Part I
by Roderick MacIvery
The Black church is the single most authoritative religious force within our community. It is, furthermore, our only continuous anchor to the orishas loas and ancestors of our past. Still more, the church has served both as dissuader and catalyst in our most necessary social and political struggles. Yet because It is seldom consciously Afrocentric, it is often a controversial institution. The nature of the controversy reveals the fundamental weakness of the church which unfortunately seems little altered by the debates over objectives, functions, and rituals. There has to be a general regeneration of the black church. Possibly, this renewal, might occur simultaneously with the foreseeable intellectual resurrection. Nonetheless, whether or not its transformation occurs in conjunction with a general black awakening, it must occur. Without the full participation of
the church we cannot have a genuine re-creation. In fact our history shows that the church, sooner or later, establishes itself as transmitter of the new visions within our community. The work of Albert Cleage, James Cone, and Cornel West in productng the groundwork for committing the churches to the collective consciousness is remarkable.
It is now possible to make an analysis of the church and then make some comments about its direction. First, while the church is the most dominant institution within the black community, it is not a united church in any political, social, or religious sense. It is, however, united symbolically as the black church; but the consequences of this fragmentation are not overcome by any reference to symbols. What then is the nature of the church's authority? It is the individual wills of the preachers that constitute the power of the church. Those who minister to the flock control not only the religion but the pocketbooks and the politics of the flock. It is the recognition of this fact alone which has traditionally brought old and new white politicians into the community to beg the preachers for votes.
The church leaders control more followers than all of the protest organizations. For example, there is no American civil rights organization that commands as many followers as the president of the Black Baptists. Yet that president has never used that power to bring about an Afrocentric collective imperative. In any single community, while the various congregations are autonomous, the Baptists usually represent a considerable force. In much the same way the paramount Bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church is a formidable power. As leader of the oldest black institution, he commands the respect that comes with tradition and heritage. The history of the black protest movmenet in the nineteenth century, before and after emancipation, parallels the history of the American Methodist Episcopal Church. And while the A.M.E. has lost its nineteenth-century zeal it remains potentially productive, socially and politically. There are numerous other churches most controlled, either administratively or theologically, by white churches, e.g., Adventists, Churches of Christ, Jehovah Witnesses, Methodists, Episcopalians, etc. Yet, collectively, the church remains a force with which all pretenders to black power must reckon. These churches dispense favors, on the right people, like an old uncle gives candy to nice nieces and nephews. But like an old uncle the Christian church often refuses to see new realities, perhaps it cannot because of its own contradictions. A new consciousness would depose the church and institute Afrocentricity as the principal ideology.
Another aspect of the church community is the indigenous Christian movements. These lively and colorful original religious activities further reflect the pervasivenessof the church. Notably in the twentieth century have been the organizations led by Daddy Grace, Father Divine, and Prophet Jones. These movements have several traits in common: (1) charismatic leadership, (2) total submission to their leader, and (3) unyielding discipline. Unfortunately, appearances and performances frequently have taken the place of substance in these movements. The charisma of the leader is sustained by showmanship and dramatic displays. Followers become so devoted to the leader that they would give him (almost always a man) their earthly possessions if he asked. In fact, many have no existence aside from the shadowy glory of the charismatic leader. Total submission is the price the followers pay for what they see as total security. For them the exchange is more than fair, it reflects the benevolence of the charismatic leader. Often the more flamboyant the leader, the more devoted his followers are to him as their special savior.
While these smaller churches are not as prevalent as the Baptists and A.M.E. churches, they do represent the aspirations of a large segment of the black community. Much like these churches are the sub-stratum storefront and shotgun barrel churches that seem to occupy every comer not already occupied by a gasoline station. They are usually headed by a "leader" who believes he is charismatic, frequently he is not more than a distraught preacher who was ousted from a larger church If this is the case, then his storefront is referred to as a splinter group of a larger church. But even so these secondary churches account for a sizable number of church people and money. This feature of the black Christian community alone could provide considerable support to the coming rise of the spirits.
When the infiltration by young men and women, conscientious cadres, takes place these and other churches will painfully come into the forefront of religious leadership. They will be the innovators, the politically aware partners to Afrocentricity. The church, as a whole, has vacillated on too many issues, wagged its tail too eagerly for the wrong reasons, and lost the trust and confidence of many youthful supporters. They will only return when they are given the choice of a relevant ideology. Deliberate and willful attempts must be made to change these organizations into Afrocentric units. In the next few years, this conscientious cadre will go to church.
They will make of the Black Church what the Ukranians made of their churches, what the Armenians made of theirs, and what the Jews have made of their synagogues: places where children receive cultural and historical training. Such training cannot be left to the schools. Since we have so many churches in the community with buildings going unused on Saturdays, why not Saturday schools?
Clearly the church institutions is the major group force in the black community, outpolling the political parties as well as the civil rights organizations. Yet it has traditionally represented a conservative corpus of opinion and has not fully participated in the emergence of the various enlightenment periods in black history. They have usually started outside the church. Martin King's movement was an exception He was able to captivate most of the Baptists and many members of other churches, primarily because he was a Baptist preacher, his faith was their faith, and as a man of God he combined the best qualities of the charismatic leaders with the passionate rhetoric of the black Baptist to translate grievances into marches and discrimination into sit-ins, walk-ins, and pray-ins. It was the black Baptist civil rights movement. While a few A.M.E. ministers held some secondary posts, the top positions in King's movement were always held by Black Baptist preachers. Notwithstanding its relatively broad appeal it failed to include the principal leaders of other black denominations. Perhaps Rev. Shuttlesworth, Rev. Abernathy, Rev. Walker, and Rev. Jackson, Rev. Young, and a host of lesser Baptists represented a united front emotionally and theologically that may not have been so with nonBaptists in the chief positions. But this is history, it only serves us as the launching pad from where we make the next ascent The church, possessing significant power, figures in the Afrocentric resurrection.
Go to: Part II