When the "Occupy Wall Street" movement began several weeks ago, there were many who were aloof to its mere existence. I was one of them. I saw the posts on Twitter and on Facebook. I saw it featured on local and national news reports but still had not paid enough attention to the revolution to learn about it. When one of my friends, who is very active in “Occupy Chicago”, expressed his concern that very few African-Americans were engaged in the movement at local and national levels, I had to come clean. Here I am: a PhD student engaged in social activism and completely ignorant to one of the greatest social movements of my time.
So I educated myself and began to see how vital “Occupy Wall Street” is to providing a voice to those who have been disproportionately affected by the current financial crisis. Those who have long since been ignored by corporate businessmen and policymakers were now at their front door demanding they be recognized. As I began to think about the beauty and potential of this movement, I jokingly said to my friend “You can occupy Wall Street. I’ll occupy the Church.”
But why not occupy the Church?
While that is a profound question, a more fundamental one to ask is “Where is Jesus in the midst of this current economic disaster?” Jesus was always engaging the poor; His ministry fundamentally served them. Before He left, He charged His disciples to continue the work He began. Continuing that work is more than a “weeping endures for a night” or “hold on until your change comes” sermon. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ most recent report, the national unemployment rate is 9.1%. However, the unemployment rate for Hispanics is 11.3% and 16% for African-Americans. Continuing the work of Jesus is utilizing every resource available to alleviate the problems concerning “the least of these”. This is why we need to “Occupy the Church”.
When was the last time we experienced a movement that held the Church accountable to its mission of outreach and social justice? With the rate of unemployment climbing and the problems associated with that unemployment continuing to plague minority communities, it is time to demand accountability from our religious institutions. The mission of and mandate on the Christian church is to be like Christ. Those who followed Jesus, and those who did not, never ceased in soliciting assistance from them. And he gave it. His church is to do the same.
So what should “Occupy the Church” look like? While I would love to see every member of inner cities and rural communities journey to the nearest church and find ways to hold them accountable, I believe the movement should be both proactive and reactive. During “Occupy the Church”, there should be:
- A call to discontinue building and capital campaigns that do not meet emergent church safety needs and are not directly related with outreach. A family life center does not constitute outreach. Donating that money to families in jeopardy of foreclosure does. We can no longer afford to celebrate the wealth used to build new edifices when the communities that surround it are impoverished.
- An increase in the benevolence given by a church and the number of people who can receive it. Members are required to be “financially active” before they request financial assistance from some churches. Additionally, many can only request assistance once per calendar year. Given our nation’s current economic condition and the mission of Christ, this movement would see all people helped by God’s house.
- A collective and consistent rally of religious leaders demanding elected officials create opportunities that will return employment to minority communities. We can no longer afford for politicians to file into our sanctuaries to appeal for votes during election cycles but, once elected, use their vote in favor of policies that do not employ or sustain us.
- The critical engagement of young people, and the culture to which they subscribe, that will allow healthy conversation from which the Church can grow. As the Church seeks to fight against the injustices of the poor, it must take every advantage to gain warriors. The strongest voice is that of the youth. Productive conversation can both save a generation and propel a movement.
- An ethnically integrated approach to solving the issues surrounding poverty. The current economic crisis has impacted us all. However, African-American and Hispanic communities have always had less expendable income per household than their White counterparts. It is the responsibility of every Christian to aid their siblings. Inequality continues to polarize but, through authentic faith, we can unite and work effectively together.
“Occupy the Church” does not seek to dilute the importance of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement. It is necessary. However, what “Occupy the Church” will do is extend the reach and impact of the message to those who would be its greatest benefactors. “Occupy Wall Street” seeks to effect change on Main Street. “Occupy the Church” would have its greatest impact on Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. “Occupy Wall Street”, though impactful, will never raise questions most pertinent to us and seek to answer them. The issues “Occupy the Church” cannot ignore include:
- Almost half of African-American and Hispanic children live in poverty
- African-American women continue to lead the nation in new HIV/AIDS cases
- The fight against immigration continues to treat our brothers and sisters from across the borders in a way not intended by God
- Judicial sentencing continues to disproportionately affect African-American and Hispanic communities
This movement will not be easy. It will mean many who once had no accountability will be held accountable. It will cause those who profess to be Christ-like to actually become Christ-like. Most importantly, it will ensure that the message of Jesus remains accurate and effective in combating those social injustices that grieve our land. Who knows how long “Occupy Wall Street” will continue? But “Occupy the Church” should remain in effect until the Savior returns.
Weekly, I will raise an “Occupy the Church” issue for discussion on my blog, Selah and Amen: Righteous Critique. Additionally, I will appeal to religious leadership, at both local and national levels, to begin the dialogue in their congregations that will transform their communities. I encourage you to follow me on Twitter @CandiceBenbow and join the conversation #OccupyTheChurch.
©CMB, 2011
A few days ago, Shaun King informed everyone of his intention to step down as pastor of Courageous Church in Atlanta, Georgia. For many, including myself, we saw it as a blow. Courageous represented a breath of fresh air in the American (especially Black) Church System. We were tired of church as usual and, from the outside looking in, Courageous seemed to give an alternative to that. I know I wasn’t alone when I saw Courageous being a national movement, with “churches” everywhere.
I didn’t know who Shaun King was until a few months ago. A friend of mine texted me about a young pastor going off on Twitter, calling another pastor a rapist. I read Shaun’s timeline and was livid, to say the least, and I told him as much. That’s not what we do. That’s not who we are. While I was glad a pastor in Atlanta was FINALLY speaking out about the sexual abuse against children in churches there, I didn’t think he handled it correctly or effectively. Unbeknownst to me, I had a few good friends attending Courageous and they called to tell me about their pastor and the church. Honestly, the more I learned about Shaun King, the more I liked him. He was quirky, he approached ministry in the most radical of ways and it seemed genuine.
But this post isn’t about Shaun King. It’s about the thinly veiled attempts by pastors today, through social mediums, to exalt themselves as true spiritual leaders while, at the same time, discrediting him and his thoughts. More importantly, it’s about how that’s doing absolutely nothing to advance the kingdom and Christ’s mission. In talking with a few of my friends in ministry, many advised me to not write this. One said “Those dudes are treacherous. Be careful.” The sad thing is he was wasn’t talking about mobsters; he was talking about pastors- men and women who lead spiritual and religious congregations. But let’s be honest: the celebrity strand of Black Christian leadership and their minions are cold and unfeeling. But growing up in Winston Salem, North Carolina and the Missionary Baptist Church taught me two things: how to fight in the spiritual and in the natural.
With that said, let’s go.
How does this work exactly? How do you publicly crucify a preacher using your Twitter timeline while privately soliciting sex (from men and women) through your direct messages? Yes #TwitterPastors, the email notifications of your direct messages are flying across the country faster than Airtran. Are they teaching this in seminary? Do they also teach you how to add to your Twitter followership daily while your church members are leaving in droves over your fiscal/spiritual/social/personal irresponsibility? Seriously; what are we doing here?
I said a few weeks ago that today’s Black pastor sees himself as a celebrity while yesterday’s saw himself as a servant. I caught flack for it then. I stand behind it even more today. It’s so very easy to bully from behind HootSuite, TweetDeck or UberSocial. There’s nothing revolutionary about tweeting a Scripture of “correction” from your iPad.
It amazes how vocal pastors are on Twitter today but were mute in regards to the continued sexual objectification of children at the hands of religious leadership a year ago.
I’m in awe how quickly pastors used Twitter to vilify anyone who spoke negatively against the late Pastor Zachery Tims just a few weeks ago but are doing the exact same thing to Shaun King today.
Fascinating, isn’t it, how people can find every Scripture under the sun to demonize someone else’s behavior but can’t find one that will cause them to shut up and work inwardly on themselves?
Is this that “move” and “flow” we’re always talking and tweeting about? Can I step out of it, then?
We can preach these sermons, on Sunday, about ignoring “man” and only listening to the voice of God and doing what He tells us to do but, on Tuesday, we’re using 140 character spaces to mock someone for doing just that. It’s pathetic. I don’t know the specifics of Shaun King’s departure from Courageous Church and I don’t believe what the majority of pastors are saying about it. What I do know is I admire anyone who’d rather freely give financial resources to members and the community than have a cap on the benevolence fund. I tip my hat to any pastor who sees radically changing the conditions of the impoverished as more than just “a string of community service projects”. I applaud anyone who recognizes, when his presence in a place hurts more than it helps, it’s time to go.
But I don’t know if God told Shaun to leave his post at Courageous and it’s not our place to use our personal leadership experiences to answer that. If God did tell him to leave, I am proud that He courageously walked further into His purpose. If He didn’t, God’s forgiveness and grace extends to him like it does us all. But what I do know, what I’m 100% sure of, is that God didn’t tell any of His shepherds to call their follow laborer “immature”, “foolish”, “unwise”, “ridiculous”, “irrational”, “a punk” or “reaping what he sowed”. That I do know.
It is my prayer that one day we all (myself included) can put ego and platform building aside and truly be about our Father’s business.
At one point, I thought about getting some popcorn. I mean…it was getting that good. The jabs were landing ever so effectively. The punch lines were classic. Amidst the texts/calls/BBMs asking the same question “Did you see that?!”, I knew I wasn’t the only one watching the festivities. People everywhere were looking at this. This was one for the history books. No, we weren’t watching season finales or reality television reunion shows. With our feet crossed- some of us even in pajamas- and phone in hand, we all tuned into an epic Twitter battle royal on Tuesday. However, instead of our favorite rappers sparring at each other using 140 characters or less, it was our professors- some of Black America’s leading scholars and thinkers- going in.“Is this Revenge of the Nerds?”, a good friend jokingly asked. Ohhh but it was so much more.
On Tuesday, the world became aware of the full extent of Dr. Cornel West’s disdain for President Barack Obama. The tenured Princeton professor and philosopher called him a “Black mascot” for Wall Street oligarchs and corporate plutocrats. Insisting that President Obama has ignored the plight of the poor and Black in America, West also explained his personal issues with the President. Apparently, while campaigning for him, Dr. West called and prayed for (then) Senator Obama and he didn’t call him back. And to add insult to injury, Dr. West wasn’t even given tickets to the Presidential Inauguration. He had to watch it from his hotel room with his mother and brother, while the hotel worker assisting him with his luggage had a ticket. Oh and then there’s Dr. West’s claim that President Barack Obama, the leader of the free world, came up to him last year at the Urban League's 100th Anniversary Convention and “cussed” him out.
Let me first say this- I think Dr. Cornel West has contributed profoundly to significant discussions in America. I love his work. Taking Dr. King’s book Why We Can’t Wait and drawing parallels of progression from it with Dr. West’s Prophesy Deliverance is one of the highlights of my academic career. But I, like a great number of people, gave West a glaring *side eye* for his remarks in Chris Hedge’s piece. I’m not one of those people who thinks President Obama is above critique; I was highly critical of a healthcare system without a public option. So Dr. West and others who can substantively critique leadership are necessary. But let’s be real: that’s not ALL Dr. West is doing. Unfortunately he (and others) has begun to believe his own hype to the detriment of his message. It’s a sad day when the one who told us you can’t save and lead the people if you don’t serve and love them is upset a hotel bellhop was granted the access he was seemingly denied. Then, later that evening with Ed Shultz, he said he wanted to affirm Pres. Obama’s humanity and protect him from attack. Where is Ed Lover when you need him? C’mon Son. We don’t believe you; you need more people.
And, as scholars do, many took West to task for his disparaging, unfounded and egotistical remarks. For instance, many referred to Dr. Melissa Harris Perry’s piece, calling West to task, as the academic equivalent of Nas’ “Ether”. I mean…..there were only two things I thought about after reading it: playing “Ether” and using my best Fabolous voice to say “Niiice”. It was good. It was grounded in scholarship and rooted in fact. But, though we’d seen a great deal of back-and-forth all day after West’s interview was published, it seemed things within Black academia took a slight turn after Harris Perry’s piece was posted. My jaw dropped when I read "It is becoming increasingly difficult to take @mharrisperry seriously." tweeted by Eddie Glaude, Princeton professor and West’s good friend and protégé. And that- my friends- is when, for me, it got real. Several other professors and scholars waged scholastic war via Twitter on, what can only be classified (in my opinion) as the truth.
While Harris Perry has no need for anyone to defend her (she did an awesome job of that on her own), I couldn’t help but be amazed at how quickly scholastic critique evolved into personal attack. Black scholars can hide behind nine syllable words and a string of phrases they believe the average person wouldn’t comprehend, but many known an academic “yo mama” when they see it. This isn’t the first time Black scholars have gone at it through social networking mediums. However, the below the belt comments fielded Tuesday evening showed just how low public intellectual discourse in Black America can go when pushed. As a student admiring the contributions of many of these scholars, I wonder what type of tone is being set in the Black intellectual community. Why does it seem we can’t get points across without personal attacks? I’m not watching Rihanna and Ciara go at each other’s throats through subliminal tweets, I’m watching highly educated and well paid individuals undermine their colleague’s credibility.
This has gone beyond feeling slighted because President Barack Obama didn’t announce his presidential candidacy on, what some believe to be, THE African-American platform (let’s be honest- that’s exactly what started all this in the first place). This has gone beyond any structured critique of leadership and policy implications. This has become personal. On Tuesday, Princeton professor Imani Perry tweeted “Cornel West opened the space. Period. And in my tradition we respect elders, period. Disagreement can be consistent w/that.” I agree. However, when we see West imply one of the most engaged leaders within our community is weak and can be “easily manipulated”, we do not see respectful disagreement. When we see our educational leaders refer to the work of their colleagues as “bombast and bellicosity”, we do not see respectful disagreement. When we see them resort to petty remarks of misspelled tweets just to get a point across, we do not see respectful disagreement.
Those who accuse the African-American community of not having a substantive critique of the Obama Administration can’t then become hypocritical and unwilling to accept a substantive critique others have of them. I purchased every book Dr. West has published. I even own and have read the majority of the works of the intellectuals who squared off on Twitter. I support them and believe their voices are necessary. However, in a community where our children hear the first African-American President of the United States referred to as someone who is afraid of “free Black men”, the last thing they need to hear are their future professors picking on each other.
With so many in the Hip Hop generation climbing the Ivory Tower, academics and pop culture will continue to intertwine. Beef is good. It’s good in the music. It’s even good in academia. It keeps us on our toes, ensuring our product- whether music or philosophy- is fresh and most beneficial to the progression of the people. But beef is problematic when it becomes personal. It’s counterproductive. Most importantly, it’s just straight up whack. It was entirely too many degrees and too much money talking reckless on Twitter Tuesday. Using my best Florida voice, I ask “Where they do THAT at?” Sadly, in the African-American intellectual community.
