Carl F. Ellis Jr.'s Blog, page 2

Reflections on Black Lives

Last night, two young Black Christian leaders from our community came to visit us.  They joined a steady stream of young people who’ve come to our home in the last few years seeking answers.  One brother was primarily concerned about unjust policing in our city, the other with the high crime rate in his neighborhood.
Both of these issues have affected them and their friends deeply.  My two young brothers expressed their frustration with measures that often lack practical application, be they protest or prayer.  They were united by their larger concern over the lack of discipleship, the absence of applied biblical principles, and a prophetic void – all three, they sensed, were at the heart of their frustrations.  They expressed a profound sentiment: “‘Black Lives Matter’ won’t matter to us until allBlack lives matter.” 
They also came with a question, “What do we do?”
Most folk acknowledge that there are at least two versions of “black lives matter.”  For the Christian, making some sort of distinction makes it possible to participate in the movement for Black lives without compromising fidelity to Scripture.  Not long ago, the two versions were distinct.  They’ve since become so intertwined that it’s worth revisiting how they’re framed and perceived, and how they might be evolving.On one hand, “black lives matter” (all lower case, “blm”) is a truth.  This truth encompasses the healthy concern for matters that touch Black lives – criminal justice reform, racial justice, just policing, better community relations, crime reduction, urban homicide rates, discipleship, mass incarceration, abortion rates, poverty reduction, education, employment, ethnic reconciliation, accurate representation of our history, etc.
I affirm and engage this truth, and have encouraged and trained other Christians to do the same as a part of God’s plan of individual and cultural discipleship.  I find these affirmations and concerns have no conflict with Christian conviction.  I’ve built decades of personal and academic ministry on this truth – that Black lives do, indeed, matter to God, and therefore are of immeasurable significance and worth.
On the other hand, “BlackLives Matter” (capitalized, “BLM”) is an ideology with clearly stated goals and presuppositions.  I would go so far to say that the original “BLM” ideology, which started as a rally cry and grew into an entity, has given rise to a cult with its own doctrines and demands for faith.  It now extends beyond the original entity, blending with other belief systems in a syncretistic manner as it exports its own iconography, its own language, and its own heroes for veneration.
Spiritual Elite
Honestly, I am more concerned about this syncretistic subculture than I am about the original “BLM.”  It is an infection that is finding its way into Christian communities.  Some things I have observed about this subculture among Christians:
1)    It comes dangerously close at times to binding consciences by conflating holiness or true Christianity with grievance on the singular issue of police brutality as defined by “BLM.”
2)    It flirts with binding consciences by subtly emphasizing public proclamation of commitment to “BLM” as evidence of commitment to Black people — ignoring the myriad of other issues that Christians might be addressing in their own personal and cultural spheres.
3)    It borrows a language of exclusivity that suggests some Christians enjoy a deeper knowledge of reality than others (e.g., “woke” vs. “not woke,” commonly accepted by many in the movement for Black lives as an “existential state of being”).  This transfers into the experiential, as when a Christian “gets woke,” one is now an acceptable part of a spiritual elite.  This kind of language unwittingly draws unnecessary dividing lines in the Body that Christ died to unify.
I question the underpinnings of such language; it creates division based on a temporal standard for inclusion.  Those within the Body who express concern or disagreement with this doctrinaire approach, or who lack public displays of support for the “BLM” movement, can have their authenticity questioned, be rejected, or ostracized.  Surely, just policing is a legitimate pursuit for the Christian activist.  However, it almost seems that for some, advocacy for just policing alone is becoming the Gospel, and awareness of the issue its Pentecost.
Others have already pointed out that “BLM” the entity holds presuppositions regarding human flourishing that are at odds with much of biblical truth.  In our land of free thought and speech, it is their Constitutional right to hold these beliefs.  Their de-centralized form of leadership, however, has opened the movement to chaos and uncontrolled rogues who aim to dehumanize others under their banner, even at the most peaceful of protests.  Couple this deficiency in the leadership’s structure with their presuppositions of what constitutes human flourishing, and the Christian is presented with an obvious dilemma that cannot be glossed over with persuasive, yet simplistic pleas for “solidarity around a common cause.”
It has become increasingly apparent that the differences between these two – “blm” and “BLM” – do not co-exist as “tension to be embraced,” as it is touted by staunch “BLM” advocates in the Body of Christ.  Rather, it seems for a number of Christians, the two are incompatible and for some, the two present an irreconcilable confusion.  These concerned brothers and sisters should not be judged or marginalized for the courage of their convictions.
As for using the hashtag, it’s not essential to doing work that affirms Black lives, nor is its use essential in order to work alongside others who advocate for criminal justice reform and just policing.  For example, a cursory glance through the Equal Justice Institute’s Twitter feed this year shows no consistent use of the phrase or the hashtag, even as they similarly pursue their fine work of criminal justice reform.
We need to walk in the wisdom of Jesus.  He is truly the Messiah, yet he did not identify with that title when he was in Judea.  Why?  Because the term “Messiah” was grossly misunderstood by the Judeans.*  The same applies to the confusion surrounding the “BLM” banner.
‘Where Is the Christian Voice?’
Not long ago, our colleague and brother Anthony Bradley argued thatwe don’t have to bend “BLM” the entityinto something it wasn’t originally designed to be; that is, into something distinctly Christian.  I agree with him.  We also don’t need to rely on it to accomplish cultural and social change.  Christianity should never be subject to anyone else’s movement.
In the same article Bradley asked, ‘Where is the Christian voice in the conversation?’ Since his article was published, a number of young Christians have developed organizations willing to take on today’s issues without co-opting the language of “BLM.”  Under their own unique titles, a number have organized and are developing belief statements outlining parameters of agreement.  I believe this will help them greatly as they network to tackle today’s issues.
Belief statements are helpful in that they display care for the Body of Christ, for society, and for individuals who wish to collaborate by building parameters and defining expectations.  Such statements combat confusion in two ways:
1)    They show respect for the Constitutional right of the original “BLM” entity to have their own stated goals, beliefs, and intellectual property – even if it disagrees with “blm” as a truth.
2)    They help define and articulate the Christian’s unique perspective on human flourishing.
In our collaborations, there’s no need for either defensive posturing or for blind affirmation of the value systems involved.  In love for man and faithfulness to God, we can show respect to the platforms of those who may disagree with our foundations.  It’s telling, however, if they do not respect our foundations or our commitment to them in return.
I’m also encouraged that these same grassroots organizations are springing into action around just policing and beyond, to all the issues that touch Black lives and into all spheres of human flourishing.  They are arming themselves with a robust theology that can accomplish much, without compromise.  Likewise, my two young friends left our home last night with a resolve to begin something of their own.  It is up to God whether or not these movements will grow beyond their local significance.  Either way, my wife and I are personally committed to nurturing these initiatives into something tangible and lasting.
Grateful
I would be remiss if I did not mention those who have labored long in our communities, schools, courts, in politics and in our legislature, and in our general society for years, bringing the biblical Gospel to bear on the value of Black lives.  Many who are new to today’s advocacy tend to ignore this presence, stating that “the church was not there” on these matters.  
This is not accurate history.  
I know many of you…some are younger, some are older.  I’m a witness that your advocacy for Black lives – including just policing – began long ago, and continues a legacy started by those who came before us.  You may not have been organized into movements, but you were there.  I’m grateful for your faithfulness in the day to day, and I’m here to remind you your work does not go unseen.
Caution
Unless a distinction is clearly made between the two – “blm” and “BLM” – in the minds of the general public and the larger Christian community, or unless organizations issue public statements that distinguish between the two, I find myriad reasons why it’s unwise for Christians to identify with or protest under the “BLM" banner since other less compromising options are available.
For the Christian activist, a distinction also needs to be made between reform, revolution and revolt.  Reform movements seek to improve the existing order.  Revolution movements, if they are committed to truth, seek to abolish the existing order and replace it with a better one.  Revolt movements just seek to tear down the existing order.  History teaches us that without a better replacement as a goal, the result of a revoltis often a new order that is worse than the one that was demolished.  The inconsistencies, lack of accountability caused by its decentralized leadership, and moral murkiness of today’s “BLM” leave it vulnerable to becoming merely a revolt movement.
I have further concerns that the gains and strides made by those who champion “blm” will be eclipsed by the unchecked and counterproductive activities of “BLM.”  As a result, I’ve spent a good portion of this year advising those who ask me about the movement to use caution in affiliating with “BLM” ideology, or when marching under the “BLM” banner.
Conclusion
I’ve only touched on a few concerns here, but I’m open to dialogue further about the issue. 
In closing, I don’t seek to bind anyone’s conscience; my hope – as it’s always been – is to see young men and women wisely build solid platforms on which they can generate tangible changes for our communities, without doing harm to conscience or conviction.



Notes

*The Samaritan ‘woman at the well’ – in spite of her theological confusion – had a more correct understanding of “Messiah.”  Hence Jesus, in this context, did not hesitate to use this language familiar to her and identify himself as the “Messiah.”

Racism Alone? ��� Reflections on the Current National Divide

When I heard the decision not to indict the killers of EricGarner, my outraged response was, ���here we go again!���  If the Michael Brown case lacked moral clarity, the senseless tragedy of the Eric Garnercase was much more clear.  No matter whatthe circumstances were, here were two more African American men added to thelist of senseless killings, arousing strong reactions nationally andinternationally.

Some claim that these killings demonstrate the existence ofracist structures that permeate our society. Others claim that these killings resulted from criminal behavior or ���alack of personal responsibility.���  Whileboth positions point to contributing factors, they both continue to ignore theelephant in the room, namely culture��� a factor that dwarfs the previous two. 

We have made astounding progress against racism thanks tothe Civil Rights and Black Consciousness movements.  Yet in the ���hood, conditions have notimproved accordingly.  Today, there is a growingculture of dysfunctionality eatingaway not just at the ���hood, but at our larger society.  It is often government funded through wellmeaning but mismanaged subsistence programs. It is having devastating effects across cultures, yet is felt mostprofoundly in the ���hood.  Itis a culture derived from the old ���redneck��� South ��� a culture nurtured bystructures of oppression and one that wears down initiative and personalresponsibility ��� whose value system elevates and encourages anti-achieverism,fatherlessness, dependency, helplessness, hopelessness, self-sabotaging/self-destructivebehavior, fratricide, etc., and in extreme cases, nihilism. 

What we are witnessing today is more a cultural divide thana racial one.  I am by no means denyingthe reality of the remaining vestiges of racism; I am saying that racism byitself cannot fully account for the frustration of those who feel the sting ofnon-acceptance in, and hostility from, the larger society.  This is because valued behavior in theculture of dysfunctionality is often devalued in the culture of functionality,and vice-versa.

A major dogma of today���s politically correct milieu is, ���Valuesystems and cultures are equally valid; therefore, thou shalt not evaluate themlest ye become guilty of ���blaming the victim.������ Thus, without the culturalfactor, the entire problem of marginalization is attributed only to racism. This partly explains, perhaps, why the overwhelming majority of senseless Black on Black murders across the country do not arouse the sameintensity of anger.  It does not fit the narrativeof ���sola racisma��� (racism alone),leaving us with no adequate basis for rallying widespread outrage and protest.

Dimensions

Figure 1: The National Cultural DivideThe vast majority of African Americans are not bound by the culture of dysfunctionality.  Yet this distorted culture has gained a dominant influence among African Americans, aided largely by the mass media. However, the functional vs. dysfunctional is not the only cultural divide. There is also another dimension, namely, the dominant vs. subdominant (Figure 1).

Most African Americans have experienced some form ofracism.  There are few of us who haven���tsuffered or witnessed some form of overbearing police misconduct by White andnon-White officers.  Because thesubdominant culture tends to experience more oppression than the dominantculture, there tend to be divergent views of police.  Thus, while most in the dominant culture seerecent excessive police use of force from the perspective of the rule of law,many in the subdominant culture feel these incidents as paradigms of injusticeand oppression.

Furthermore, from the perspective of the culture ofdysfunctionality, it is easier to see police as an ���occupation force.���  From the perspective of the culture offunctionality, police tend to be seen as ���upholders of law and order.��� 

Hence, our current national crisis has uncovered anunfortunate point of contact between members of the subdominant culture andthose trapped in the culture of dysfunctionality ��� a suspicion of police.

In the wake of recent events, there is much talk of healingand reconciliation.  Unfortunately, astime passes there is a diminishing possibility for this.  Why? Because at the same time, our society is dumping its historic corevalues all in the name of ���inclusiveness��� and ���multiculturalism.���  Many of us have forgotten that appealing tothese essentially biblical core values made the Civil Rights Movementpossible.  We are increasingly losing thebasis for building a consensus to distinguish right from wrong, and justicefrom injustice.

If this current trendprevails, we will degenerate into a culturally balkanized society and everyonewill lose.

Paradigms

Oppression is sin plus power ��� the imposition of sin or itsconsequences on others with less power.  Thiscauses the oppressed to push back.  Asthey resist oppression, they tend to overlook their own sin, and the oppressionalone becomes the paradigm for all their problems.

Solomon said, ���there is nothing new under the sun.���  A similar scenario of national crisis happenedto the people of Jerusalem 140 years before the time of Nehemiah.  Recall that when the Israelites returned from70 years of Babylonian captivity, they had high hopes.  Opposition to rebuilding the temple delayedits completion.  However, as they beganto rebuild the city wall, the opposition succeeded in halting its constructionand destroying the work that was completed. Because their oppressors continued to thwart all attempts to rebuild thewall and restore the gates, the people of Jerusalem continued to be vulnerableand helpless.  This had a devastatingeffect on the Israelites.  As a result,they lost their vision and sense of dignity; their culture degenerated into chaos as they slippedinto apathy, self-sabotaging behavior and self-destructive life-styles.

If you asked any Jerusalem resident to describe theirpredicament, they would reply, ���The walls are broken down and the gates areburned with fire.���  They would identify Sanballatand Tobiah as their oppressors.  Whilethis paradigm of oppression was astatement of truth, it overlooked the Jew on Jew exploitation in Jerusalem,where the wealthy elite exploited the non-elite through tax manipulation andhuman trafficking.

For African Americanscaught in the culture of dysfunctionality, the comparable paradigm ofoppression has been racism.

Rethink

The ongoing unrest about Michael Brown, Eric Garner and others is a cryfor a new and overdue movement.  Fifty-plusyears after the Civil Rights and Black Consciousness movements, there stillremain unresolved problems and issues. What many protesters don���t understand is that the movement for whichthey foment will not be realized based on old worn out paradigms andslogans.  The new movement will need a newparadigm that will revolutionize our outlook, offer symbols with moral clarity,and promote rally cries that will articulate the essence of both.  

For example, the Civil Rights Movement weaponized thetheology of suffering that had been with us from the beginning of our Americanexperience.  The idea of theology as aweapon caused a major paradigm shift in our outlook.  Thus for the first time in the civil rightsstruggle, we knew we could actuallyeffect change.  Hence, the rally cry, ���Weshall overcome��� came forth and the Civil Rights Movement was born, making many gains before it degenerated into the civilrights industry.

The emergence of Black consciousness as a movement alsoresulted from a paradigm shift and a rally cry. As gains in civil rights advanced, we began to experience more fullyanother dimension of our American ordeal. Up to this point assimilation into the dominant culture was seen as keyto our success.  This was the generalconsensus.  However, as we experiencedgreater degrees of success, we began to more fully experience culturaldissonance in the area of aesthetics. Conformity to a Euro-centric standard of beauty was absurd for most ofus.  This phenomenon had moral clarity andgave rise to the rally cry, ���Black is beautiful.���  Unfortunately, the rising dominance of theculture of dysfunctionality has pushed us toward another refrain ��� ���Black isghetto.���

The politically charged left and right wing approaches tothe current crisis are woefully inadequate. They ignore the cultural factor because they lack a robust basis foranalysis and resolution.  Biblical wisdomstill stands as the source for true understanding.  It empowered the Civil Rights Movement andundergirds our sense of human dignity and worth as it affirms that we are inthe image of God ��� the foundation for ���Black is beautiful.���

The paradigm shift we need today involves recognition of thecultural factor in our current difficulties; we need to rethink what it meansto be African American.

Revolution

There is no such thing as a value system that accepts allvalues.  Likewise, there is no such thingas a successful movement that embraces all behaviors.  Just as the early advocates of ���Blackness���identified assimilation into the dominant ���White��� culture as ���anti-Black,��� wemust identify the culture of dysfunctionality and the resulting behaviors ascounterproductive.  However, it is notenough just to identify the crippling value system of this culture, we mustseek to free our young men from its grip ��� a nexus that continues to set themup to be devoured by the jaws of the rapacious ���prison industrial complex.���

Rising above this cultural morass will require an intense and gutsy form of discipleship.  It must first awaken our young men to thefact that they are being used as canon fodder by those who profiteer from the culture of dysfunctionality, namely, drug cartels, unscrupulouspoliticians, race hustlers and poverty pimps, etc.  Second, it must not only empower them fromsinfulness toward righteousness, but from dysfunctionality towardsfunctionality and from foolishness toward wisdom.

This partly explains whathappened in Jerusalem under the guidance of Nehemiah when he shrewdly marshaledthe resources at his disposal to empower the people to rebuild the city walland gates.  With biblical wisdom, he led themto rise above their cultural crisis through a Godly paradigm shift; Jew on Jewexploitation was ended, the affected families were restored, and the people regainedtheir vision and sense of dignity.

Ifdone right, the contemporary approach to discipleship will influence more than individualsand families.  It will also impact theculture itself through the use of powerful art forms like ���spoken word,��� video,hip-hop, blogging, music and drama, to name a few.

This task is fraught with opportunity and danger for thedisciple-maker, but it must be done. With God���s help, it can be done.

It is time for a new and different type of liberationmovement ��� a cultural revolution informed by Nehemiah,

anchored to a transcendent reference point and rooted in transformative biblical wisdom.

Racism Alone? – Reflections on the Current National Divide

When I heard the decision not to indict the killers of Eric Garner, my outraged response was, “here we go again!”  If the Michael Brown case lacked moral clarity, the senseless tragedy of the Eric Garner case was much more clear.  No matter what the circumstances were, here were two more African American men added to the list of senseless killings, arousing strong reactions nationally and internationally.
Some claim that these killings demonstrate the existence of racist structures that permeate our society.  Others claim that these killings resulted from criminal behavior or “a lack of personal responsibility.”  While both positions point to contributing factors, they both continue to ignore the elephant in the room, namely culture– a factor that dwarfs the previous two. 
We have made astounding progress against racism thanks to the Civil Rights and Black Consciousness movements.  Yet in the ’hood, conditions have not improved accordingly.  Today, there is a growing culture of dysfunctionality eating away not just at the ‘hood, but at our larger society.  It is often government funded through well meaning but mismanaged subsistence programs.  It is having devastating effects across cultures, yet is felt most profoundly in the ’hood.  It is a culture derived from the old “redneck” South – a culture nurtured by structures of oppression and one that wears down initiative and personal responsibility – whose value system elevates and encourages anti-achieverism, fatherlessness, dependency, helplessness, hopelessness, self-sabotaging/self-destructive behavior, fratricide, etc., and in extreme cases, nihilism. 

A major dogma of today’s politically correct milieu is, “Value systems and cultures are equally valid; therefore, thou shalt not evaluate them lest ye become guilty of ‘blaming the victim.’” Thus, without the cultural factor, the entire problem of marginalization is attributed only to racism.  This partly explains, perhaps, why the overwhelming majority of senseless Black on Black murders across the country do not arouse the same intensity of anger.  It does not fit the narrative of ‘sola racisma’ (racism alone), leaving us with no adequate basis for rallying widespread outrage and protest.
Dimensions
Figure 1: The National Cultural DivideThe vast majority of African Americans are not bound by the culture of dysfunctionality.  Yet this distorted culture has gained a dominant influence among African Americans, aided largely by the mass media. However, the functional vs. dysfunctional is not the only cultural divide. There is also another dimension, namely, the dominant vs. subdominant (Figure 1).

Most African Americans have experienced some form of racism.  There are few of us who haven’t suffered or witnessed some form of overbearing police misconduct by White and non-White officers.  Because the subdominant culture tends to experience more oppression than the dominant culture, there tend to be divergent views of police.  Thus, while most in the dominant culture see recent excessive police use of force from the perspective of the rule of law, many in the subdominant culture feel these incidents as paradigms of injustice and oppression.

Furthermore, from the perspective of the culture of dysfunctionality, it is easier to see police as an ‘occupation force.’  From the perspective of the culture of functionality, police tend to be seen as “upholders of law and order.” 
Hence, our current national crisis has uncovered an unfortunate point of contact between members of the subdominant culture and those trapped in the culture of dysfunctionality – a suspicion of police.
In the wake of recent events, there is much talk of healing and reconciliation.  Unfortunately, as time passes there is a diminishing possibility for this.  Why?  Because at the same time, our society is dumping its historic core values all in the name of “inclusiveness” and “multiculturalism.”  Many of us have forgotten that appealing to these essentially biblical core values made the Civil Rights Movement possible.  We are increasingly losing the basis for building a consensus to distinguish right from wrong, and justice from injustice.

If this current trend prevails, we will degenerate into a culturally balkanized society and everyone will lose.
Paradigms
Oppression is sin plus power – the imposition of sin or its consequences on others with less power.  This causes the oppressed to push back.  As they resist oppression, they tend to overlook their own sin, and the oppression alone becomes the paradigm for all their problems.
Solomon said, “there is nothing new under the sun.”  A similar scenario of national crisis happened to the people of Jerusalem 140 years before the time of Nehemiah.  Recall that when the Israelites returned from 70 years of Babylonian captivity, they had high hopes.  Opposition to rebuilding the temple delayed its completion.  However, as they began to rebuild the city wall, the opposition succeeded in halting its construction and destroying the work that was completed.  Because their oppressors continued to thwart all attempts to rebuild the wall and restore the gates, the people of Jerusalem continued to be vulnerable and helpless.  This had a devastating effect on the Israelites.  As a result, they lost their vision and sense of dignity; their culture degenerated into chaos as they slipped into apathy, self-sabotaging behavior and self-destructive life-styles.
If you asked any Jerusalem resident to describe their predicament, they would reply, “The walls are broken down and the gates are burned with fire.”  They would identify Sanballat and Tobiah as their oppressors.  While this paradigm of oppression was a statement of truth, it overlooked the Jew on Jew exploitation in Jerusalem, where the wealthy elite exploited the non-elite through tax manipulation and human trafficking.

For African Americans caught in the culture of dysfunctionality, the comparable paradigm of oppression has been racism.
Rethink
The ongoing unrest about Michael Brown, Eric Garner and others is a cry for a new and overdue movement.  Fifty-plus years after the Civil Rights and Black Consciousness movements, there still remain unresolved problems and issues.  What many protesters don’t understand is that the movement for which they foment will not be realized based on old worn out paradigms and slogans.  The new movement will need a new paradigm that will revolutionize our outlook, offer symbols with moral clarity, and promote rally cries that will articulate the essence of both.  
For example, the Civil Rights Movement weaponized the theology of suffering that had been with us from the beginning of our American experience.  The idea of theology as a weapon caused a major paradigm shift in our outlook.  Thus for the first time in the civil rights struggle, we knew we could actuallyeffect change.  Hence, the rally cry, “We shall overcome” came forth and the Civil Rights Movement was born, making many gains before it degenerated into the civil rights industry.
The emergence of Black consciousness as a movement also resulted from a paradigm shift and a rally cry.  As gains in civil rights advanced, we began to experience more fully another dimension of our American ordeal.  Up to this point assimilation into the dominant culture was seen as key to our success.  This was the general consensus.  However, as we experienced greater degrees of success, we began to more fully experience cultural dissonance in the area of aesthetics.  Conformity to a Euro-centric standard of beauty was absurd for most of us.  This phenomenon had moral clarity and gave rise to the rally cry, “Black is beautiful.”  Unfortunately, the rising dominance of the culture of dysfunctionality has pushed us toward another refrain – ‘Black is ghetto.’
The politically charged left and right wing approaches to the current crisis are woefully inadequate.  They ignore the cultural factor because they lack a robust basis for analysis and resolution.  Biblical wisdom still stands as the source for true understanding.  It empowered the Civil Rights Movement and undergirds our sense of human dignity and worth as it affirms that we are in the image of God – the foundation for “Black is beautiful.”
The paradigm shift we need today involves recognition of the cultural factor in our current difficulties; we need to rethink what it means to be African American.
Revolution
There is no such thing as a value system that accepts all values.  Likewise, there is no such thing as a successful movement that embraces all behaviors.  Just as the early advocates of “Blackness” identified assimilation into the dominant ‘White’ culture as ‘anti-Black,’ we must identify the culture of dysfunctionality and the resulting behaviors as counterproductive.  However, it is not enough just to identify the crippling value system of this culture, we must seek to free our young men from its grip – a nexus that continues to set them up to be devoured by the jaws of the rapacious “prison industrial complex.”
Rising above this cultural morass will require an intense and gutsy form of discipleship.  It must first awaken our young men to the fact that they are being used as canon fodder by those who profiteer from the culture of dysfunctionality, namely, drug cartels, unscrupulous politicians, race hustlers and poverty pimps, etc.  Second, it must not only empower them from sinfulness toward righteousness, but from dysfunctionality towards functionality and from foolishness toward wisdom.
This partly explains what happened in Jerusalem under the guidance of Nehemiah when he shrewdly marshaled the resources at his disposal to empower the people to rebuild the city wall and gates.  With biblical wisdom, he led them to rise above their cultural crisis through a Godly paradigm shift; Jew on Jew exploitation was ended, the affected families were restored, and the people regained their vision and sense of dignity.

If done right, the contemporary approach to discipleship will influence more than individuals and families.  It will also impact the culture itself through the use of powerful art forms like ‘spoken word,’ video, hip-hop, blogging, music and drama, to name a few.

This task is fraught with opportunity and danger for the disciple-maker, but it must be done.  With God’s help, it can be done.
It is time for a new and different type of liberation movement – a cultural revolution informed by Nehemiah, anchored to a transcendent reference point and rooted in transformative biblical wisdom.

Ferguson ��� ���We Don���t All Look Alike���

Photo Credit: Megan Sims @The_Blackness48, Howard University Student Body via USATodayA quiet rage has been inside me since the shooting ofMichael Brown on August 15 ���a rage I kept under control as I tried to be objective, and resist beingmanipulated by the strident and predictable rhetoric surrounding this senselesskilling.  However, as I watched Michael���sfuneral, that rage burned hot.  It broughtto mind the senseless and tragic deaths of other young Black men: Eric Garner, age 43 on July 17, 2014 in StatenIsland, NY; Trayvon Martin, age17 on February 26, 2012 in Sanford, FL.  I couldn���t help recalling the horrifying murderof Emmett Louis Till, age 14 on August 28, 1955 in the Mississippi Delta.  His body was fished out of the TallahatchieRiver after being beaten and shot in the head. The image of his mutilated and bloated body is still seared in mymemory.

Before youwrite me off for strident and predictable rhetoric of my own, you must knowthat these killings are not the only ones that have me incensed.  I am likewise enraged by the murders of thousands of young African American men in places like Chicago, Detroitand Philadelphia, where the killers happened to be Black.  I have lost personal friends in ���drive-by���shootings, simply because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrongtime.  In the case of Emmett Till, the motive was clearly racism. The cases of Michael, Eric and Trayvon certainly involved racism, but otherimportant factors were involved.  Racism alonecannot account for the countless Black on Black murders that happen withregularity across the country.  In thefinal analysis, the race of the one who pulls the trigger makes no differencebecause the result is the same: one more dead African American young man,gunned down for unclear reasons.  

Part of what outrages me is the self-appointed andopportunistic Black gatekeepers who continue to frame all of our tragedies only in terms of racism.  By so doing, they cannot account for Black onBlack murders because they don���t fit their ���racism-is-our only-hindrance��� scenario.  Obviously, racism is an ongoing issue weface, but it is not the only issue.  Surely we have a long way to go as a society,but most would agree that while racism is alive and well, it is not the monsterit once was.  The specter of the past is quickly being eclipsed by aclash of value systems.

We are in the midst of a cultural crisis amongst ourselves,and the events in Ferguson have illustrated it.  Part of this crisis is today���s ongoing battlebetween those who are ���life affirming��� and those who are ���life denying.���  The former are pro-Black because they are pro-human and the latter are anti-Black because they are anti-human.

Generally speaking, life-affirmers are the dominantinfluence in any culture.  However,lately life-deniers have gained an inordinate influence in African Americanculture.  Acting as wolves in Blacksheep���s clothing, they disguise themselves as pro-Black, while carrying and pursuingan anti-Black agenda.

The peacefulprotesters in Ferguson seem to have been motivated by the violation of theirlife-affirming sensibilities, andrightfully so.  The root of the community���sunrest was decades of frustration with the American justice system that hadfailed them for so long.  

At the firstsign of unrest, life-denying troublemakers, mostly from outside of Ferguson,rushed in to exploit the situation.   They included:

1) The opportunists ��� Those with no concern for justice or truth, who attempted to manipulate Ferguson���s vulnerable citizens with inflammatory rhetoric. Their chief concern was getting into the headlines to further their grievance industry agenda;

2) The criminals ��� Those interested in immediate personal gain by looting, burning and stealing property from Ferguson���s vulnerable citizens;

3) The nihilists ��� Agitators interested in the destruction of the social order for destruction���s sake. They deny that anything is valuable, neither Ferguson lives nor Ferguson property, or peaceful Ferguson values. These nihilists tried to provoke police violence with gunfire and by hurling Molotov cocktails and bottles of urine.

These anti-Black intruders and provocateurs had no concernfor the tragedy of Michael Brown���s killing aside from the gain the caseprovided for their own agenda.  Theyneither had respect for Michael���s family nor interest in the true advancementof African Americans.  They were like atsunami that overwhelmed the situation ��� sweeping others up in a dominating dynamicof their creation.

The opportunists consistently and willfully ignore the anti-Blackcriminals and nihilists. Recognition does not fit their narrative, and to makesuch an acknowledgment would expose their own anti-Black agenda.  If criminals and nihilists began thinking forthemselves, or even began to think betterof themselves, they would realize they too are being exploited, robbing theopportunists of their base for a lucrative, guilt-manipulating hustle.  Thus the opportunists��� survival necessitatesframing issues like Ferguson only inracial terms.

For wisdom, we need to look past the rhetoric of theopportunists to the original ideologues of modern Blackness, and how theydefined Blackness itself ��� men like Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael and FloydMcKissick.  They all stated that being ���Black���involved more than the amount of pigment in one���s skin.  ���Blackness��� was a state of mind, involving thevalues one lived by.  To that end, Dr. Maulana ���Ron��� Karenga soughtto buttress Blackness with a clear set of values.  In 1966, he created Kwanzaa to connectAfrican Americans with their African cultural roots and to enshrine life affirmingvalues into Black consciousness; values such as faith, purpose,self-determination, and cooperative economics, to name a few.

In essence, the pioneers of modern Blackness were all inagreement that in order to be Black onehad to think Black, and to think Black was to affirm life in the mostpositive of terms.  A life-denyinglifestyle had no place in the matrix of early Black consciousness; suchthinking was recognized and condemned as anti-Black.  Today, those distinctions have disappeared. 

We rightfully protest, then, when those in the dominantculture sweepingly state, ���we all look alike,��� ���Ferguson is looting and burningits own community,��� and other erroneous statements that consign Black people toa monolithic status.  We are not all thugsand degenerates.  I propose that thismentality led to the initial militaristic overreaction of the police to theFerguson protesters ��� overreactions that provoked more waves of anger thatbecame its own vicious cycle.  Much ofthe news media also played the ���we-all-look-alike��� game as they rhetoricallyconflated ���peaceful protesters��� with ���rioters.���

We don���t all lookalike; no group is monolithic, and we cannot all be lumped into the samecategories.  Unfortunately, we treatourselves as if this misguided notion is true when we include life-denyingimposters as if they are ���authentically Black.��� We continue to make this mistake in the name of ���political correctness,���and Ferguson teaches us that this is to our detriment.

Michael Brown himself stands as the hinge-pin between thesetwo positions.  He has come to exemplifythe struggle between authentic Blackness and anti-Blackness, between theaffirmation of life and its denial.  MichaelBrown, like so many other young Black men, had one foot in pro-Blackness as hewas headed for college, and the other foot in anti-Blackness as he was seen onvideo stealing from a convenience store. Despite the best efforts of his mother and father, he was without avalue-based sense of Blackness, and he was ���at risk��� because he was culturally adrift��� primed to be cut down by the forces of "they-all-look-alike-ism."

Had Brown not been cut down, he may have grown into a morelife affirming position; perhaps as an internationally renowned neurosurgeon, anationally syndicated newscaster, a White House cabinet member, a militarygeneral, a preacher of the Gospel, or perhaps as a simple and ordinary man wholoves his wife and leads his family well, like so many who sit in ourcongregations every Sunday.  Sadly, wewill never know.

It is time to rediscover the values that originallyempowered ���Blackness,��� allowing it to become the paradigm-shifting positiveforce it was from its inception.  To dothat, we need to rediscover biblical wisdom.  Wise application of the Word of God to ourlife situations, our identity and our purpose was the powerhouse that gave 19thCentury African American theologians the foundational truths upon which historicand modern ���Blackness��� was built ��� theologians like Rev.Henry Highland Garnet, Rev. Alexander Crummell and Rev. Henry McNeal Turner toname a few.

We must mourn the heartbreaking death of Michael Brown andothers like him across the country.  Aswe do, we must also recognize that these unnecessary deaths are part of acultural death ��� the death of Blackness itself at the hands of life-denying,anti-Blackness.



This post originally appeared on Ed Stetzer's The Exchange , Hosted by Christianity Today.

Ferguson — “We Don’t All Look Alike”

Photo Credit: Megan Sims @The_Blackness48, Howard University Student Body via USATodayA quiet rage has been inside me since the shooting of Michael Brown on August 15 — a rage I kept under control as I tried to be objective, and resist being manipulated by the strident and predictable rhetoric surrounding this senseless killing.  However, as I watched Michael’s funeral, that rage burned hot.  It brought to mind the senseless and tragic deaths of other young Black men: Eric Garner, age 43 on July 17, 2014 in Staten Island, NY; Trayvon Martin, age17 on February 26, 2012 in Sanford, FL.  I couldn’t help recalling the horrifying murder of Emmett Louis Till, age 14 on August 28, 1955 in the Mississippi Delta.  His body was fished out of the Tallahatchie River after being beaten and shot in the head.  The image of his mutilated and bloated body is still seared in my memory.
Before you write me off for strident and predictable rhetoric of my own, you must know that these killings are not the only ones that have me incensed.  I am likewise enraged by the murders of thousands of young African American men in places like Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia, where the killers happened to be Black.  I have lost personal friends in “drive-by” shootings, simply because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Part of what outrages me is the self-appointed and opportunistic Black gatekeepers who continue to frame all of our tragedies only in terms of racism.  By so doing, they cannot account for Black on Black murders because they don’t fit their “racism-is-our only-hindrance” scenario.  Obviously, racism is an ongoing issue we face, but it is not the only issue.  Surely we have a long way to go as a society, but most would agree that while racism is alive and well, it is not the monster it once was.  The specter of the past is quickly being eclipsed by a clash of value systems.
We are in the midst of a cultural crisis amongst ourselves, and the events in Ferguson have illustrated it.  Part of this crisis is today’s ongoing battle between those who are “life affirming” and those who are “life denying.”  The former are pro-Black because they are pro-human and the latter are anti-Black because they are anti-human.
Generally speaking, life-affirmers are the dominant influence in any culture.  However, lately life-deniers have gained an inordinate influence in African American culture.  Acting as wolves in Black sheep’s clothing, they disguise themselves as pro-Black, while carrying and pursuing an anti-Black agenda.
The peaceful protesters in Ferguson seem to have been motivated by the violation of their life-affirming sensibilities, and rightfully so.  The root of the community’s unrest was decades of frustration with the American justice system that had failed them for so long.  
At the first sign of unrest, life-denying troublemakers, mostly from outside of Ferguson, rushed in to exploit the situation.   They included:
1) The opportunists — Those with no concern for justice or truth, who attempted to manipulate Ferguson’s vulnerable citizens with inflammatory rhetoric. Their chief concern was getting into the headlines to further their grievance industry agenda;

2) The criminals — Those interested in immediate personal gain by looting, burning and stealing property from Ferguson’s vulnerable citizens;

3) The nihilists — Agitators interested in the destruction of the social order for destruction’s sake. They deny that anything is valuable, neither Ferguson lives nor Ferguson property, or peaceful Ferguson values. These nihilists tried to provoke police violence with gunfire and by hurling Molotov cocktails and bottles of urine.

These anti-Black intruders and provocateurs had no concern for the tragedy of Michael Brown’s killing aside from the gain the case provided for their own agenda.  They neither had respect for Michael’s family nor interest in the true advancement of African Americans.  They were like a tsunami that overwhelmed the situation — sweeping others up in a dominating dynamic of their creation.
The opportunists consistently and willfully ignore the anti-Black criminals and nihilists. Recognition does not fit their narrative, and to make such an acknowledgment would expose their own anti-Black agenda.  If criminals and nihilists began thinking for themselves, or even began to think betterof themselves, they would realize they too are being exploited, robbing the opportunists of their base for a lucrative, guilt-manipulating hustle.  Thus the opportunists’ survival necessitates framing issues like Ferguson only in racial terms.
For wisdom, we need to look past the rhetoric of the opportunists to the original ideologues of modern Blackness, and how they defined Blackness itself — men like Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael and Floyd McKissick.  They all stated that being “Black” involved more than the amount of pigment in one’s skin.  “Blackness” was a state of mind, involving the values one lived by.  To that end, Dr. Maulana “Ron” Karenga sought to buttress Blackness with a clear set of values.  In 1966, he created Kwanzaa to connect African Americans with their African cultural roots and to enshrine life affirming values into Black consciousness; values such as faith, purpose, self-determination, and cooperative economics, to name a few.
In essence, the pioneers of modern Blackness were all in agreement that in order to be Black one had to think Black, and to think Black was to affirm life in the most positive of terms.  A life-denying lifestyle had no place in the matrix of early Black consciousness; such thinking was recognized and condemned as anti-Black.  Today, those distinctions have disappeared. 
We rightfully protest, then, when those in the dominant culture sweepingly state, “we all look alike,” “Ferguson is looting and burning its own community,” and other erroneous statements that consign Black people to a monolithic status.  We are not all thugs and degenerates.  I propose that this mentality led to the initial militaristic overreaction of the police to the Ferguson protesters — overreactions that provoked more waves of anger that became its own vicious cycle.  Much of the news media also played the “we-all-look-alike” game as they rhetorically conflated “peaceful protesters” with “rioters.”
We don’t all look alike; no group is monolithic, and we cannot all be lumped into the same categories.  Unfortunately, we treat ourselves as if this misguided notion is true when we include life-denying imposters as if they are “authentically Black.”  We continue to make this mistake in the name of “political correctness,” and Ferguson teaches us that this is to our detriment.
Michael Brown himself stands as the hinge-pin between these two positions.  He has come to exemplify the struggle between authentic Blackness and anti-Blackness, between the affirmation of life and its denial.  Michael Brown, like so many other young Black men, had one foot in pro-Blackness as he was headed for college, and the other foot in anti-Blackness as he was seen on video stealing from a convenience store.  Despite the best efforts of his mother and father, he was without a value-based sense of Blackness, and he was “at risk” because he was culturally adrift — primed to be cut down by the forces of "they-all-look-alike-ism."
Had Brown not been cut down, he may have grown into a more life affirming position; perhaps as an internationally renowned neurosurgeon, a nationally syndicated newscaster, a White House cabinet member, a military general, a preacher of the Gospel, or perhaps as a simple and ordinary man who loves his wife and leads his family well, like so many who sit in our congregations every Sunday.  Sadly, we will never know.
It is time to rediscover the values that originally empowered “Blackness,” allowing it to become the paradigm-shifting positive force it was from its inception.  To do that, we need to rediscover biblical wisdom.  Wise application of the Word of God to our life situations, our identity and our purpose was the powerhouse that gave 19thCentury African American theologians the foundational truths upon which historic and modern “Blackness” was built — theologians like Rev. Henry Highland Garnet, Rev. Alexander Crummell and Rev. Henry McNeal Turner to name a few.

We must mourn the heartbreaking death of Michael Brown and others like him across the country.  As we do, we must also recognize that these unnecessary deaths are part of a cultural death — the death of Blackness itself at the hands of life-denying, anti-Blackness.



This post originally appeared on Ed Stetzer's The Exchange , Hosted by Christianity Today.

A Letter to Our Young Brothers and Sisters

This letter was written in response to the National Center for Family Integrated Churches' 2013 Panel, "The Worship of God - Q&A: Holy Hip Hop." 
UPDATE: (12/5/13) Several of the men on the above panel have issued apologies. Their comments can be found here, here and here.

UPDATE: (12/21/13) The NCFIC site administrators have removed the original video from the NCFIC web and blog sites.


To our dear brothers and sisters,

Our culture — within and outside of the Church — will always misunderstand your Kingdom work ... at this, you must not be dismayed.
You know better than anyone that we are in the midst of a devastating cultural crisis, a cancer that is destroying souls in our community.  This cultural cancer doesn't discriminate by socioeconomic class or by color, but merely takes different manifestations according to the hopelessness that festers in each of the despairing.  

We have seen the rise of ghetto nihilism, Wall Street nihilism, government nihilism, Hollywood nihilism, gender nihilism, and on and on.  Many of our self-appointed cultural gatekeepers are exploiting this crisis for personal gain, instituting programs and legislation that promise satisfaction, yet work against the liberating biblical principles we seek to teach.

For those who live and work in our most hopeless areas, be it in the city, the 'hood,' or in the 'burbs, it sometimes seems as if the deck is stacked against our Kingdom work.  And so, we carefully count each hard-won victory as precious Kingdom treasure — each life saved, each family mended, each young woman or man who comes to see themselves a bit more clearly through Christ’s eyes, know Him more intimately, and find their ultimate identity in Him.    

Thanks to your labor, God is not without human testimony.  Daily, for decades, you have been used to breathe new life into dry bones.  Yours has been a powerful and refreshing voice of redemption and cultural renewal.
Now, a new set of self-appointed gatekeepers has emerged who are out of touch with our most basic core concerns. 
Even more disheartening, these gatekeepers wear our family name ... the name of Christ.  They have decided that one of our many cultural facets — Reformed hip-hop — needs their permission to be valid and legitimate.  And while they, as brothers, certainly have as much right as we to speak of moral matters, they have impacted our community with an ill-timed and uninformed voice to assess our cultural and theological expression. 

Be assured; we do not need anyone's permission to teach or ‘do theology’ from our unique cultural position, nor are we required to justify ourselves to self-appointed Christian gatekeepers; they simply have no authority over us as our basis for cultural validation.   

We all have a tendency to confuse cultural norms with Biblical ones; yet this is especially harmful when done by the dominant culture of any society.  All too often the dominant culture is blind to the knowledge that they, too, have a culture that is in need of redemption at the cross.  

Ideally, as we grow, we learn to value cross-cultural interaction, and enter into fellowship that informs us of our blind spots.  However, this is radically different from one culture determining what is proper application of Scripture in the context in which another culture lives. To say it another way, one culture cannot use itself or its aesthetic as the standard to judge another; only the Word of God can make that assessment.   

Dr. John Frame’s broader interpretation of the regulative principle helps to widen our understanding of worship to include all spheres of life.  Frame gives us a helpful scriptural foundation for understanding Reformed hip-hop as a musical genre in the larger artistic milieu.
 
It is always preferable to bring our culturally dominant brothers and sisters along on our journey of theological expression and help them understand us, rather than just ignore them.  However, it is foolish to let dominant approval determine whether or not we continue to minister to the people in our own sub-dominant context.

And while we must constantly examine our own ministry motives and be open to legitimatecorrection, given the depth of our current cultural crisis we do not have the luxury of extended  preoccupation with illegitimate assertions.  We must be cautious stewards of the time we’ve been granted, wary not to spend it all educating Christians in the dominant culture while neglecting those among us who are still blind and searching for the Kingdom Door.  

Is it worth the trouble to press on from here?  Unequivocally, yes.  We need your unique voices to accompany the hands that labor; the didactic role of Reformed hip-hop is a powerful one.  When built on sound theology and done skillfully, it speaks to those to whom others cannot speak, and encourages those to whom they will not go. 

Of course, we do not limit ourselves to Reformed hip-hop as our singular expression of sound theology, but we may embrace it for what it is: a valuable tool that has brought understanding to a community that desperately needs a theology robust enough to carry the freight and weight of life.  

So do not hesitate to use every sound theological tool at your disposal to wage war ... the lives  of men, women and children are at stake.  Do not let this distract you from your call to battle the nihilism of our day, redeeming the very vehicle that nihilism hijacked and now uses to demean and destroy us.  Through this medium, what once brought death now brings Life; it does so in a reality that the dominant culture is often unwilling to engage — either physically, or even in philosophy. 

Those who accuse you are as absent in our communities as the fathers and mothers you stretch yourselves thin to replace.  Yet Christ is present — and we continue strong in Him. 

You are no one’s coward; you who stare down a full history of negation within and outside of the Church; you who hold a high view of Scripture and of the character of God, who strive to live above reproach to His glory; you who understand all too well the darkness from which you have been redeemed...

Indeed, He has brought us all 'from a mighty long way'.

We leave you with this: 

Be at peace among yourselves.  And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.  See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.  Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.  Do not quench the Spirit.  Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good.  Abstain from every form of evil.  Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 

He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it.

Laboring with you,
The Ellises, Carl and Karen

Undercurrents: A Perspective on Why the Trayvon Case Aches

How does one begin to explain this feeling? 

Korean culture has a name for it … they call it Han .   

Han . The overwhelming feeling of helplessness in the face of irreversible cultural sorrow; a cold fist that reaches deep into a people’s collective soul, only to pull away having grasped a fistful of emptiness and despair. 

Something… simply... is... not... right.

In light of the concept of “cultural Han,” a collective memory of tragedy and injustice can, in fact, seem primal and full of complex emotions. Han further holds the notion that such collective cultural memory is universal. 

There are descendants of Eastern Europeans alive today who cannot bear to hear the language of their forefathers’ Soviet oppressors without tears of cultural Han welling up in their eyes. 

Survivors of the Rwandan genocide may carry the memory of those lost to a season of slaughter at the hands of their own countrymen. This is Han.

For those who made their way to escape through the picked-clean-bones that littered Pol Pot’s Cambodian killing fields, this is Han.

For the surviving Jews, the Roma, the true Christ-followers and numerous other Western Europeans who still vividly recall the last century’s systematic slaughter and gassing of millions, this is Han.

For the communities of thousands of under-reported innocent bystanders in cities like Chicago, Philadelphia and Baltimore slain just this year, this is Han.

The Martin-Zimmerman verdict was, for some, just this visceral for many Americans of African descent. Regardless of the details of the case, for the average descendant of the slave in America one teenager’s death potentially carried the “historically haunting” memory of a million-plus souls lost to the sea or to the lynch-mob’s noose, dead by neglect, disease or overwork. For some, the verdict was a whisper; for others it was a cultural scream.

This, too, is Han.

Is there a culture in history on whose door Han has not knocked? 

If such a culture exists that has never known a collective depth of sorrow, then the people of that culture should be prepared; Han is not a respecter of persons, and may pay an unwelcome visit at any point in a culture’s history. 

Some cultures have not been visited by Han for many generations; as a result, time, dominance and privilege have erased their ability to recognize such pain in others. There are still others that feel that their culture’s Han is somehow different, perhaps even more painful or more intense than that of another. Yet with irreversible loss of life as the great and ultimate equalizer, it is all … Han. 

Some in our culture rightfully seek justice, while some mistakenly seek vengeance. Legislation is drafted to serve and protect the living, and due process is sought in the courts. And while some survivors feel that justice is served in extinguishing one life for another, there are stories of yet others who’ve found only emptiness in the public execution of their loved-one’s murderer.

In light of life lost, even when justice is served, the scale remains out of balance. 

When Han is applied to the finality of death’s realm, we see its frustrating, helpless and hopeless dimensions … the realization that no matter what course of justice is taken, the masses of dead cannot be restored. A human debit will always remain on the balance sheet, and the salve of justice, no matter how liberally it is applied, never … adequately … covers … the wound. 

This week, cultural outsiders who’ve watched the average African American wrestle with this collective Han may misinterpret this voiceless, internal struggle – that this case can, for some, evoke the weight and reminder of more than a million souls that cannot be revived – just as it does for others who’ve experienced a cultural trauma. 

For the outsider, the extremes of response don’t seem to match the stimulus. What appears to be a simple brush against calloused skin is actually the touching of nerve endings, raw and exposed. Rub up against it enough times, and the pain turns to a gut-level defense and protection of the sore. Soon, the outsider begins to distance himself while scratching his head, perhaps confused and fearful of inflicting more pain, or perhaps simply fearful of the heightened intensity of the response. 

Universally, with such a collective cultural angst buried deep inside, direct descendants who struggle to reconcile the effects of Han are often rocked by historical aftershocks. While on one level we may be reacting to the details of the case itself, on a deeper level some of us may also be reacting to the cultural effects of Han. Perhaps we as descendants don’t even fully understand the primal complexity and conflict of our own response. And so, many from numerous camps spend much time talking past and misunderstanding each other, deepening our social divides. 

Our culture will roll on. Social media is often commandeered by the voices on the extremes of an issue, those who either cry “too much” or “not enough.” Most of us stand somewhere in-between, understanding that there are still very real and critical unresolved issues in the African American context, but that they come from a variety of sources – from without and within. Legislators will legislate, analysts will analyze, concerned people will continue to serve, the apathetic will yawn, activists will rally, demonstrators will protest, the pundits will continue to opine, and opportunists will find new ways to exploit our collective Han. 

God has gifted the astute among us to help us understand ourselves as a nation, and help continue to move the scales of justice toward a functional equilibrium. Christ-followers, for example, are called to wisely resist injustice and evil against cultures and individuals wherever it’s found; many have given their lives to answering that call in a variety of arenas. We do what we can; we initiate positive movement with legislative changes, we vote responsibly, we blog our opinions, and we find comfort and healing through rational discussion in our personal conversations. 

Yet many of us come away feeling somewhat unsatisfied because none of our efforts or ruminations will completely resolve our Han. 

The truth is, not even the most gifted minds will find a satisfactory solution to the effects of “cultural Han,” or find a way to fully balance the weight of the scale that holds the masses of lost souls for a culture; nothing will erase the tragedy, or prevent reminders of the tragedies from recurring.

Like so many things for those in Christ, our pain is "already healed, but still not yet removed." In this framework, we needn’t be defined by our pain or oppression but rather informed by it, and we can recognize that all unresolved pain – even cultural pain – still has ultimate meaning. 

If such collective despair visits all cultures universally and proves to be such a powerful force in our personal reactions, is it possible to find release? Will the scales of justice ever fully balance? 

The Bible reminds us that only one Man in history has ever accomplished the restoration of a people, destroying humanity’s collective Han – that man is Jesus Christ. Apart from him, there is no relief from Han’s existential ache. 

From our vantage point, we only see the debit side of the ledger sheet. He is Himself the Credit and Balance for our cultural sorrow, both in this life and the next – the only one able to satisfy perfectly everyone’s longing, to account for the lives lost, and to dispense the measure of justice each needs. 

Unlike the ground that cried out in despair when Cain slew Abel, the grave in which Christ was buried could not contain his declarations of “Life – Justice – Mercy!” for all who put their faith in him. In conquering death, he accomplished the reversal of the world’s greatest injustices in the face of man’s inhumanity to man – be they national or global, collective or individual.

Christ has accomplished the reversal of the greatest injustice of all – humanity’s cosmic treason against God.

Having done so, he is the only One who can wipe the tears of Han from any peoples’ eyes.

Only he can fully bring the heavy side of justice’s scale into perfect balance.

Karen Angela Ellis holds a Master of Fine Art from the Yale University School of Drama and a Master of Art in Religion from Westminster Theological Seminary, and is happily married to Carl Ellis, Jr. Karen writes about theology, identity and human rights ... you can follow her on Twitter @KarAngEllis.

An “Illiberal” Liberalism: Why Black Folk Can’t Get Ahead

While many people are loyal to a single news outlet in their homes, my wife and I take in a considerable amount of daily news from a variety of viewpoints – domestic and foreign, liberal and conservative, and much more.  A few nights ago, Fox News featured an audience of articulate African American citizens who identified themselves as “conservatives.”  What caught our ear was host Sean Hannity’s teaser for the show: he announced that African American conservatives “don’t enjoy freedom of speech” in their own country.  With our curiosity piqued, we tuned in.
As we listened to the audience describe the disdain they had experienced from fellow African Americans for their conservative affiliation, we realized that, experientially, we had much in common with them.  We don’t subscribe personally to either the conservative or liberal ideology; we have as many agreements with both as we have disagreements. 
Yet with few exceptions, one thing remains fairly consistent: when we express our disagreement with the prevailing “liberal” agenda, we’re often tagged with the same epithets that leftists use to besmirch these conservatives.  We seldom get this kind of reaction when we disagree with conservatives.  We find this ironic, since by definition, to be “liberal” is literally to be “open to new ideas and willing to debate the issues.”  However, our so-called “liberal” detractors have often proven themselves to be illiberal — that is, not open or willing to debate the issues.  Because they have a doctrinaire suspicion of differing ideas, they personally attack, insult, and marginalize those who disagree — especially conservatives. 

It is clearer to me than ever, that we live in a climate dominated by political and social illiberalism.  If I subscribe to the aforementioned definition of liberal, there is a question that must be asked before I can throw my hat into the conservative ring: “How ‘liberal’ will conservatives prove themselves to be?”  While Mr. Hannity’s show covered much territory in its brief hour, this was the crucial question they failed to explore.  I’m persuaded that without addressing the deeper dynamics, the current liberal/conservative debate will continue to be frustrated by the extremes on both sides.
A Tale of Three Cultures
In today’s America, there are at least three cultural distinctions; a dominant culture, a sub-dominant culture and a culture that’s mainstream.  Before the late 1960’s, mainstream culture and White culture were virtually the same; Black culture was sub-dominant to the two.  Today, mainstream culture is an amalgam of elements from both dominant and sub-dominant cultures.
As I see it, the greatest conflict lies in the differences between how the dominant and sub-dominant cultures operate.
The orientation of the dominant culture is toward preservation of things as they are; after all, our flawed human nature dictates a desire to cling to power.  It’s not an American problem; the pattern can be seen globally as the dominant culture typically marginalizes many of the core concerns of the sub-dominant culture.  Given our flawed human nature, this should come as no surprise. 
The orientation of the sub-dominant culture is toward change; those without power want to gain it, and in order to do so, alteration of some sort must occur. 
Historically, liberals have gravitated toward change while conservatives have gravitated toward preservation.
It’s Not What You Say, It’s How You Say It
It’s also significant to note the use of language in the discussion.  While it is true that in general terms the values of African Americans are closer to conservatives, in terms of language and cultural orientation, Blacks respond more readily to liberals.
Today’s conservatives tend to use the language of the dominant culture, while today’s liberals tend to use the language of mainstream and/or sub-dominant culture.
Indeed, liberals have learned what conservatives have not: how to ‘speak’ to the African American diaspora, and by doing so appear to appeal to the community’s broad core concerns.

However, this appeal is often merely superficial, as it exists only on the level of language and visceral response.  If we are to effect significant change, we as a community need to see beyond the language and deal with the substance. 
If we dig more deeply beneath the surface of liberal rhetorical style, we would discover that not all public policies developed under the banner of “liberal” are helpful in addressing African American core concerns.  In fact, some are destructive.  Many who claim to be “liberal” push public policies that work against empowerment and encourage dependency, but the language they use makes it sound “right.”  However, not everything that sounds right is right.
Similar things can be said of public policies that claim to be “conservative.”  Yet conservatives still have many valuable contributions to make such as public policy proposals that take an empowerment approach.  Their message is muddied, however, by the dominant cultural language they employ.  This makes their ideas sound mean-spirited and out-of-sync with African American concerns.
He who controls the language of the culture has the greatest power to shape the culture.  As long as conservatives ignore this linguistic reality, attracting African Americans will prove to be a challenge; they will either continue with their current methodsI believe that if we are going to move forward as a community who has distinctive concerns in America, we need to evaluate political and social ideas as they stand on their own, without regard to their ideological association.
 Principled Change
Like many liberals, sub-dominant independents like my wife and I have an interest in change.  What we want to know is, according to what standard will change be effected?  If change means bringing this society into greater fidelity with the transcendent core principles of true freedom, justice and equality, then we have no problem standing with liberals in this cause.  This is principled change, and these principles have been the bedrock of our progress.  If, on the other hand, change necessitates discarding the core principles, then we oppose this ‘far-left’ brand of liberalism because this is change without principles, or unprincipled change.
Like many conservatives, sub-dominant independents like us have an interest in preserving our core principles.  If this is the aim of conservatives, then we have no problem with standing with them in this cause.  This is principled preservation.  If, on the other hand, “preservation” means propping up the existing unjust state of affairs, then we oppose this ‘far-right’ brand of conservatism because it is unprincipled preservation.
The true political and social distinction for African Americans should not be liberal verses conservative, but principled verses unprincipled.  The principled stance is the ideal position for positive change – the ‘sweet spot’ on which we can best operate.

The unprincipled are not committed to true freedom, justice or equality; they are after dominance and power.  If left unchecked, the unprincipled will be able to use the liberal or conservative cause as a Trojan horse for a corrupt and capricious agenda – people who will redefine and pervert the core principles accordingly.

Unprincipled (‘far-right’) conservatives seek power through preserving what’s left of the old unjust status quo.  This ultimately leads to entrenchment of oppression and permanent marginalization. 

Unprincipled (‘far-left’) liberals on the other hand seek dominance and power through establishing a new unjust status quo.  This ultimately leads to a government of men, not of laws.  We may be in the favor of the government today, but what recourse will we have if we fall out of favor tomorrow?

No matter which side we choose, if we don’t think critically, we will ultimately lose.

Conclusion
Any current discussion must take into account that today’s current liberal/conservative argument is geared to the dominant culture, not the sub-dominant.  While I am encouraged to hear African Americans naming and discussing unfruitful public policy, African Americans should weigh out whether they want to be drawn into this conflict since the dominant culture currently makes it clear that our core concerns are not on their radar.

I, for one, am certainly eager for this discussion.