PBS
is airing the first extended interview with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright tonight.
Bill Moyer will pummel him with hard questions about his patriotism and the
politics of the pulpit, and Wright won’t back away, instead standing firm on
his principles. And he should. When I
heard that Wright was a UCC pastor, I wasn’t entirely surprised. I know
something of the UCC.
The United Church
of Christ (Trinity’s “Mother church,” if you will) is a very progressive,
very liberal touchy-feely large-ish Protestant denomination. I know that
because although I was not a member of the church, I was employed by them—as
staff news writer and web news editor---for four years. I resigned my post for
a variety of reasons, not least among them the fact that while there is a lot
of high-minded white liberal goo-gobb about inclusion, racial harmony and
reconciliation—just like everywhere else in America—there is very little of it to be found within the
organization. UCC churches are either black or white, with some rare mixed
congregations in the suburbs. And while
you may find Wright’s comments strident, I assure you his fiery brand of
oratory is consistent with other black UCC churches. There is a frustration
that some black folks in the pews have with the powers that be, and church
leaders would be remiss not to make it plain on the pulpit. The whole reason
there is a black church tradition is because whites did not want to worship
with The Help. So the hotness from the altar? Well, that is as it’s ever been,
and as it should be. Right On. Everything is not for everyone to understand,
and white people particularly can’t seem to understand that.
The broader question about The
Wright Controversy, for me, has nothing to do with Barack Obama, politics
or patriotism. There are three places in America that black people could always
speak freely and plainly: the church, the beauty salon and the
barbershop. Those places were black institutions. You could say whatever
you want within those walls, and know there weren’t any white folks around needing
an interpretation or demanding an explanation. Everyone around you knew
your language, your idioms, your rhetoric and the roots of your righteous
outrage: you were among family. Elsewhere, like clubs and bars, white folks
slum in hopes of picking up pieces of your peculiar jive and jungle music. In
the confines of the church, the salon or the shop, you had no worries. Because
white folks, literally, had no business in any of those places.
But now that the mainstream media has seen fit to come out
of pocket and violate the sanctity of the church, where can we go to speak our
mind without having to answer to The Man? There is this very colonial motif of
having to filter black free voices through a sieve of white ignorance and
paranoia. What you say—and what other black people in your vicinity say!—has to
be state-sanctioned and approved by people who have no idea what you are
talking about, and you’d be a fool to explain it to them. “Negro Tour-Guide” is
an under-paid position with lots of work, but no benefits.
All indications are that The Rev. Wright is
unapologetic. And Thank God for
that. Because The Wright Question is, if
you can’t speak freely and plainly in church without consequence, where are you
free? What is your freedom worth if you are not entitled to an opinion you can
share—in any matter you like—among friends?
