stopped by churches and synagogues to rally the faithful. We answered phone calls on local radio shows. While Barack and Hillary were swiping at each other, John Marks and I were taking heat from animated audiences.

Skeptics wondered why John seemed so negative, almost acting like a bully. Christians wondered why I took so much abuse from John without punching back. Both sides were disappointed that their representative failed to defend their side with more authority. The crowds wanted a bloody boxing match. Instead, we offered a perverse bit of peace, love and understanding. Tired of the gridlock created by the culture wars, we offered a different way of being, advocating active listening, promoting a purple state of mind.

In an era of red states versus blue states, who proved the most popular and purple candidate? Obama’s conciliatory, bridge-building speeches pushed past the divisive politics that preceded him. Every previous election in my lifetime felt like a referendum on the past—the responsibilities of the 1950s versus the freedom of the 1960s. Your opinion of Vietnam and Woodstock was reflected in your voting record. But Barack came of age after that tumultuous era. His approach to governing felt pragmatic rather than ideological.

A series of challengers tried to rile him. Obama floated above the mire during the Democratic primary. But what about the presidential election? For a brief moment, Sarah Palin reignited her party’s faithful. She freshened up an old divide-and-conquer script, begun by Patrick Buchanan, polished by Lee Atwater, perfected by Karl Rove. Palin put a positive spin on negativism. Her candidacy was an entertaining sideshow to the main event: Obama vs. McCain.

Senator McCain garnered the Republican nomination by running toward the middle, building a coalition around unity rather than division. Yet, with Obama running ahead in the polls, McCain abandoned his centrist principles, incorporating some of the scare tactics and whispers that had been used against him in previous campaigns. Eventually, the depths of the economic depression trumped any attempts to prey upon voters’ fears.

Yet, even before the inauguration, the culture war reared its decidedly ugly head. By inviting Pastor Rick Warren to deliver the opening invocation, Obama stepped into the firestorm swirling around gay marriage and California’s Proposition 8. Reaching across the aisle only resulted in more flames coming his way. Those who viewed the Warren invocation as a political maneuver found equal calculation in the late addition of Episcopal bishop Gene Robinson to inauguration week. Robinson vowed to offer an inclusive invocation, crafting “a message that everyone in the nation can identify with” (although his prayer was not broadcast on HBO’s ‘We Are One’ concert.) You can read it here.

I am thrilled that Obama made room for pastors who not only disagree with each other, but possibly even with him. We desperately need a leader who can listen to his critics, who can bring people together across the ir/religious, political and cultural divide. I embarked on the Purple State project because I need a voice of dissent in my life. The doubts of John Marks make me a better believer. He keeps me honest, keeps me questioning, keeps me from getting comfortable. Can we continue to make room for the loyal opposition, even when it causes complications?

By swearing upon Abraham Lincoln’s Bible, Obama reaches back to an equally challenging era of American history. The specter of civil war caused Lincoln to ask, “Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it?” He reminded his listeners, “We are not enemies, but friends. He closed his address with an appeal to “our bonds of affection,” “the mystic chords of memory,” and “the better angels of our nature.”

Obama appears poised to make a similar call for cooperation. He doesn’t expect people to abandon their principles, to set aside significant differences. But the gravity of our current crisis surely forces us to subsume our agendas for the sake of the greater good. There will be plenty of time to argue after we’ve gotten out of this mess. Until then, we desperately need to come alongside those who want to forge a future for America. We can no longer afford to be entertained by surface distances or ideological divides. It is time to be adults–to work with skeptical neighbors, faithful friends, and disbelieving college roommates. Martin Luther King’s words continue to resonate, “We must learn to live together as brothers (and sisters) or perish together as fools.”