On racial expectations

[TimV]

I lived in South Africa under Apartheid, where different races were only allowed to vote in their own area, for for their own leaders. Apartheid ended, and there were democratic elections for the first time.

We got our first Black President, and during the run up to the election there were passionate emotions in all the ethnic groups. Whites, Coloured and Indians were all nervous, because they knew a Black was going to win, and that there were historic grievances between those groups and Blacks. Blacks were excited, since they had been taught that getting the vote meant that the Huxtables on the Bill Cosby Show was really the way all Blacks in America lived, and that by putting their "x" under a picture of Nelson Mandela they would get cars, a nice house, lots of money and a beautiful family.

During the run up to the elections Blacks in the back of the pick up trucks used to transport labor would call out to each other slogans praising the New Era. They would be overcome by excitement.

Then after Mandela came into power things really didn't change. Actually they got quite a bit worse. And the feeling in the Black community turned from unrealistic expectation to a sort of melancholy hopelessness.

I see history repeating itself now. And since I'm in kind of an unusual position of having seen it before from an place where I could stand back and objectively watch it unfold, I'd like to offer a few observations.

There won't be any major changes. White people here in the US don't need to start hording guns and food. People should always have weapons that they know how to use, and a bit of food etc.. on hand for emergencies. But that's all. The world will go on, and there will be grocery stores open in even the long term future.

Black people have be given great opportunities here in the US, but they haven't always had a fair shake. That doesn't excuse bad behavior on the part of Blacks any more than the Irish mistreatment by the British (and it did happen, even if the Irish exaggerate too) excuses an Irish American punching a British tourist. But the righteous indignation expressed towards the behavior of some Black people needs to be tempered with the realisation that we're dealing with individuals rather than the whole race, and there isn't a secret conspiracy by Blacks against White Americans to destroy all of us anymore than there is a secret conspiracy by Arabs to destroy the West.

I have noticed that much of the anger projected against Mideasterners is a sort of transfer of the anger and fear many White demographics have towards Blacks here in the US. For me sitting a bit on the sidelines it's as clear as day.

And for Blacks, of which thankfully we have many here on the PB I have noticed the long suffering with which you have treated so many of the Obama diatribes here that have had an 'edge' to them. I was so thankful for Jessica's post yesterday since she was so clear in making her sorry story very fair, and crediting one of that crowd for helping her husband.

And while I am not so concerned about the Black people here getting the same sort of unrealistic hopes up that my Black workers in South Africa did, I'd still suggest my Black brothers and sisters keeping an eye on that as well.

It's just so easy to forget what the other guy is feeling. Those of you who remember especially my older posts will know that I'm not being falsely contrite when I say that the slow realization of myself having not considering other peoples feelings is coming back to haunt me in a way I hope no one reading this is haunted.

Even something that is so fair and just, like patrolling our boarders can offend the many Hispanics we have reading, if we forget our audience and deviate from the just and righteous indignation into offensive stereotypes.

The Kingdom isn't going to be built by any particular race or human political structure. It's us working together under the rule of the Great King who has adopted us into the same family.

 

[Tim]

Just a quick question, and sorry if this has been addressed before here on the PB.

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

This is really just a rhetorical question because I resent when people only feel satisfied when 'one of their own' is in power. I would hope we would all be glad if a godly man were in power, no matter what he looks like or what ethic group he identifies with. It should be that 'one of our own' refers to someone who is a Bible-believing Christian man who fears God.

 

[ThomasCartwright]

That doesn't excuse bad behavior on the part of Blacks any more than the Irish mistreatment by the British (and it did happen, even if the Irish exaggerate too) excuses an Irish American punching a British tourist.

Tim

Another sweeping generalization that would be hotly contested by many Ulster Presbyterians. If you want to pull rank on this, I was brought up in Ireland and it is frankly nonsense to claim that the British mistreated the Irish. You have swallowed the Kennedy family propaganda hook line and sinker! You have also insulted thousands of Reformed believers who have spilled their blood defending their right to preach the Reformed faith in Ireland.

Did you know that the various kingdoms of the island of Ireland were initially handed to the English Monarch by Pope Adrian IV? Adrian IV during his reign issued a papal bull, Laudabiliter, granting dominion over Ireland to the English monarch, Henry II. He hoped that Henry II would conquer the Christian Church of Patrick and bring it under Rome. You may want to read up on the 1641 rebellion or the true history of St Patrick before indulging in revisionism again:

St. Patrick

 

[Herald]

Just a quick question, and sorry if this has been addressed before here on the PB.

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

This is really just a rhetorical question because I resent when people only feel satisfied when 'one of their own' is in power. I would hope we would all be glad if a godly man were in power, no matter what he looks like or what ethic group he identifies with. It should be that 'one of our own' refers to someone who is a Bible-believing Christian man who fears God.

Tim,

Obama attaches his identity to being black. He has never embraced his partially white heritage. That was his choice.

 

[Tim]

Fair enough.

 

[DMcFadden]

Just a quick question, and sorry if this has been addressed before here on the PB.

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

Black was considered a "bad" thing. Any amount of it would stigmatize one as Black. Laws against miscegenation once popular in part of this country, for example, would have prevented Obama from marrying a "white" woman. For historical reasons, therefore, Mr. Obama had little choice but to call himself Black. Oh, btw, have you ever looked at him? With his 50% Kenyan pureblood, he is quite a bit darker than a lot of the people claiming to be African-American activists.

I'm not surprised that he calls himself Black. What choice did he have? A more interesting issue is that when he was vying for power, some of the activists in his party did not consider him "black" enough in the sociological sense: he did not have slave roots which many of them take to be the sine qua non of "understanding" the Black expeience in America.

I was amused to see some commentators observe that with his African roots, his ancestors might have been among the ones that sold other Africans into slavery in America. Now that he is POTUS, most of this stuff has passed by the boards. He is the most powerful man on earth and earned his spot in a free election.

 

[BlackCalvinist]

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

In addition to Bill's answer, Tim..... 60 years ago the 'half-white' explanation wouldn't have flown if Obama was alive and went to a 'white only' water fountain. One look and there would've been nothing but 'what's wronng with you, boy ? cantcha read thuh' sign ? It sez white onleh'" and the bats and bricks would have come out to help with the 'literacy lesson'.

 

[Hippo]

That doesn't excuse bad behavior on the part of Blacks any more than the Irish mistreatment by the British (and it did happen, even if the Irish exaggerate too) excuses an Irish American punching a British tourist.

Tim

Another sweeping generalization that would be hotly contested by many Ulster Presbyterians. If you want to pull rank on this, I was brought up in Ireland and it is frankly nonsense to claim that the British mistreated the Irish. You have swallowed the Kennedy family propaganda hook line and sinker! You have also insulted thousands of Reformed believers who have spilled their blood defending their right to preach the Reformed faith in Ireland.

Did you know that the various kingdoms of the island of Ireland were initially handed to the English Monarch by Pope Adrian IV? Adrian IV during his reign issued a papal bull, Laudabiliter, granting dominion over Ireland to the English monarch, Henry II. He hoped that Henry II would conquer the Christian Church of Patrick and bring it under Rome. You may want to read up on the 1641 rebellion or the true history of St Patrick before indulging in revisionism again:

St. Patrick

The British did mistreat the Irish, this mistreatment was however generally hundreds of years ago which for me largely invalidates it as a justification for the recent and present troubles.

In recent times (albeit forty years ago now) the majority protestants have "mistreated" the Catholics in Northern Ireland (thats democracy for you and took the form of favouritism by local government and some rather brutal policing) but this was largely corrected by means of Westminsters attempts at benign interference which just upset eveyone concerned and ended up in a veil of tears.

 

[ThomasCartwright]

The British did mistreat the Irish, this mistreatment was however generally hundreds of years ago which for me largely invalidates it as a justification for the recent and present troubles.

In recent times (albeit forty years ago now) the majority protestants have "mistreated" the Catholics in Northern Ireland (thats democracy for you and took the form of favouritism by local government and some rather brutal policing) but this was largely corrected by means of Westminsters attempts at benign interference which just upset eveyone concerned and ended up in a veil of tears.

Both unsubstantiated allegations. I lived through the latter period and this is not an established fact. Where was this "brutal policing" occurring? No evidence of systematic discrimination has ever being objectively documented. For instance, the so-called "one man one vote" civil rights movement actually was the application of a UK wide law of local government franchise that actually resulted in the 1960s of less Protestants having a local government vote. Still believe the propaganda if you like.

 

[Hippo]

Still believe the propaganda if you like.

Likewise.

 

[LadyFlynt]

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

In addition to Bill's answer, Tim..... 60 years ago the 'half-white' explanation wouldn't have flown if Obama was alive and went to a 'white only' water fountain. One look and there would've been nothing but 'what's wronng with you, boy ? cantcha read thuh' sign ? It sez white onleh'" and the bats and bricks would have come out to help with the 'literacy lesson'.

But at the same time, from having a friend that grew up in EStL during that same time period, he would have been picked on by blacks for "not being black enough" looking. Oh and TCK's claim him also...because he spent quite a few formative years, totally out of our home culture...so I'd say he doesn't fit in either box.

 

[Hippo]

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

In addition to Bill's answer, Tim..... 60 years ago the 'half-white' explanation wouldn't have flown if Obama was alive and went to a 'white only' water fountain. One look and there would've been nothing but 'what's wronng with you, boy ? cantcha read thuh' sign ? It sez white onleh'" and the bats and bricks would have come out to help with the 'literacy lesson'.

But at the same time, from having a friend that grew up in EStL during that same time period, he would have been picked on by blacks for "not being black enough" looking. Oh and TCK's claim him also...because he spent quite a few formative years, totally out of our home culture...so I'd say he doesn't fit in either box.

I think that the importance is not that Obama is mixed race, it is that his black heritage does not derive from the african american civil rights tradition. This is why he was quite unwelcome to many balcks in the USA black establishment.

This adds an interesting dynamic to the whole situation, he does not have the same "victim" baggage as some so he may actually tread the middle ground which has so far not been possible in American racial politics.

 

[Herald]

In addition to Bill's answer, Tim..... 60 years ago the 'half-white' explanation wouldn't have flown if Obama was alive and went to a 'white only' water fountain. One look and there would've been nothing but 'what's wronng with you, boy ? cantcha read thuh' sign ? It sez white onleh'" and the bats and bricks would have come out to help with the 'literacy lesson'.

But at the same time, from having a friend that grew up in EStL during that same time period, he would have been picked on by blacks for "not being black enough" looking. Oh and TCK's claim him also...because he spent quite a few formative years, totally out of our home culture...so I'd say he doesn't fit in either box.

I think that the importance is not that Obama is mixed race, it is that his black heritage does not derive from the african american civil rights tradition. This is why he was quite unwelcome to many balcks in the USA black establishment.

This adds an interesting dynamic to the whole situation, he does not have the same "victim" baggage as some so he may actually tread the middle ground which has so far not been possible in American racial politics.

Mike, make no mistake, Obama is not treading the middle ground. He is displaying every sign of governing from the far, far left. You're right in assessing that his racial identity does not stem from the civil rights era. I believe he views his racial identity as a means to further his socialist ideology.

 

[Hippo]

Politics is very complex, right now Obama has to satisfy those who backed him but in a year or two he may have some more freedom. Whether he uses this freedom to reach out beyond his historic agenda is what will be interesting. Politics is rarely made up of good guys and bad guys with no middle ground (of course Ted Kennedy is the exception that proves the rule).

 

[SemperEruditio]

This is all well and good but what are the racial expectations of our Reformed brothers/sisters. We can talk all day and night on the only race being the human race however I bet dollars to doughnuts if I walk into 95%+ of the congregations board members attend it would be a smorgasbord of the different shades of white skin.

We are all depraved and the depravity of the lingering racism in American Christianity is very real and prevalent. It even sneaks up into those who would never for a second believe that they could be accused of being racist. In my short stint now as a PCA member I have met with more than a handful of elders and not once have I been asked if God's call on my life has been academia or seeking a call to a church in suburbia. Without fail what has come up is "inner city church planter." I've had RE's ask how best to approach Black people. I've told them it is the same way you approach a Cuban which leaves them baffled because "who's Cuban?"

What needs to happen is loads of prayer and open meetings on racial reconciliation. White America has wronged and continues to propagate the theology of a slave doctrine. Where people of color are only seen as workers who need to go into the field and harvest. No different now except the "field" is the inner-city and the "harvest" are increased membership on the rolls. Now I am very, very aware at the wrongs that the "Black" Church promotes. Having come out of a Black church steeped in the traditions of the Black Church and attending seminary where Black Liberation Theology is emphasized I know all too well how blackness has taken priority over holiness and how salvation is seen as corporate because of the Middle Passage.

As my rant continues perhaps the problem is not that Reformed folk are afraid to speak to people of other races but just afraid in general. Everyone prays like a Calvinist but in our evangelism we are more hyper-Calvinist. "If God has saved that Black/White/Latino/Asian...over there then he will end up in a church somewhere....I hope it's mine so we can at least say we are now 'multi-ethnic....."

 

[BJClark]

SemperEruditio;

In my short stint now as a PCA member I have met with more than a handful of elders and not once have I been asked if God's call on my life has been academia or seeking a call to a church in suburbia.

Have you asked THEM about it?? Or expressed such calling on your life to them? If not, why not?? Or did you just walk away in frustration and disgust when they mentioned inner city churches? and how to address a black person??

Did you attempt to open the dialogue or is it your expectation they they should be asking you about it?? (on that note, how many of the men here, have had their elders come to them and ask them about such things?? or have you gone to them to seek advice on that?)

 

[steven-nemes]

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

YouTube - Barack Obama IS WHITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ww]

Doesn't Obama have one white parent and one black parent? Why is he always considered to be black if his ethnic heritage is actually 50-50? Why have black Americans 'claimed' him as their own? Shouldn't white people have as much 'claim' to him?

YouTube - Barack Obama IS WHITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Ravens]

As my rant continues ...

Well, you were right about one thing: It certainly is a rant.

 

[Theognome]

Comparing South Africa to the US, culturally and politically, is a bit of a stretch for me. The folks I've known who are from Africa, either visiting or working in the US (I know many that are going to school here as well) are some of the most polite, industrious, courteous and conscientious people I have ever met. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for the folks born and raised here. In the Mid Western inner city I live in, the expectation is not of liberation from oppression with a new black president, but rather license to riot, steal and overthrow the rule of law. Thankfully, such 'hotheads' are in the minority, but that may not remain the case if the economy doesn't pick up soon.

Theognome

 

[ww]

The greatest issue I see in reaching folks of other ethnic backgrounds has been the fact that it is human nature for people to be around people who are "like" them. Who understand them, etc. I married into a Filipina family and my sister and brother-in-law and family started a Fil-Am non denominational church in Austin, TX. Why didn't they just join up with one of the other orthodox, evangelical Christian Churches in the area? Because for them, Church is "COMMUNITY". It is about understanding one another, enjoying one another's fellowship, eating Filipino food, carrying each other's burdens as immigrants from the same country. It is the same reason that we have Russian and Greek Orthodox Churches, Black Churches, etc. Reformed Presbyterianism is predominantly White, Irish, English, Scottish descendants. Lutherans are primarily German and the CRC, URC are of Dutch descent. So all of these folks came over to America to worship freely among their countrymen and people groups and it continues until today.

We are a melting pot in America and as more generations are born here, raised here, and educated with others from other ethnicities the more prepared we need to be as Reformed Baptist, Presbyterians, etc to understand and embrace those from other ethnic backgrounds other than our own. Some folks will respond and others will choose to remain with those they can identify with and understand. But we should be welcoming of all ethnic backgrounds into our churches. Some Reformed Churches are better at this than others. And what will surprise some is that in many cases those who do it best are those who were once part of the segregated South. It isn't about geography but philosophy of ministry more than anything else.

 

[Herald]

This is all well and good but what are the racial expectations of our Reformed brothers/sisters. We can talk all day and night on the only race being the human race however I bet dollars to doughnuts if I walk into 95%+ of the congregations board members attend it would be a smorgasbord of the different shades of white skin.

We are all depraved and the depravity of the lingering racism in American Christianity is very real and prevalent. It even sneaks up into those who would never for a second believe that they could be accused of being racist. In my short stint now as a PCA member I have met with more than a handful of elders and not once have I been asked if God's call on my life has been academia or seeking a call to a church in suburbia. Without fail what has come up is "inner city church planter." I've had RE's ask how best to approach Black people. I've told them it is the same way you approach a Cuban which leaves them baffled because "who's Cuban?"

What needs to happen is loads of prayer and open meetings on racial reconciliation. White America has wronged and continues to propagate the theology of a slave doctrine. Where people of color are only seen as workers who need to go into the field and harvest. No different now except the "field" is the inner-city and the "harvest" are increased membership on the rolls. Now I am very, very aware at the wrongs that the "Black" Church promotes. Having come out of a Black church steeped in the traditions of the Black Church and attending seminary where Black Liberation Theology is emphasized I know all too well how blackness has taken priority over holiness and how salvation is seen as corporate because of the Middle Passage.

As my rant continues perhaps the problem is not that Reformed folk are afraid to speak to people of other races but just afraid in general. Everyone prays like a Calvinist but in our evangelism we are more hyper-Calvinist. "If God has saved that Black/White/Latino/Asian...over there then he will end up in a church somewhere....I hope it's mine so we can at least say we are now 'multi-ethnic....."

Frank, you certainly have opened up a can of worms, but I'm glad you've done so. I can't comment on what the elders of your church believe or have said. One thing I do know, especially living in the D.C. Metro area, is that there is a fear among some whites that anything they say will portray them as racist. This has resulted in segments of the white community measuring every word and deed in their interactions with blacks. It's a disservice to blacks because it often appears as patronizing and disingenuous. It's a disservice to whites because it creates a paralysis of fear. For that reason I disagree with this following comment of yours:

White America has wronged and continues to propagate the theology of a slave doctrine.

The black community has done an admirable job of finding its identity. But with each legitimate success comes those who would take advantage. Black celebrities such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, and Louis Farakhan have sent a consensus message to white America. That message says, "We're black and proud of it, and we don't need you!" Government leaders, businesses and individuals have learned to change what they say and how they do things out of fear of being called a racist. Your "theology of a slave doctrine" is actually propagated by some blacks in order to gain influence and power.

This fear has found it's way into some of our churches. "Whites don't understand blacks. Whites can't possibly meet black needs. Lets train blacks to go and minister to other blacks." I would argue those whites who think this way do so partially because of fear. It's not a matter of propagating a slave doctrine. Far from it. I believe that it is dependent on blacks to tear down some of the barriers they themselves have erected. These barriers have created fear and misunderstanding. In the quest to eliminate racism, some of the actions taken were an over-correction. I'm stupid and bold enough to make these statements because I believe they're true. If nothing else I hope it spurs dialog.

 

[AThornquist]

Thank you, Bill. I refrained from commenting because I feared that it would be in frustration and not in love. You said what I wanted to but couldn't.

 

[DMcFadden]

This is all well and good but what are the racial expectations of our Reformed brothers/sisters. We can talk all day and night on the only race being the human race however I bet dollars to doughnuts if I walk into 95%+ of the congregations board members attend it would be a smorgasbord of the different shades of white skin.

95%

Well, maybe. But the church I attend will be composed of the following congregation tomorrow morning . . .

45% Asian (of various kinds - just over from China, Filipino, Burmese, Japanese, misc. Pacific Islander)

35% Hispanic (Mexican, Central American, with a smattering of South American)

3% African American

17% Clear folks like me

(average worship attendance = 375-425)

 

[SemperEruditio]

Bobbi and Joshua,
The majority of my conversations are about race. I mention race and point out the fact about the demographics at, say Presbytery do not even come close to resembling the presbyteries region much less the county we're in. No I am not the angry minority in the room, I am the Cuban who will bring up in conversation how I prefer cafe cubano to Starbucks or Maxwell House. Unfortunately until you walk into a room where you and one other person are the only white faces will you understand what it is like. Not just once but for a couple of decades. Then be the one who always mentions race and what you'll become is "that's the guy who always talks about race." Yet I have no choice because very few are doing it. I am so thankful because Carter, Thabiti, Voodie, Leach, Lewis and others are making noise and being heard and listened to.

Bill,
Thanks! I am not only talking about the DC-MD-VA area. When a White PCA pastor has to resign because of his mention of inter-racial marriage in a sermon that is a problem. When a Latino NewYorker at RTS Orlando is told quite frankly that he will never be ordained in that areas PCA because he is Latin as well as from New York there is a problem. When they send a Mexican TE to the heart of Little Havana in Miami to start a church plant there is a problem.

Of course we are dealing with entrenched ideologies. Scared? Open up and talk about race but be willing to do more listening. Just so you know there is NO majority of Black Americans which view Jackson, Farrakhan, nor Wright as Black leadership. There is no Black leadership. The guys mentioned are seen by the majority of Black America as having stayed too long at the party...the party is over.

Now I agree that it is difficult for Whites to talk about race. That is why I bring it up at every opportunity. I open the door as much as possible to let those I am around know it is okay to mention race. Ask questions. What is the difference between a Puerto Rican and a Cuban? Why would sending a Mexican to Miami be a problem? Do all Black people know each other? What's up with the youth and their pants? What is black tax?.....

Now...realistically speaking how many would be willing to worship with an Arminian charismatic Black church? We cannot even agree amongst Presbyterians about the RPW much less want to rub elbows with Arminians to take it even further. All this requires work on everyone's part and taking everyone out their comfort zone. We cannot get guys to smile at each other and say "Good Morning" and I am dreaming of people from different races to worship.

As far as TimV's post I am waiting for the shine to fade on Obama. I think his election is great for America as far as race relations but only if it encourages dialogue. I have been told that now Blacks have no excuse because after all Obama is president. Yet you have the New York post print a picture of a monkey getting shot and not make the connection as to how that is offensive. The wounds of slavery go deep and Jim Crow was not that long ago but we figure that with the new birth all that is washed away???

We need to dialogue and fellowship. Appreciate the difference and focus on how we are the same. Learn from the past, embrace the mistakes, and get to the work of the kingdom. Trust nor reconciliation happen overnight nor corporately.

-----Added 3/7/2009 at 09:18:47 EST-----

DMcFadden...you're too much. Looks like a good spread there. I would like to see a Cuban or two...

 

[py3ak]

The majority of my conversations are about race.
Then be the one who always mentions race and what you'll become is "that's the guy who always talks about race."

Frank, from your own words, that sounds like an accurate assessment. If the majority of your conversations are about race, why is it a problem that people think that about you?

By the way, I'd like to know two things:
1. What was the Mexican TE thinking?
2. If missionaries are supposed to be adaptable, what's wrong with sending the guy who speaks Spanish? I expect my Venezuelan coworker to be able to interact with the Mexicans he meets on the job.

 

[Edward]

Laws against miscegenation once popular in part of this country, for example, would have prevented Obama from marrying a "white" woman. For historical reasons, therefore, Mr. Obama had little choice but to call himself Black.

Barak Hussein Obama was born in August, 1961. Loving v. Virginia was decided in June, 1967, when Mr. Obama was only 5 years old.

Anti-miscegenation laws never prevented Obama from marrying a white woman.

 

[SemperEruditio]

Frank, from your own words, that sounds like an accurate assessment. If the majority of your conversations are about race, why is it a problem that people think that about you?

By the way, I'd like to know two things:
1. What was the Mexican TE thinking?
2. If missionaries are supposed to be adaptable, what's wrong with sending the guy who speaks Spanish? I expect my Venezuelan coworker to be able to interact with the Mexicans he meets on the job.

I'm not "that" guy. My point is you have to open the door to the conversation but when you're always the one who opens the door then a doorman is all you will be remembered for. However Lord-willing once I become a TE I pray that will make a difference.

1. Not sure it was the Mexican TE's fault.
2. Missionaries yes. What about taking the culture you are sending the missionary to into account? Little Havana is North Cuba. Much better to send an Anglo who speaks Spanish versus sending a Mexican. I take it your Mexican or at least latin so you should be familiar with the Latino caste system. Sending a Central American Latinos to Carribbean Latinos is a mistake. It would take a very adaptable Mexican and a congregation of Cubans who will look past their culture...so you would have to have everyone put culture aside....who does that?

 

[Ravens]

Having a frank and open discussion about race is all but impossible. In the workplace it can get you fired, in real life it would often lead to altercations and broken relationships (between males), and on the Puritanboard it could probably lead to infractions and banning, even if you never actually said anything that was unbiblical, rude, or "racist."

Your posts themselves are laced with innuendo, assumptions, and disdain, probably the very same things that you decry in "white people". They have the very same "edge" that the O.P. talked about, except that edge cuts in an opposite grain.

In my opinion (since you want to be frank and honest) "open and transparent conversations" are code for minorities loading up 00 verbal buckshot into a conversational 12-gauge, unloading right into the lily white faces that irritate them so much, and white people putting on Whiteface. That's a term that I like to use as the opposite of the "black face" of yesteryear.

Except it doesn't present a happy-go-lucky caricature, it presents a Clown Frown, wherein the white person speaks in a Stewart Smalley voice, wrings their hands, and simply listens, nods, and accepts all the blame. So to cite Beowulf, I could open up my word-hoard and and unleash non-sinful, non-accusatory, non-Kinist, non-racist (I'm none of those things) things that every white person thinks, but I won't. It simply isn't done nowadays, and it has nothing to do with fear (at least, fear of minorities).

There are probably a plethora of people on this board who know exactly where I'm coming from, but even the suspicion of racism can get you banned (probably), black-listed, or fired (in the workplace). So I just mind my business and go about my day. But to log on to the Puritanboard and see (to be frank), an irrational diatribe against people and churches that I care about... yeah, it kind of bothers me. And I'm sure others know exactly where I'm at on that, but they feel the same "vibe" I do, and probably won't even "thank" this post because of how it sounds, even though I've said nothing even remotely verging on "racist."

But of course none of us want that "tag". None of us wants to be viewed as the secret Klansman just for stating facts that almost every normal, hard-working, average white person thinks. So yeah. I'll keep my thoughts to myself. Maybe someday if I have a level of sanctification that I don't currently possess we can discuss facts, history, and demographics. But right now I don't have that level of sanctification.



So for my part,

 

[calgal]

Laws against miscegenation once popular in part of this country, for example, would have prevented Obama from marrying a "white" woman. For historical reasons, therefore, Mr. Obama had little choice but to call himself Black.

Barak Hussein Obama was born in August, 1961. Loving v. Virginia was decided in June, 1967, when Mr. Obama was only 5 years old.

Anti-miscegenation laws never prevented Obama from marrying a white woman.

Would have prevented means what Edward?