Think Progress

Southern Conference: Focus on Faith

By Jon Baskin on Feb 25th, 2005 at 5:10 pm

Southern Conference: Focus on Faith

[The Center for American Progress is co-hosting a two-day conference this week in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, entitled New Strategies for Southern Progress. The conference is convening more than 200 national, state and local political leaders, policy experts, journalists and academics to rethink critical issues facing the South and chart a new progressive vision for the region. ThinkProgress Team member Jon Baskin is on the scene]

Progressive religious voices at today’s third panel, “Rethinking the Role of the Faith Community,” argued over the legacy of the Civil Rights movement in the South. Congressman David Price (D-NC) said his social and political conscience was forged during the North Carolina sit-ins and harkened back to the Civil Rights movement as a moment characterized by interfaith coalitions and progressive ideals.

But Reverend Daphne Wiggins, the Assistant Pastor at Union Baptist Church, cautioned that even as pastors led mass movements to broaden rights and tear down segregation in the South, “in that same period, you had the emergence and increase of segregated Christian day schools. And older people of faith too, who had a particular agenda saying we’re not in the progressive movement, we’re not going to have desegregated schools.”

Wiggins was joined by Alabama Baptist Reverend James Evans in warning that many of the gains of the Civil Rights movement may not be as permanent as they once appeared. The modern Christian right wing, said Evans, wants to “refight battles its already lost. Evolution is back. they lost on Civil Rights but this battle over gay marriage is a way for white Christians to say, ‘by golly I’m right about this and I know I’m right.’” It also wants to dismantle the New Deal, said Evans.

Indeed, Wiggins emphasized the importance of not resting on laurels or “patting ourselves on the back” about past victories. “It seems to me that if we talk about what’s happening currently…good work once done is not being repeated in our pulpits, not being put in our Sunday school literature.” she said. “The people that went through [the Civil Rights movement] are not telling their stories. A generation of people are not getting the lessons.”

Quote That Made Me Hungry But Shouldn’t Have:

“It’s so hard when you have good sweet Anglo pastors who say, ‘Maria, we want to partner with your church and we want to be inclusive and we have decided, it’s taco night!’”

–Reverend Maria Teresa Palmer, founding Pastor of Iglesia Unida De Christo (United Church of Christ), explaining some of the benefits and challenges of inter-racial church activities

  • Print


5 Responses to “Southern Conference: Focus on Faith”

  1. Jim says:

    This is an interesting post — but why bother? Progressivism is a lost cause in the south. We need to reclaim the rust belt – Ohio, West Virginia etc. No point wasting our time in Mississippi.

    February 25th, 2005 at 6:17 pm
  3. spyder says:

    The South has a very long history of religious intolerance, dating well back to times of indigenous population warfare. The colonial times saw great upheavals between Catholics and Protestants, and it is only being polite to say that indigenous and african religions were never valued. The rise of Masonic power in the US, esp. post Civil War led to purges of Catholic and Jewish communities. Contrary to the common thinking, Catholic and Jewish persons were lynched by members of the KKK who were equally disdainful of people of those faiths as they were of the african americans. And yet, in the mix of all this hatred, some profound populist and progressive theological notions have been generated in the South. The Bible Belt below the Mason Dixon line was home to spiritual inspiration and innovation as much as it was to deep racial hatred and intolerance. Progressivism is not a lost cause in the South. Tapping into its roots there is a necessary step in re-crafting democracy in the USA.

    February 25th, 2005 at 6:49 pm
  4. MPH says:

    The left already has its mysticisms – bound up in State-worship and the numbing drum-beat of environmentalism/global warming..

    Wake up – the collectivist socialist left and the neo-con religious right have more in common than either wants to admit.

    March 1st, 2005 at 2:30 pm
  5. Nemo says:

    Those evangelical conservatives seem to be caught up on the concept of adhering to the sanctity of marriage. Just a few thoughts about this…

    sanc·ti·ty (sngkt-t)
    n. pl. sanc·ti·ties
    1. Holiness of life or disposition; saintliness.
    2. The quality or condition of being considered sacred; inviolability.
    3. Something considered sacred.
    ——————————————————————————–
    [Middle English saunctite, from Old French sainctite, from Latin snctits, from snctus, sacred. See sanctify.]

    I believe in the sanctity of marriage inasmuch as the two who join together adhere to the purposes and commitment that marriage requires. I agree with the exclusive nature many churches and faiths use to determine who they will or will not marry, as they must ensure that those being married adhere to what that religious body believes to be sacred in marriage. Such exclusions can be along the lines of religious affiliation, commitment to rear children within the specific religion, etc. Just as I, not being a member of the Roman Catholic faith could never be married by a Roman Catholic Priest in a Cathedral without committing myself to rearing our children within the Catholic church, the church that I attend would maintain similar exclusions and would likely refuse to marry someone outside of the set of beliefs that we hold fast to. I believe that is where the sanctity of marriage should be upheld, where the spiritual nature of marriage is taught and supported. I also think that monogamy is a beneficial social control that anyone, heterosexual or homosexual, would be best adhering to. With that thought in mind, would it not behove the State to permit and encourage recognized Civil Unions between two individuals regardless of affiliation and allow the various religious bodies to recognize whether or not the union can be categorized as a marriage? The State, being seperated from religious authority, cannot enforce sanctity. It can, however, enforce equal access to be given to those adhering to the rules of monogamy and lifelong commitment through the recognition of Civil Unions universally, right?

    I welcome anyone’s comments and encourage discussion of this. I consider myself a moral conservative, but also acknowledge that my cultural background values different standards over those prioritized by others. Because of this acknoweldgement, I consider myself a socio-political liberal, or perhaps moderate, because I see access to State controlled benefits through law and policy to have its foundation laid in secular philosophy.

    April 28th, 2005 at 4:29 pm

Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

What We're Fighting For
Social and Economic JusticeHealthy CommunitiesMedia AccountabilityGlobal and Domestic Security

What We're Fighting Against
Public CorruptionIncompetent EstablishmentCorporate MalfeasanceRadical Right-Wing Agenda

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports

In-depth studies on select topics

Why Bush's 'Enhanced Interrogation' Program Failed
The Sarah Palin Digest
THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
A TIMELINE OF THE IRAQ WAR

Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)

imageArchives


imageBlog Roll