Segregation and Separate Conferences

[Tom Wetmore]

I urge you to take the time to watch this whole sermon. It is time we wake up and do something about this.

[Tom Wetmore]

I have maintained for some time now that this is the one thing that has delayed the Lord's return. Jesus declared that everyone will know his followers because they love one another. This is the sign, the seal of God. Not the Sabbath. Our Sabbath worship should be a fulfillment of that sign, not the sign itself. Until our worship demonstrates that love, the unity for which Jesus prayed in his last prayer for us, we are not sealed. As long as the Church, the body of Christ, including the Adventist Church, remains racial divided to any extent, we will remain here on earth, shackled by the mark of the beast called Babylon, the origin of all division and confusion. Choose you this day whom you will serve...

[Dr. Shane]

I attend a multi-ethnic church. Over 20% of our members are minorities. We have Whites, Hispanics, Filipinos and Indians. I am not aware of any African American members. I am part of an inter-racial marriage myself. So I am all for integration.

I believe that any reform or transformation of the regional conferences has to come out of those conferences themselves and not from a white pastor or church leader. The black churches are not segregated from the regular conferences and that is a "little" detail that Dwight left out of his sermon. Black churches can choose to belong to the regular conference or to join a regional conference. The regional conferences still do a fine work of focusing on reaching the black populations and they also provide many leadership positions for black believers.

I think the case could be made for expanding the regional conferences to include other minorities like Hispanics, Asians and Native Americans. Some areas of the country do not have regional conferences and could perhaps benefit from them.

There is a big elephant in the room that some do not want to address. The white population is diminishing in the NAD churches while the minority population is growing. Within a generation the regular conferences are going to have more minority members than white members if the current trends do not change.

The issue isn't so much a color issue, like Pastor Nelson would like us to believe. The issue is much more about culture. The fact is that birds of a feather really do flock together. Yes, society is *integrated* yet if we look at the lunch tables in a corporation's break room or university cafeteria we see people from the same cultures grouping together naturally without anyone encouraging or requiring them to do so. If we dissolve the regional conferences we will still have black churches and they will still have over 80% of their members from the African American culture.

I am not a big Limbaugh fan at all but one of his main criticisms of liberals is that they seek symbolism over substance. That came through in this sermon. Pastor Nelson is worried about what *outsiders* think about us when they look and see the regional conferences. There is a desire to get rid of the regional conferences so we will not *appear* to be racist. So we forget about the effectiveness these conferences have shown at reaching into the black populations and the opportunity for church service they have provided to scores of our black members. If our greatest concern is about symbolism - how things look - then I agree we need to get rid of the regional conferences. If our greatest concern is substance - reaching every segment of society with the gospel - then I think the regional conferences still have a place in our church structure.

[nuff sed]

Shane wrote, "then I think the regional conferences still have a place in our church structure."

Several years ago the Regional Conferences decided that the Denominational Retirement plan was not good enough for them and against counsel from the 'brethren', withdrew from the system and set up their own. As you indicated it is the Regional Conferences who are going to want to 'integrate' and not the other way around.. At this time I see no inclination on their part toward this. Nuff sed

[lazarus]

I don't really understand why there is not usually any really honest talk about the reasons why regional conferences were set up in the first place.

The SDA church has never really had a healthy discussion about the racism within its ranks. Until we have that open and honest discussion we will never move forward. Come let us reason together.

[CoAspen]

Wow!

What a powerful sermon! His appeal is not about the what the world thinks but rather what Christ asked/prayed for us...oneness! He give praise to what was accomplished in the past and challenges the church to change, for the better, to fulfill Christ prayer. Awesome! His focus was not about color, but separation which is the opposite of oneness. It is time for us to quit defending what has been done or trying to explain current perceptions and move forward in 'Oneness'!

A big Amen to his sermon.

(The heading of the video is a bit misleading...but then, it did get viewers!)

[Dr. Shane]

The SDA church has never really had a healthy discussion about the racism within its ranks. Until we have that open and honest discussion we will never move forward. Come let us reason together.

I find it a bit offending that a white pastor is trying to push the envelope to dissolve the regional conferences. If there is to be a change, it needs to come from the regional conferences themselves. I actually think it could be beneficial to expand the regional conferences by allowing Hispanic and Asian churches to join them.

Let me illustrate with a story.

I helped start a Hispanic church in Minnesota. We rented a Lutheran church where we would meet. Our baptisms were done in a neighboring SDA church about 20 miles away and all our members' memberships were on the books of that church. That church's pastor was a nice man but he could not speak Spanish. When the rumor came floating that he was going to be moved out, we wrote a letter to the conference asking that the next pastor be bilingual as most of our members did not understand English. The conference replied that they felt it important that the mother church have a pastor from the same ethnic background and they would explore ways to serve the needs of our church. Note: we were not asking for a Hispanic pastor - a white guy that could speak Spanish would have been fine. So the conference hired a part-time pastor for us that had to get a regular job. The mother church was not growing and they got a full-time, white, English-speaking only pastor. Our Hispanic church was baptizing about 10 souls a year with much more potential. We got a part-time pastor that had to find another job in the secular world so he could feed his family. When he was diagnosed with leukemia the conference did nothing for him.

When I first announced I was marrying a latino girl my pastor was headed to the very school with the local academy on a Maranatha trip where she was studying in El Salvador . I gave him some photos to deliver to her. When he gave them to her, she says he gave her a look of disgust and would not allow her any time to chat with him (and he was going to be her future pastor). When I told a young man in the church that he should only date someone within the faith so that he could see Jesus in her eyes. He answered by saying only if she wasn't a spic. (spic is to latinos what n***** is to blacks). Another church member called my fiance a *china doll*. Is racism alive and well in the Adventist church? Absolutely.

I suspect if the President of the Minnesota Conference had been latino, our mother church would have gotten a pastor that was bilingual. "A church should have a pastor of the same ethnic background." No racism there. Right?

[Dr. Shane]

His appeal is not about the what the world thinks but rather what Christ asked/prayed for us...oneness!

We have oneness now. That is accomplished through the world church. We are one with the Europeans churches, the African churches, the Latin American churches and the Asian churches. We take the same baptismal vows. We all study the same Sabbath school lesson. We all get together every five years as ONE. Don't fall for the smoke and mirrors. The regional conferences are members of the same unions as the regular conferences are. The unions are members of the NAD. We are all one church.

[John317]

Good posts, Shane. Having bi-lingual family, I can certainly relate.

[abelisle]

Whatever the reasons for this are or who should initiate this, the NAD church is a de facto racially segregated church, especially within our urban centers. We might be one church in our beliefs but not in the way we socialize as we worship.

Alex

[Dr. Shane]

We might be one church in our beliefs but not in the way we socialize as we worship.

I agree with that completely. In fact, it was one of the points I made in this thread already. Changing our church structure isn't going to change how ethnic groups continue to socialize and worship. The best way to change that is to be supportive of inter-racial marriage. One two people from two different races marry, their families begin to socialize with each other. Furthermore, their families start to view the people of the other race differently and their changed view influences still others. Of course, the children of an inter-racial are less likely to become racists themselves.

That said, my children have white skin and I have caught them at times making comments about Hispanics that is not appropriate. At such times I remind them that they are Hispanic too and their children may well come out looking very dark. So even racially mixed children can turn out racist if not raised right.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

His appeal is not about the what the world thinks but rather what Christ asked/prayed for us...oneness!

We have oneness now. That is accomplished through the world church. We are one with the Europeans churches, the African churches, the Latin American churches and the Asian churches. We take the same baptismal vows. We all study the same Sabbath school lesson.

I remember when an ss teacher told me that about the ss quarterly. I was quite shocked that she, who had been in the church all those decades and I had been out, did not have a clue what that "oneness" meant.

I say this respectfully, my brother. Those things you mentioned are not the "oneness" that God/Jesus is looking for. That is just indoctrination. If they were then perhaps the catholic church has far more "oneness" than we do.

[abelisle]

You're preaching to the choir Shane. I'm a mulatto. My father was black (from Belize) my mother white (from Latvia) and my church is one of the very, very few truly multi-ethnic churches in NYC.

Your suggestion is a good one but will be a while in coming. In the metro NYC area, the Northeastern Conference(Regional) coexists with the Greater NY Conference and ironically they are both black - one West Indian the other Afro-American. Then as the demographics filter down, the rest of the churches in both conferences are fragmented by ethnicity, ex. Haitian, Filipino, Hispanic, Ghanian etc.

I sure hope Heaven isn't going to look like this!

Alex

[Dr. Shane]

Those things you mentioned are not the "oneness" that God/Jesus is looking for.

I will certainly concede that the "oneness" Jesus is looking for is open to interpretation. That said, I don't think dissolving the regional conferences is the oneness Jesus is looking for.

[teresaq]

I attend a technically black church which has now become 3-in-1. (How do you like that? lol )Black, Samoan, Latino, but has a bit of every "thing" else. The blacks set the "tone" of the church and that is the same as the white church I attended growing up.

My observation and opinion is that there are several factors at play. What stage some are at, liberal/conservative, some are a mix of SDA and "other" beliefs, are a few that come to mind.

I have come to the conclusion that we won't be able to clean up the "mess", partly because various groups have different ideas of how the church should be, and apparently we don't really understand what "oneness" means.

I think that while we individually should make the effort for understanding it won't be til the sunday law is enforced that the church will be what God intended. Then we will know for sure what that is supposed to be.

But that's just my 2 cents.....

[CoAspen]

Quote:

I have come to the conclusion that we won't be able to clean up the "mess", partly because various groups have different ideas of how the church should be, and apparently we don't really understand what "oneness" means.

I agree....maybe if everyone would simply go back and listen to the sermon, read the texts that were quoted...well, I think it is rather plain and simple! We need to stop over analyzing each and every word that Christ said and just contemplate what we are being told. The gospel is simple!!

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

Those things you mentioned are not the "oneness" that God/Jesus is looking for.

I will certainly concede that the "oneness" Jesus is looking for is open to interpretation. That said, I don't think dissolving the regional conferences is the oneness Jesus is looking for.

I probably could have gotten my point across in a much better way.

[Tom Wetmore]

I think you missed the point Nelson was making. It was not simply getting rid of the regional conferences. It goes much deeper than organizational unity. It is personal. It is hard to be in a spirit of unity with someone that you never interact with and don't even know by name. It is difficult to be in spiritual unity with someone that you never worship with.

[nuff sed]

"Northeastern Conference(Regional) coexists with the Greater NY Conference and ironically they are both black - one West Indian the other Afro-American."

Abelisle...........You hit the nail squarely on the head......There is no difference in color between the the majority of the GNY Conference constituents and the Northeastern Conference. The difference is 100% cultural. From what I have seen most of the Caribbean 'blacks' consider themselves 'British' and don't really feel that they have much in common with so-called 'African Americans....

Nuff Sed.................

[lazarus]

. From what I have seen most of the Caribbean 'blacks' consider themselves 'British' and don't really feel that they have much in common with so-called 'African Americans....

Nuff Sed.................

I have to disagree strongly. As someone who is British and of Caribbean descent I have a different take. The strongest ties that UK Adventist black people have in Adventism with other conferences and cultures is the connection with regional conferences in the USA.

As a member and a Pastor, over the years, the people that we could best relate to would be African-American Evangelists, Pastors, educators and administrators. That's just the way it was. If we wanted to have an evangelist for a tent meeting it would be an EE Cleveland, or Dick Barron only occasionally it would be Dwight Nelson or Mark Finely. Routinely we would invite African Americans to present at our conferences and Pastors meetings.

In my opinion you could not be more wrong. Of course there would be exceptions but it is generally the rule.

The fact that you say "so called" is illustrative of your perspective on the African-American view of themselves. You don't seem to understand or perhaps accept their need to name themselves in this way.

Black Adventists in the UK have had a similar experience when it comes to dealing with White majority Adventist administrations. In fact Methodist and Baptist blacks have had similar experiences.

[lazarus]

I think you missed the point Nelson was making. It was not simply getting rid of the regional conferences. It goes much deeper than organizational unity. It is personal. It is hard to be in a spirit of unity with someone that you never interact with and don't even know by name. It is difficult to be in spiritual unity with someone that you never worship with.

Let me go further.

I have found Seventh-day Adventist whites less accepting, less understanding, more racist than white non-Christians, atheists etc. Non-Adventist whites are more willing to listen, engage in healthy debate and honest exchange in terms of experiences and ideas when it comes to the race issue.

Tom is right, it goes much deeper than organizational structures. It about Spirituality and a willingness to forgive, apologize for past hurts and all that goes with the history of racism in the Adventist church.

Perhaps we need an Adventist truth and reconciliation commission.

[Overaged]

The fact that you say "so called" is illustrative of your perspective on African-American's view of themselves. You don't seem to understand or perhaps accept their need to name themselves in this way.

[lazarus]

I don't have a "need" to name myself, according to race or color of my skin. I guess you would, if you had to, call me MWGA. (married white guy Adventist). Then my identity would be complete. My black friends call me "white wash."

Quote:

Sometimes a case for discrimination is made where there isn't one

Thank you Sir for reinforcing my point.

[John317]

You don't seem to understand or perhaps accept their need to name themselves in this way.

But many black Americans don't name themselves "that way." I never heard black Americans referring to other blacks as "African-American" when they're having a conversation with other blacks. In my work, when a black "client" was reported by black staff, they were never called "African American" but simply as a "black kid."

I know quite a few blacks who don't want to be called "African-American." They prefer to be called American just like anyone else. (Of course I know that this doesn't describe everyone. Many do want to be called "African-American," especially by whites.)

For me it would it be like wanting to be known as "English-American" or "German-English-Irish-Scotch American."

Many people in Mexico don't consider blacks as "American." They think of white people when Americans are mentioned because they consider blacks as "African-American," not as American.

I understand the social/racial/historical issues involved in the name "African-American," but personally I think it would be beneficial to all Americans if they let it be known they want to be called an American and if they referred to themselves and each other in that way. That's how I think of all Americans anyway.

[lazarus]

Quote:

But many black Americans don't name themselves "that way."

Of course, its a free country. Enough use it and accept it for it to have become part of common parlance. I'm sure there are Native Americans who don't like that phrase, Muslim Americans etc. I found that white Americans have more of a problem with those designations that anyone else.

This discussion may be better served in another thread.